Census: Atlanta set to soon pass Philadelphia (Gainesville, Griffin: mortgages, credit)

[BR Valentine]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

Aside from the fact that metro Atlanta actually is adding more people, there are no real natural barriers to growth in the region nor is there a larger metro nearby that it bumps up against and those are issues for Philly. Honestly it really sucks for Philly but if the OMB revises any of the criteria associated with the designation of metropolitan areas, that may keep Philly from slipping down the list so fast. If it happens to win HQ2 (and it is a strong candidate with one of the best proposed sites), that would be immensely helpful in boosting the region's growth.

The constant expansion of the NYC CSA prevents Philadelphia’s geographic designation from growing. Mercer County NJ (Trenton) was part of Philadelphia’s MSA until 1990 when it was moved to the NYC CSA. Downtown Trenton is 15 miles from the Philadelphia city limits. Trenton along with the Lehigh Valley (Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton) are part of the Philadelphia DMA but are for census purposes part of the NYC CSA. Given its modest population growth and inability to expand its geographic designation Philadelphia is going to continue to fall in the metro population list.

[Pemgin]

Originally Posted by primaltech

Largest 10 is not really the same thing as Top 10, let's keep in mind. Houston is the 5th largest metro, and I'd much prefer to live in Seattle, any day of the week, which is the 15th largest.

Okay, I'm just saying Atlanta has managed to attract more people than all but 8 (soon to be 7) metropolitan areas in the country. That's the result of a lot of hard work and investment.

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

This is not a badge of honor. Between traffic, water, insufficient transit, disrepair infrastructure... I don't really think adding a gazillion more folks to the region is necessarily a great thing right now. I hope it all bodes better than I fear.

The irony of this way of thinking growth is actually the catalyst to fix those issues. Without growth increase stagnation and less redevelopment.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

The irony of this way of thinking growth is actually the catalyst to fix those issues. Without growth increase stagnation and less redevelopment.

People who are lamenting rapid growth aren't necessarily arguing for no growth. I'm pretty sure there's a nice middle between the two extremes--such as healthy, modest growth?

[Otakumaster]

This is a weird thread.

Like, I understand the point of people saying growth isn't a good thing without attention to QOL aspects like infrastructure growing along with it.

At the same time,you got folks who because of the above reasons don't think Atlanta would surpass Philly as a "top 10 place".


Yet, most of them live in Atlanta and clearly choose to live here because they aren't natives, so is Philly really that much better in their personal context and if not why live the contradiction and stay in Atlanta ?

There isn't a stark cost of living difference and it is not in another country.

Clearly something about Atlanta is better to them.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

This is a weird thread.

Like, I understand the point of people saying growth isn't a good thing without attention to QOL aspects like infrastructure growing along with it.

At the same time,you got folks who because of the above reasons don't think Atlanta would surpass Philly as a "top 10 place".


Yet, most of them live in Atlanta and clearly choose to live here because they aren't natives, so is Philly really that much better in their personal context and if not why live the contradiction and stay in Atlanta ?

There isn't a stark cost of living difference and it is not in another country.

Clearly something about Atlanta is better to them.

Yes, clearly, but it's something they're unwilling to admit to themselves for whatever reason.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

People who are lamenting rapid growth aren't necessarily arguing for no growth. I'm pretty sure there's a nice middle between the two extremes--such as healthy, modest growth?

Precisely.

[oobanks]

Originally Posted by Iconographer

Yes, clearly, but it's something they're unwilling to admit to themselves for whatever reason.

Maybe some people prefer Green, A city in the Forest,,, Who knows??? That's not Philly by any means

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

People who are lamenting rapid growth aren't necessarily arguing for no growth. I'm pretty sure there's a nice middle between the two extremes--such as healthy, modest growth?

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Precisely.

Considering Atlanta was growing 140k a year and now just 80 to 90k this is pretty moderate.

And this doesn't change my point. Growth is fuel for change, it increase the tax base to fund those fixes and it give developers more confidence in projects for redevelopment. Not to mention growth change the demographics and political culture which affect these issues. So the slower the growth slower those issues will be addressed. And AnsleyPark didn't mention growth rate in that post what was mention a complaint over issues as if all growth would lead to more of it.. so my response was directly respond to that. So " Precisely." is more like relief that someone disagree with me regardless that it had nothing to do with the post. My post was specific to that point. Growth create challenges but it also create opportunities.

The focus shouldn't be on growth vs no growth but rather the type of growth itself.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by oobanks

Maybe some people prefer Green, A city in the Forest,,, Who knows??? That's not Philly by any means

Ever been to Philadelphia? Its neighborhoods are quite forested, and the urban areas have an impressive amount of dedicated park space.