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.
Actually based on what I found when looking at proportion, commuter growth trends from 2000 and general economic conditions, It pains me to say that Im actually inclined to think that Stockton will combine with the SF MSA actually by 2020.
The job market out there is super weak while the SF MSA is super strong by comparison.
I thought that I would see more numbers from Stockton to Santa Clara because the media is always talking that up but really its the East Bay that is BY FAR the number 1 destination for Stockton people.
As for Stockton it will be official this year. Bay Area is going over 8 mil and picking up Stockton MSA to it's CSA. Lock it. In my opinion it's a good thing as The Bay Area actually DOES feel that large regardless if it brings other stats down such as per capita income. It could also get the Bay Area off the backs of all the "most expensive" places to live lists a notch or so.
OMB already put it in there. You will most likely eventually get Modesto also bringing the population up, and the numbers down. That is just what happens when cities grow... and why per capita metro wide #'s aren't really the best way to these things.
The best is always raw #'s when it comes to wealth, and raw #'s still holds up really well for the Bay Area.
You don't think LA would have higher per capita #'s if it didn't have so much extra space added in with all the low wage immigrants bringing these stats down? Or NYC?
Sorry I was typing on my cell. How do you know that the Bay Area will be "picking up" the Stockton MSA. I have not heard anything about it or been able to find anything mentioning that online.
And you will be hard pressed finding any Bay Area natives who would be excited about Stockton or Modesto being included in the Bay Area. Its location to the Bay Area is all it has going for it. Terrible crime, high unemployment, more foreclosures than any place in the nation, oppressive heat- doesn't make for a desirable location! I'd much rather live in Oakland or Richmond.
Does anyone here have any statistics regarding economy the city of San Francisco(Not the MSA or Bay Area)? Every time I look up things like the GDP for San Francisco it always shows the metropolitan statistics.
Sorry I was typing on my cell. How do you know that the Bay Area will be "picking up" the Stockton MSA. I have not heard anything about it or been able to find anything mentioning that online.
And you will be hard pressed finding any Bay Area natives who would be excited about Stockton or Modesto being included in the Bay Area. Its location to the Bay Area is all it has going for it. Terrible crime, high unemployment, more foreclosures than any place in the nation, oppressive heat- doesn't make for a desirable location! I'd much rather live in Oakland or Richmond.
Actually based on what I found when looking at proportion, commuter growth trends from 2000 and general economic conditions, It pains me to say that Im actually inclined to think that Stockton will combine with the SF MSA actually by 2020.
The job market out there is super weak while the SF MSA is super strong by comparison.
I thought that I would see more numbers from Stockton to Santa Clara because the media is always talking that up but really its the East Bay that is BY FAR the number 1 destination for Stockton people.
I've probably mentioned this before but it really astounded me to see the traffic actually get worse in Pleasanton on Eastbound 580 as I made my way home from Richmond. I'm pretty sure all of those people weren't going to Tracy
Yes it is, but regional planners on both sides of the Altamont Pass project that the areas of the 925 and 209 area codes are the future of Bay Area and Central Valley and will eventually be a region of Millions-think the Inland Empire, only rich and very productive. I kid you not.
And if you think about it the seeds for that are being planted now.
And this the primary reason that I oppose the High Speed rail's proposed route entering the bay from the Pacheco Pass instead of the Altamont Pass-the biggest increase in traffic and population growth now and in the future will be from the East, not the South.
Even now, the 205 and 580 already have massive westbound traffic jams at 4:30 in the morning.
I'm currently living in New York (UES) after living in San Francisco (Potrero Hill) for 7 years and I really miss the Bay Area. The weather is nicer, the people are chill, the food is awesome, the almost year round fresh produce and Farmer's market allowed me to eat healthier and at a much lower price. New York really does have everything you'd want, but I find in fact it's a little off putting because of that - it becomes a city where you want things. in SF there's great skiing ~2hrs away but you don't have to deal with the cold of the winter, there's great golfing and surfing and you're surrounded by nature the moment you drive outside the city. I always felt comfortable going out to eat where ever, there's no attitude from the multibillionaire tech tycoon sitting next to you having coffee at Four Barrels, and it's actually mostly enjoyable to drive around and out of the city. I'm rambling but for me personally, living in SF was much more inexpensive and relaxing, and it had most of what I want day to day.
I'm currently living in New York (UES) after living in San Francisco (Potrero Hill) for 7 years and I really miss the Bay Area. The weather is nicer, the people are chill, the food is awesome, the almost year round fresh produce and Farmer's market allowed me to eat healthier and at a much lower price. New York really does have everything you'd want, but I find in fact it's a little off putting because of that - it becomes a city where you want things. in SF there's great skiing ~2hrs away but you don't have to deal with the cold of the winter, there's great golfing and surfing and you're surrounded by nature the moment you drive outside the city. I always felt comfortable going out to eat where ever, there's no attitude from the multibillionaire tech tycoon sitting next to you having coffee at Four Barrels, and it's actually mostly enjoyable to drive around and out of the city. I'm rambling but for me personally, living in SF was much more inexpensive and relaxing, and it had most of what I want day to day.
Another produce post.
Sorry I just find it kind of funny it is mentioned so much. While cool, I just find it odd that it makes seemingly such dramatic lifestyle differences. Maybe if you are vegan/raw vegan/vegetarian it would...
I mean, the produce was definitely better in CA, at least if you go in a local store but it wasn't ever a top priority...
You also most be doing some serious speeding...It was always 3 or above to Tahoe for me, esp if you had to stop and put chains on your tires.
Bay Area is definitely more fun to drive around in scenic and curvy road wise.
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.
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.
