Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are more and none identify Buffalo, that is why I call bull on the article and what this local magazine comes up with.
Being the top and being "hot" aren't necessarily the same thing. So, that may be the issue. A place can be hot in terms of millennial growth, while not being a top place for millennials. Bigger cities are likely to get more millennials, but in terms of millennial growth, a smaller/medium sized city can have a higher percentage of growth. This post by UncleBenny kind of sums up that point: //www.city-data.com/forum/46855028-post4.html
Criteria in terms of city or metro size, time frame or the weight of what may be considered important may also play a factor as well. That 3rd article has such criteria: https://local.niche.com/rankings/cit...s/methodology/
The second article is for neighborhoods within select cities.
Don't make it out to be more than it is, just another regional magazine doing what its market expects. Semantics like computer generated statistics can make any point seem legitimate regardless of how absurd it seems.
The second article showed the cities and the preferred neighborhood in each...
Don't make it out to be more than it is, just another regional magazine doing what its market expects. Semantics like computer generated statistics can make any point seem legitimate regardless of how absurd it seems.
The second article showed the cities and the preferred neighborhood in each...
I'm not and I know what the second article does.
I'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily make any of the articles wrong, as knowing and properly interpreting the criteria is important. That's all.
The data indicates a percentage change, not absolute number... it indicates a trend from the starting point. But we all interpret stats to our own bias or otherwise poo-poo the source.
The data indicates a percentage change, not absolute number... it indicates a trend from the starting point. But we all interpret stats to our own bias or otherwise poo-poo the source.
Basically....This is especially the case given that the BN article is using 2011-2015 US Census information.
Even some of the other sources show growth or less of a decline in percentage in comparison, depending upon the time frame/criteria used.
Yes, and stating Buffalo is "hottest" is kinda ridiculous with these % change stats. These stats are only meaningful to the city, not really as a comparison to other cities (my city is better than yours).
Yes, and stating Buffalo is "hottest" is kinda ridiculous with these % change stats. These stats are only meaningful to the city, not really as a comparison to other cities (my city is better than yours).
It is actually for the metro area as a whole. So, the age range used, 20-34, can be due to a variety of reasons which have been mentioned(immigration, college students, some coming from out of state, some from other places within the state, some returning home, etc).
I think they were trying to compare peer, "Rust Belt" areas that may have seen an increase during that time as well.
Its about time you guys upstate started to enjoy the liberal diversity we have been forced to live with in NYC.
Thank Shcumer and Cuomo.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.