California population expected to double in 30 years.. does this trouble you? (taxes, place to live)

[CAVA1990]

You'll need to move more jobs inland, to the Inland Empire and Sacramento/Stockton, for example. You'll also need to expand the state university systems either by growing each campus (some are more amenable to that than others) or establishing some new ones. Japan is smaller than California, has major concentrations of jobs and people in certain areas, and has a populaton of 127 million. It can be done.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by nmnita

people are marrying later, having fewer kids, and unless the cost of living, including taxes are adjusted down some of those living in CA now will be exiting.

That trend's been happening since I was a kid and the population has doubled since when I was born there. I don't think another doubling in that amount of time sounds unreasonable. As climate change produces more extreme weather elsewhere, CA will seem even more appealing.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

If we get our head out of the sand and plan an infrastructure of roads, bridges and public transportation to handle the population, this could be a wonderful place to live. It all comes down to doing smart planning and executing it in a timely manner.

Quite right! But some of us have been beating that drum for decades to little effect. The infrastructure continues to degrade and needs to be a high priority.

That being said, while some growth is inevitable, I don't believe the population will double in the next 30 years. At the same time, and as someone mentioned, California's allure will remain a constant yet the current trend is more leaving than immigrating and that's more desirable, in my opinion, than an opposite dynamic.

If I believed the population would, in fact, double in the specified period of time I would be concerned. It wouldn't directly affect me as we're no longer in CA and my chances of living until age 97 are not high. However, my wife and I have well over a dozen children, grandchildren, in-laws and outlaws, etc. still living in the state and I shudder to think of just how crowded things could get. The traffic alone would be crazy-making and shopping for anything a nightmare. It conjures up images of lengthy lines to buy a bit of bread or a few potatoes in Russia when it was still the USSR and the urban populace was reliant upon the state stores.

[sponger42]

Originally Posted by Dingler

Are you concerned about the expected population increase in California's population? Or do you think that it is just part of progress?

I hope it happens, and I hope they're mostly rich Chinese so I can make a mint on selling my house in a good school district, but not have to deal with more surfers in the lineup, since most don't consider the ocean or beach attractive.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by sjnative

CA's soon-to-be majority demography will likely be in a poor position to pay for it[/url] as that very demography did not come to CA to contribute to its tax base. Hardly.

Then change the laws to broaden the tax base

[majoun]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I have my doubts if those figures are anywhere close to correct. I think it is a figure dreamed up to encourage people to push for better rapid transit and even more and better freeways. Look at who did the study?

people are marrying later, having fewer kids, and unless the cost of living, including taxes are adjusted down some of those living in CA now will be exiting.

Now, unfortunately I won't be alive in 30 years to see if this prediction comes true, but I might be around in 20 years and I will be able to see a trend: if I can still see then.

I agree with you, Nita. I don't see California's population doubling at all, given the slowing of population growth and the general poor state of California's economy outside the Bay Area.

[Dean Trails]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

The traffic alone would be crazy-making and shopping for anything a nightmare. It conjures up images of lengthy lines to buy a bit of bread or a few potatoes in Russia when it was still the USSR and the urban populace was reliant upon the state stores.

Aye, Captain! I was down in LA last week and at Mid-Day on Friday, I had to negotiate FWY 101 and 5 to leave the area. it took me well over an hour to go about 20 miles. And this happened all week no matter the time. Constant road expansion is evident but the whole area is so cramped. I asked a local about alternate routes and the surface streets are worse. I am not sure the answer as it take money to build the infrastructure and as a previous poster mentioned, the underground cash economy doesn't contribute to our tax base.

So, i doubt the population will grow as in the last 30 years as the jobs aren't as lucrative as they once were. And, the State must pay the huge retirement monies still outstanding for the excesses of those decades. BUT, we still have the present congestion.

Where do we go from here? Maybe to the Ozarks!

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I have my doubts if those figures are anywhere close to correct. I think it is a figure dreamed up to encourage people to push for better rapid transit and even more and better freeways. Look at who did the study?

people are marrying later, having fewer kids, and unless the cost of living, including taxes are adjusted down some of those living in CA now will be exiting.

Now, unfortunately I won't be alive in 30 years to see if this prediction comes true, but I might be around in 20 years and I will be able to see a trend: if I can still see then.

One other thing. The old 1960s - 70s Paul Ehrlich meme is really hard to break out of. People still imagine some sort of looming "population bomb" and this was not helped by the flood of illegal immigration during the late 20th Century (which has stopped or even reversed net, net). It is a perception vs reality syndrome. Every update to the "official" world population forecast projects a lower peak and earlier inflection point. We can see where this is leading ... and it ain't in the upward direction. That includes macroeconomic conditions. Anyone who thinks the Great Recession has been (was?) bad will be dumbfounded by the coming 1000 year economic decline.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Dean Trails

Where do we go from here? Maybe to the Ozarks!

Uh, no! We Ozarkers closed the gates to Califoreigners and most other two legged species after we arrived to preserve our serenity and sanity. Next step? A declaration of open season! This is the Aux Arcs after all.

[RogersParkGuy]

Originally Posted by Dingler

The energy and transportation infrastructure in CA is at a breaking point. It is challenged to handle the current population of the State. What will happen as the population goes to 60 million in the next three decades?

Are you concerned about the expected population increase in California's population? Or do you think that it is just part of progress?

Such a projection must assume that current growth rates will remain steady or increase. That is a big assumption if you are projection 30 years into the future.