Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2014, 08:25 AM
 
11,289 posts, read 26,118,585 times
Reputation: 11354

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
It's only a matter of time before Pennsylvania surpasses Illinois in population.
Why? Pennsylvania had always had more people than Illinois until the 1990's when it flipped.

Penn was ahead by 1,800,000 in 1950, ahead by 700,000 in 1970, ahead by 450,000 in 1990 and then trailed by 140,000 by 2000. That narrowed to 130,000 in the last census.

I think they'll probably be close to each other for the near future. Don't see anything that makes it "only a matter of time", although it's certainly possible!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2014, 09:12 AM
 
16,345 posts, read 17,998,101 times
Reputation: 7879
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
I'm happy to report that the note here that warned of below zero temps all the way southeast into Georgia later this week doesn't match up at all with anything I have found in forecasts.
Perhaps at the highest mountain elevations in the state the wind chill might dip below zero but certainly not the actual temperature.
As for what comes later in January, who can say.
I imagine that most forecasts will be revised downward as we get closer to Monday. The level of cold most models are showing is pretty extreme. If not below zero, single digits are a good bet even into parts of the South.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 09:15 AM
 
16,345 posts, read 17,998,101 times
Reputation: 7879
Quote:
Originally Posted by isawooty View Post
Yeah, but the idiots in Washington said Georgia only added about 80k last year. Atlanta added more than that itself last year.
80K in a single year is a lot. Few states added even 50K. And Atlanta probably did make up more than half.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 09:29 AM
 
37,829 posts, read 41,683,695 times
Reputation: 27144
Quote:
Originally Posted by masonbauknight View Post
@Isawooty. You need to recheck the growth rates of NC and GA cities since 2000. Metro Atlanta, Savannah, Athens, and Warner Robins have been booming: 20%-plus growth rates, which are similar to many NC metros. And no way will North Carolina catch up with New York State in population, prestige, financial clout. etc. Not in 2050. NEVER. New York City will see to that. Charlotte and Raleigh will remain small sweet potatoes in comparison. (Love them sweet potatoes, but... it's hopeless.)

I assume you are comparing METRO areas. "City-proper"/municipalities are artificial yardsticks in the 21st century. South Carolina's three largest cities are far larger than the city proper -- and SC cities aren't allowed to annex as a rule (NC cities are legally allowed to gobble up unincorporated areas rather easily, so they do).
Until the GOP took over the state legislature; they put an end to that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,874 posts, read 4,677,337 times
Reputation: 5365
Mutiny
That's an interesting bit of news there regarding the change in annexation laws in North Carolina. I can't effectively follow all that happens up in Carolina but that's a type of story I do try to keep abreast of as per policies & changes in those laws around the country.
Do you have any idea as to what forces & special interests were behind the push to change annexation law there?
My friends in Charlotte were overjoyed years ago & quite in my face about it when Charlotte officially passed the City of Atlanta in population. I told them that Georgia's annexation laws were very restrictive & that Atlanta had pretty much remained in it's same corporate limits since 1953.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 10:11 AM
 
37,829 posts, read 41,683,695 times
Reputation: 27144
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
Mutiny
That's an interesting bit of news there regarding the change in annexation laws in North Carolina. I can't effectively follow all that happens up in Carolina but that's a type of story I do try to keep abreast of as per policies & changes in those laws around the country.
Do you have any idea as to what forces & special interests were behind the push to change annexation law there?
My friends in Charlotte were overjoyed years ago & quite in my face about it when Charlotte officially passed the City of Atlanta in population. I told them that Georgia's annexation laws were very restrictive & that Atlanta had pretty much remained in it's same corporate limits since 1953.
This article, written before the changes took place, helps to explain it:

RALEIGH: Many hail North Carolina annexation law | Local Politics | NewsObserver.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 10:26 AM
 
Location: Columbus,Georgia
2,663 posts, read 4,828,137 times
Reputation: 619
Welp. I predicted this would happen. It doesn't mean Georgia decaying. It means the tables IS slowly turning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 10:33 AM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,751,029 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnutella View Post
A rapidly-growing plant is called a weed, and rapidly-growing cells are called cancer. Weeds and cancer illustrate that it's possible for something to grew too fast, and if it does, then the growth tends to be of poor quality. I honestly believe that states like Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas have been growing too fast, and there are bound to be some problems once the built environment in those states begins to age. There are already problems with secondary roads in and around the major metropolitan areas in those states being well over capacity, and good luck expanding those roads fast enough to meet current demands, let alone future demands. Just wait until sewers, dams and electrical grids need work, or the water supplies start to run dry. Atlanta almost ran out of water during a severe drought in 2007.

Obviously, population decline has its own set of problems, and it's been well-documented throughout the "Rust Belt" for decades now, but less well-documented are the problems in areas that are growing too fast. If anything, most news stories about those areas sound like they're written by the local Chambers of Commerce. They'll talk all day about how awesome it is to do business there, and how nice and new things look, but what they won't talk about is what a pain in the ass it is having to drive 10 MPH below the speed limit on a formerly bucolic country road that's now lined with subdivisions that were built without any care as to whether or not the road could handle the extra capacity. And the quality of the construction of the houses in those subdivisions is often mediocre, with plenty of shortcuts taken and cheap materials used. Those houses are going to be a pain in the ass to maintain sooner or later.

