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.
I would say yes but not by 2020 maybe 2030 thats not good news for Houston. I would never live in a city as big as NYC, Chicago or LA, too many hassles, taxes are too high and real estate for a super nice house is outrageous. Houston is doing really well in population gain right now due to a good diversified economy but the more population gains they make their cost of living will go up a lot in the future.
I would say yes but not by 2020 maybe 2030 thats not good news for Houston. I would never live in a city as big as NYC, Chicago or LA, too many hassles, taxes are too high and real estate for a super nice house is outrageous. Houston is doing really well in population gain right now due to a good diversified economy but the more population gains they make their cost of living will go up a lot in the future.
I did an analysis of rental prices for MSAs not long ago via the CPI. From 2009 to present, I think Houston grew almost as fast in rental prices (MSA wise) as anybody else except maybe San Francisco.
The sleeper is that San Francisco and San Jose combine into one MSA and surpass them both.
If you combine San Francisco MSA with San Jose MSA you essentially get the San Francisco CSA, and San Francisco CSA still falls short of Chicago, I'm sorry.
It may fall to 4th in GDP, but it will take Houston several decades before it passes Chicago in MSA population. Houston still falls 3 million people short.
It may fall to 4th in GDP, but it will take Houston several decades before it passes Chicago in MSA population. Houston still falls 3 million people short.
But according to the article even at the MSA level, Houston should surpass Chicago in the near future if current population trends maintain.
But according to the article even at the MSA level, Houston should surpass Chicago in the near future if current population trends maintain.
That's decades away. Unless everyone from San Antonio ups and moves to Houston, it's going to take Houston AT LEAST another 20 years to reach the population level that Chicago is at now. The only way for Houston to pass it in 20ish years if Chicago COMPLETELY stagnates, which is not likely.
The GDP overtake is very real, Houston is nipping at the heels of Chicago, population is still decades off.
The article you're posting compares city population, which is pretty irrelevant. By city population Indianapolis is bigger than San Francisco, Washington D.C., Boston, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Detroit, Miami, and Atlanta. When you compare MSA's the cities are separated by millions. There are still 3 million more people in Chicago MSA vs Houston MSA.
But according to the article even at the MSA level, Houston should surpass Chicago in the near future if current population trends maintain.
At the current growth rates, it will be at least 2030 for the city alone before it surpasses Chicago. That's 15 years away and 15 years is a lot of time for any city to rise/fall.
As far as MSA level goes, if Houston increased by 140K per year and Chicago was 25K per year, then it would take until 2043 for Houston to surpass Chicago's MSA, which is about 30 years away.
^^^Still the point stands that in the near future, tourists and fellow Americans will view Houston as the third largest city, taking that prominence away from Chicago.
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.