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.
Its one months worth of data my man, the economy is volatile. Backtrack a month or 2 and Philly was in the middle of the pack from a percentage basis. A month or 2 from now Philly will most likely not be last. And its not like Chicago, and NYC had a much better month than Philly.Tenths of a percentage point difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightonWalnut
Philadelphia's current job growth numbers don't look as good currently because it never fell so hard during the economic recession as most other major metro areas have, therefore it didn't have as much to gain back. Also, philadelphia is finally coming out of decades of decline and is reinvigorating itself. These things take time. All older cities have gone through this including NYC and Boston. Some, it seems, like Cleveland, St Louis, Detroit, etc have yet to reach the turn around point. The current hot booming cities of the south and west like atlanta, Dallas, Houston, seattle, etc. are very new cities compared to the older east coast and Midwest cities. Who knows what the future holds for these places but 30 years from now we could be singing a different tune.
These are both very good points. Economic data should never be looked at only as a snapshot, as it is always tied to a longer-term trend.
The fact of the matter is that Philadelphia has been a relatively slow-growth area for several decades, but due to the extreme irregularity of the economy over the past several years, the comparisons between cities/metro definitely does not allow for a normal comparison. This is even aside from the restructuring that was already occurring in Philly.
Philly did not have to play as much "catch up" as other cities that busted further. A recent article in the Inquirer actually discussed this:
Quote:
"Imagine a coffee shop that employed six people until the recession, when it had to let four baristas go. Now lattes are on the upswing, so the cafe brought on two baristas. That's 100 percent growth. That would be Detroit.
The Philadelphia story would be more like the coffee shop employing six people until the recession, when it let three baristas go, then lately hired one - showing 33.3 percent growth in employment."
It's also clear that the two main states comprising the Philadelphia region--Pennsylvania and New Jersey--are finding much firmer economic footing than they have in years:
Quote:
"Pennsylvania employers followed a hiring surge in April by adding 18,200 jobs in May, the Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry reported Friday, putting the state on pace for its best year of job growth in five years. The preliminary May hiring numbers brought average monthly gains to 6,280 so far this year. That is the highest it has been since 2010, when job growth averaged 6,808 per month."
"New Jersey’s job market, for long lagging the nation, is beginning to show signs of life. The state added 10,100 jobs in May thanks to a surge in private-sector hiring, putting the economy back on pace with the rest of the nation. It’s encouraging “that New Jersey’s job growth rate for 2015 to date (0.8 percent) matched the U.S. employment rate of growth over the same period,” Rutgers University economist Joseph J. Seneca said."
So, yes, while the Philly region is admittedly a bit more of a "laggard" compared to other metro areas in terms of tracking the national economy, it is in the nascent stages for some very solid economic growth in the coming years.
Philly may not necessarily catch up to Seattle's growth level, but what is inevitable is that Seattle will eventually reach a slower, more mature growth level over the next 15 years that will put it on par with other large metros. No boom lasts forever.
These are both very good points. Economic data should never be looked at only as a snapshot, as it is always tied to a longer-term trend.
The fact of the matter is that Philadelphia has been a relatively slow-growth area for several decades, but due to the extreme irregularity of the economy over the past several years, the comparisons between cities/metro definitely does not allow for a normal comparison. This is even aside from the restructuring that was already occurring in Philly.
Philly did not have to play as much "catch up" as other cities that busted further. A recent article in the Inquirer actually discussed this:
It's also clear that the two main states comprising the Philadelphia region--Pennsylvania and New Jersey--are finding much firmer economic footing than they have in years:
So, yes, while the Philly region is admittedly a bit more of a "laggard" compared to other metro areas in terms of tracking the national economy, it is in the nascent stages for some very solid economic growth in the coming years.
Philly may not necessarily catch up to Seattle's growth level, but what is inevitable is that Seattle will eventually reach a slower, more mature growth level over the next 15 years that will put it on par with other large metros. No boom lasts forever.
