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.
The big differences are that Milwaukee has a higher percentage of Latin Americans, and Minneapolis a much higher percentage of Africans.
But that's apart of the whole. If you look at it from a total number perspective there are a lot more foreign born people (as a percentage as well) in Minneapolis vs. Milwaukee.
I need to correct my previous post with percentages. I was comparing Minneapolis to Milwaukee County, not the Milwaukee MSA. The correct comparisons are:
Africa - Minneapolis - 23%
Milwaukee - 4%
Europe - Milwaukee - 20%
Minneapolis - 11%
Asia - Minneapolis - 40%
Milwaukee - 32%
Latin America - Milwaukee - 42%
Minneapolis - 24%
Yes, Minneapolis does have more foreign born, most likely due to the influx from Africa and Asia the last couple of decades. As I said Minneapolis is more spread out - their metro is 7,600 sq miles, compared to Milwaukee's 1,400 sq miles (HUGE difference). Milwaukee is more dense, at 1,080 people psm, compared to Minneapolis 457 psm. Minneapolis' metro population is twice the size of Milwaukee, but it's spread pretty thin. Milwaukee city proper is 600,000, compared to Minneapolis at 400,000.
For what it's worth, here's the rate of real GDP growth per capita in every major Northeastern and Midwestern metropolitan area (plus Louisville) from 2001-2014:
+1.3% - Buffalo
+1.2% - Baltimore
+1.2% - Boston
+1.2% - Pittsburgh
+1.1% - New York
+1.0% - Providence
+0.9% - Cleveland
+0.9% - Philadelphia
+0.8% - Milwaukee
+0.6% - Minneapolis/St. Paul
+0.6% - Washington DC
+0.5% - Chicago
+0.5% - Cincinnati
+0.4% - Hartford
+0.4% - Kansas City
+0.4% - Louisville
+0.4% - St. Louis
+0.3% - Columbus
+0.3% - Detroit
+0.3% - Rochester
+0.2% - Indianapolis
For what it's worth, here's the rate of real GDP growth per capita in every major Northeastern and Midwestern metropolitan area (plus Louisville) from 2001-2014:
+1.3% - Buffalo
+1.2% - Baltimore
+1.2% - Boston
+1.2% - Pittsburgh
+1.1% - New York
+1.0% - Providence
+0.9% - Cleveland
+0.9% - Philadelphia
+0.8% - Milwaukee
+0.6% - Minneapolis/St. Paul
+0.6% - Washington DC
+0.5% - Chicago
+0.5% - Cincinnati
+0.4% - Hartford
+0.4% - Kansas City
+0.4% - Louisville
+0.4% - St. Louis
+0.3% - Columbus
+0.3% - Detroit
+0.3% - Rochester
+0.2% - Indianapolis
Grand Rapids is a million+ metro not to far behind Rochester, why you no include?
Like peterlemonjello and mjlo stated, if you cannot see that Detroit and Minneapolis/Saint Paul are in a higher league with respect to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Total Personal Income (TPI), concentrated wealth, corporate power (both public and private companies), airport infrastructure, trade and shipping, key global industries, size, media market presence, retail and hotel brand presence, service destinations, consulates, global think-tank satellite offices, immigration, overall and total diversity, and seriously a plethora of many many many other things then you have much to catch-up on. This is a fact. Why do people insist on arguing things redundantly that are either well known or factually accessible?
I mean, if you're bigger, richer, have more of everything from airlines, to destinations, to hotel brands, to store brands, to immigrants, to foreign corporations and all of that plus more stuff that I'm not even listing here, then the chances are that you're more important than the competition(s). Which Greater Detroit and the Twin Cities, obviously, are to the cities in this thread's poll. Hence their exclusion from this topic, along with the other obvious, Chicago.
The only people this is news to are insanely intellectually dishonest and boisterous-without-cause boosters. Everyone else can identify a fact when they see one, it seems.
None of the other cities in the list even got 2,500 immigrants.
Minneapolis is one of the largest magnets in the US for immigration from Africa. Its tied for 3rd with Dallas behind NYC and DC. Detroit is the single greatest magnet for immigration from Muslim countries in the US (besides NYC).
