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 04-21-2018, 04:20 PM
 
821 posts, read 761,681 times
Reputation: 1452

Advertisements

So I took the Net domestic migration numbers for metros over 1,000,000 in 2017 and divided them by population to get a percentage:
San Jose: -1.26
New York City: -1.03
Chicago: -.89
Los Angeles: -.82
Miami: -.77
Milwaukee: -.61
Hartford: -.56
San Francisco: -.51
Virginia Beach: -.51
Rochester: -.50
San Diego: -.48
Cleveland: -.39
Boston: -.38
Pittsburgh: -.37
Memphis: -.37
Baltimore: -.35
St. Louis: -.35
Washington: -.35
Detroit: -.35
Philadelphia: -.30
Buffalo: -.20
Providence: -.16
Houston: -.15
Birmingham: -.03

Oklahoma City: .01
Cincinnati: .07
Salt Lake City: .18
Louisville: .19
Grand Rapids: .21
Minneapolis: .23
New Orleans: .28
Richmond: .32
Indianapolis: .38
Kansas City: .40
Denver: .42
Riverside: .46
Portland: .55
Seattle: .55
Sacramento: .55
Atlanta: .57
Tuscon: .59
Columbus: .60
Dallas: .80
Orlando: .93
Nashville: .98
San Antonio: 1.01
Phoenix: 1.08
Charlotte: 1.23
Jacksonville: 1.26
Raleigh: 1.30
Tampa: 1.31
Las Vegas: 1.33
Austin: 1.42

Any Surprises? I was shocked by how some of the fastest growing metros of the 2000's are lagging behind (Atlanta, Riverside)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2018, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,330 posts, read 3,814,451 times
Reputation: 4029
There isn't a single northeastern metro with positive net migration and the one that is closest is Buffalo. It really looks like there is starting to be two Midwests - Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Minneapolis and Grand Rapids are all healthy. Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, St Louis and Detroit are all still losing people to the rest of the country (or in many cases, the healthier Midwestern cities).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 05:10 PM
 
14,024 posts, read 15,037,335 times
Reputation: 10471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewcifer View Post
There isn't a single northeastern metro with positive net migration and the one that is closest is Buffalo. It really looks like there is starting to be two Midwests - Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Minneapolis and Grand Rapids are all healthy. Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, St Louis and Detroit are all still losing people to the rest of the country (or in many cases, the healthier Midwestern cities).
Providence
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 05:40 PM
 
Location: California → Tennessee → Ohio
1,608 posts, read 3,079,203 times
Reputation: 1249
Wow...each of the 3 biggest U.S. cites - NYC, LA, Chicago - are losing people fast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 05:47 PM
 
821 posts, read 761,681 times
Reputation: 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliguy92832 View Post
Wow...each of the 3 biggest U.S. cites - NYC, LA, Chicago - are losing people fast.
Yeah increasingly fast as well...NYC is over 200,000 people leaving a year. Of course, international migration and births more than offset this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 05:57 PM
 
2,262 posts, read 2,402,695 times
Reputation: 2741
I said this on here months ago but the fact that places like LA, NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, etc are losing their middle class residents in large numbers and they're being replaced with higher income folks, it may not seem like a problem now but look towards the future, it's going to be extremely problematic - when you start having areas that only the wealthy can afford and everyone else gets shut out, that's not good for sustaining long-term growth and the local economy later on down the line will start to hurt as a result.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
14,189 posts, read 9,085,132 times
Reputation: 10546
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjoseph View Post
Yeah increasingly fast as well...NYC is over 200,000 people leaving a year. Of course, international migration and births more than offset this.
Those two factors account for all of the population increase in those Northeastern US cities that continue to gain population (New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Land of the Free
6,749 posts, read 6,738,960 times
Reputation: 7600
Atlanta is getting full, much like LA 20 years ago. Doesn't have DFW's freeway capacity, and interesting to see the gap growing vs. Charlotte, which didn't even complete its perimeter highway until 2015.

With the Inland Empire filling up, Vegas and Phoenix are basically the next outer outer suburbs of LA. Someone here might have the stats on how many Californians are moving there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 08:50 PM
 
7,132 posts, read 9,141,983 times
Reputation: 6338
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11 View Post
Atlanta is getting full, much like LA 20 years ago. Doesn't have DFW's freeway capacity, and interesting to see the gap growing vs. Charlotte, which didn't even complete its perimeter highway until 2015.

With the Inland Empire filling up, Vegas and Phoenix are basically the next outer outer suburbs of LA. Someone here might have the stats on how many Californians are moving there.
Atlanta Metro still growing at 90k a year so it's not like it's a slow growing metro area....it just means that is growing more in international growth numbers than previous decades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Buffalo, NY
3,580 posts, read 3,082,791 times
Reputation: 9800
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjoseph View Post
So I took the Net domestic migration numbers for metros over 1,000,000 in 2017 and divided them by population to get a percentage:

Any Surprises?
Yes, how many of the sun belt cities that are negative, yet are still growing:

San Jose: -1.26
Los Angeles: -.82
Miami: -.77
San Francisco: -.51
San Diego: -.48
Houston: -.15
Birmingham: -.03
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. The time now is 12:42 PM.

© 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