How do we really know Seattle is going to slow down? Look at the southern metros. They're all nearly or over 6 million and still growing at absurd rates. Dallas is still growing at rates of 150k a year. It's over 7.1 million people now(extrapolated for 2015). It was 6.4 million back in 2010.
I do agree with you though one thing Seattle lacks is a large black or latino migration which is part of the reason southern metros grew so fast.
Philly is a good city but it's in the running for #4 downtown at best in terms of size or quality. It might be #6.
Seattle's downtown doesn't match its urban cohesion, transit, or history. But it does match the scale (which depends on very subjective boundaries), wins in retail, and wins by a mile in natural setting and growth rate (Comcast, University City, etc., notwithstanding!).
Philly is a good city but it's in the running for #4 downtown at best in terms of size or quality. It might be #6.
Seattle's downtown doesn't match its urban cohesion, transit, or history. But it does match the scale (which depends on very subjective boundaries), wins in retail, and wins by a mile in natural setting and growth rate (Comcast, University City, etc., notwithstanding!).
Transit in Seattle is improving quickly though and unlike many other Western cities they are building much of their rail system underground or grade-separated.
Why do I come on the internet? Some of the stuff you read on here is no different than reading a bathroom wall while you're pissing.
If NYC is #1, and Chicago is #2, Philly most certainly has a case for #3 with SF, and if not, it's perfectly #4 ahead of DC and Boston.
I like Philly's downtown as I've said, but Boston's is great too. DC's is very different, but it's fair to include the Capital stuff, which adds an entirely different dimension. As for San Francisco, that's on a different level due to the tourism and retail elements.
It would be interesting to do the poll again in 2016, and limit it to people who have recently spent time in both downtowns. Actually maybe 2018 after the current booms have played out. Greater Downtown Seattle will have grown at a much larger percentage in terms of office, housing, and transit. It still won't be as dense, but it'll be closer and the scenery and other attributes might give it a chance at winning.
Was just in Seattle last week, and was very impressed. It's definitely a top ten downtown and getting more dense by the day, but Philadelphia is in a tier above it.
I like Philly's downtown as I've said, but Boston's is great too. DC's is very different, but it's fair to include the Capital stuff, which adds an entirely different dimension. As for San Francisco, that's on a different level due to the tourism and retail elements.
It would be interesting to do the poll again in 2016, and limit it to people who have recently spent time in both downtowns. Actually maybe 2018 after the current booms have played out. Greater Downtown Seattle will have grown at a much larger percentage in terms of office, housing, and transit. It still won't be as dense, but it'll be closer and the scenery and other attributes might give it a chance at winning.
I was in downtown Seattle last fall. It was more vibrant than I had expected. I love Pike Place and the natural setting is tremendous. There is a ton of development going on too.
Philly doesn't have as much development going on, but it's far more developed overall. So, it's not like it is standing still. Especially when we're talking about Greater Center City.
The only category that Center City is really lacking in is retail IMO. Seattle is quite strong in that area, so that's where they probably line up the closest (and food?). I don't see Seattle topping Center City any time in the near future. It's had hundreds of years to mature. Old colonial streets, Rittenhouse Square, City Hall, Reading Terminal Market, Midtown Village, Spruce Street Harbor Park, Independence Hall, Old City, South Street, all the museums, etc. Everyone has an opinion, but this is the first time I've seen someone state that Center City falls in at 6th...behind DC? Downtown DC is not even close to the best park of DC.
Was just in Seattle last week, and was very impressed. It's definitely a top ten downtown and getting more dense by the day, but Philadelphia is in a tier above it.
It's funny because past 10 or 11pm Capitol Hill (and to a lesser extent, several other inner and even outer neighborhoods) is far more vibrant than Downtown, but most tourists don't see that. I suspect more will start to though at least see Capitol Hill since there's now a 4 minute subway connection between Downtown and Capitol Hill.
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.