Looking a cities international profile without considering the metro area is ridiculous. If that were the case, places like Boston, San Francisco, and Atlanta wouldn't be nearly as international as they are.
It shows Indianapolis and Columbus are the two most economically successful mid sized Midwest cities. KC and Louisville are not far behind. STL and CLE attract far fewer per capita immigrants IMO for this very reason.
???
How do you know who the immigrants are, how they are funded, what they do here?
Then you have to show the connection between immigration and positive economics. It certainly wouldn't be a good thing if a majority of immigrants were on welfare, for example.
I mean, you have Detroit at number 1 on this list. By your logic, it has the best economy. Is that what you're contending?
I'd love to see some stats to back you up, but they are curiously lacking. Please post.
Like peterlemonjello and mjlo stated, if you cannot see that Detroit and Minneapolis/Saint Paul are in a higher league with respect to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Total Personal Income (TPI), concentrated wealth, corporate power (both public and private companies), airport infrastructure, trade and shipping, key global industries, size, media market presence, retail and hotel brand presence, service destinations, consulates, global think-tank satellite offices, immigration, overall and total diversity, and seriously a plethora of many many many other things then you have much to catch-up on. This is a fact. Why do people insist on arguing things redundantly that are either well known or factually accessible?
I mean, if you're bigger, richer, have more of everything from airlines, to destinations, to hotel brands, to store brands, to immigrants, to foreign corporations and all of that plus more stuff that I'm not even listing here, then the chances are that you're more important than the competition(s). Which Greater Detroit and the Twin Cities, obviously, are to the cities in this thread's poll. Hence their exclusion from this topic, along with the other obvious, Chicago.
The only people this is news to are insanely intellectually dishonest and boisterous-without-cause boosters. Everyone else can identify a fact when they see one, it seems.
RedJohn....you will never get the homer boosters to admit this.
Chicago is in a whole other stratosphere than any other Midwest city. MLPS and Detroit are in a whole other league.
Everyone else is a mid sized city, just different shades of it. That includes as small as Des Moines, as truly midsized as Louisville, or as "large" as St Louis in MSA.
Last edited by Peter1948; 06-01-2016 at 02:45 PM..
How do you know who the immigrants are, how they are funded, what they do here?
Then you have to show the connection between immigration and positive economics. It certainly wouldn't be a good thing if a majority of immigrants were on welfare, for example.
I mean, you have Detroit at number 1 on this list. By your logic, it has the best economy. Is that what you're contending?
I'd love to see some stats to back you up, but they are curiously lacking. Please post.
No every city on this list has a better economy than detroit.
My point is due to size, Chicago, Detroit, and mpls are leagues more international than any city on this list.
And despite all the voting for CLE and STL the reality is Columbus has more international population, and no one can touch Louisville's growth in international population....and this means dozens more international stores and restaurants than one could ever imagine in these cities.
I mean none of these cities really has many international flights anymore. Maybe CLE has 3 or something and usually seasonal. Toronto barely counts since it is less than 2 hours away.
In fact Louisville has more direct international flights than every city in this poll combined...but almost none are for people (maybe a couple seasonal to Caribbean), only UPS cargo So that alone is more international than any other airport listed.....
I could give you a tour of Columbus or Louisville that would really surprise the heck out of you with regards to the new immigration of the last 20 years....
Really Indy and KC too. The square that runs from Indianapolis, to Columbus, south to Louisville and up to Cincinnati is the most successful economic region in the Midwest right now. Even taking Louisville out for the Midwest purest who believe a mile of water creates a different area, then certainly Columbus, Indianapolis, and now even Cincinnati, are doing a lot right. And immigrants are coming because of it.
I know this as I do a lot of business in this area. So...I think STL is BARELY the most international metro here, with CLE and PITT not far behind, but one has to wonder if Columbus, Louisville, Cincy, Indy, even KC are all really right there, neck and neck. At the end of the day, none are international cities and all are mid sized!
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.
So that alone is more international than any other airport listed.....