The truth is, slow and steady growth is the best, because it's not only easier to plan for, but it also tends to be more high-quality growth.
How's the growth of these Southern and Western cities fast growth any different than the huge growth of Northern and Midwestern Cities after and during the Industrial Age?Its not except these Sunbelt cities are more doing it for longer periods of time.

As far as suburbs go.America is a suburban country.Period.Almost in every major city the suburbs are growing faster than the city cores.Believe it or not Atlanta is bucking that trend and actually was one of the top 3 that grew the fastest.

Imagine if Atlanta which just less than 10 years ago has by many recent publication has seen a desnifying of its metro area and stopped the sprawl it was known for,then many other cities will follow.

This type of growth for such a long period in many of these cities is unprecedented for such a long length of time.The problems of fast growth have been well chronicled and debated so it is clearer that even cities like Atlanta,Houston,Dallas,etc have invested heavily in their infrastructure and have created more urban centric walkble developments in there individual metro regions.

Atlanta has been growing fast for over 40 years .If there are bad quality constructed house that are so prevalent across the metro, I think by now the housing stock would have issues being sold.Considering that Atlanta's housing market is sp strong at the moment.

Water is not just Atlanta problem.People think living on the ocean or even lakes means abundant water but it does not.
Even cities like Chicago face water shortage if something is not done:
Quote:
The massive Ogallala aquifer under the Great Plains, for example, is projected to run dry in two to three decades given recent withdrawal rates. Similarly, in the past two decades, groundwater resources in Great Lakes communities like Chicago and Milwaukee have fallen by 1,000 feet.
Water shortages are a national problem if not a world problem.
"Out of necessity breeds invention".Well Georgia (thanks to that drought)has been working on ways to alleviate its future potential water shortages.Its not even one of the states that are considered high water shortage potential.

The issues Atlanta saw in 2007 is gone completely and our leaders are actively planning for the future so as not to see a return.

I don't see the infrastructure no more of an issue in the Sunbelt cities as they were for NYC,Chicago,Boston and many cities in the North. Remember the when blackouts were common?They survived so why would not the newer growth cities with there newer infrastructure not fare as well or better?
Slower growth is not best to plan for because the necessity is not there so many cities put it off due to budget constraints.

The best cities in the world for
environment and infrastructure
A report by Mercer Consulting


The cities with the best infrastructure
Rank
City
Country
1
Singapore Singapore
2
Frankfurt Germany
2
Munich Germany
4
Copenhagen Denmark
5
Düsseldorf Germany
=6
Hong Kong Hong Kong
=6
London UK
8
Sydney Australia
=9
Hamburg Germany
=9
Vancouver Canada
11
Yokohama Japan
12
Paris France
=13
Atlanta, GA USA
=13
Montreal Canada
15
Dallas USA
=16
Toronto Canada
=16
Vienna Austria
=18
Helsinki Finland
=18
Oslo Norway
=18
Stockholm Sweden
=18
Stuttgart Germany
22
Washington DC USA
23
Amsterdam Netherlands
24
Zurich Switzerland
=25
Bern Switzerland
=25
Ottawa Canada
=25
Perth Australia
28
Chicago USA
29
Berlin Germany
30
New York City USA
31
Boston USA
32
Tokyo Japan
33
Nurnberg Germany
=34
Dubai UAE
=34
Madrid Spain
=34
Melbourne Australia
=37
Adelaide Australia
=37
Brisbane Australia
=37
Philadelphia USA
40
Honolulu USA
41
Nagoya Japan
42
Brussels Belgium
43
Auckland New Zealand
=44
Birmingham UK
=44
Glasgow UK
=44
Kobe Japan
47
Geneva Switzerland
48
Miami, FL USA
48
Wellington New Zealand
50
Seoul South Korea
Research by Mercer Consulting

Notice that most of the top cities in the U.S. are in the South.So I think infrastructure is not really as much of a problem as you seem to suggest.

The problems of infrastructure is major problem for the entire U.S.Measured against cities across the world,the U.S. is severely lacking.

Suburban growth is a problem in more established cities too.Even though that growth is slower paced comparatively speaking,it is still a problem because those cities are not investing as they should to update their infrastructure.Newer growth cities building as they grow.They have no choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,751,029 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austincool View Post
This is incorrect.

North Carolina has added 84,740 jobs, with a growth rate of 2.1%, while Georgia has added 72,870, with a growth rate of 1.8%.

Top 10 states that added the most jobs:

1. California
2. Texas
3. Florida
4. Illinois
5. North Carolina
6. Pennsylvania
7. New York
8. Ohio
9. Georgia
10. Virginia
I stand corrected.I was reading the wrong numbers.Even so its not a significant difference considering that NC having so many more larger cities than GA.

Last edited by afonega1; 01-02-2014 at 10:44 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,751,029 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by isawooty View Post
Lord knows Atlanta is littered with cheap construction subdivisions. When you're coming up 85 from La Grange they're painfully obvious. I often wonder who initially thought it was ok to cheapen the housing stock like that. I mean just awfully tacky.
Well you get what you pay for.Its usually the starter homes.When you get past the $250,00 range,the construction seems to get better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top