US Cities With the Highest Growth of Employemnt 2010 - 2017 - (LA, San Francisco, Dallas, Atlanta......in that order) (map, compared)
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.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,491 posts, read 15,049,857 times
Reputation: 7367
Wow, LA is on something else! What's the source of it? I haven't been lurking on C-v-C for a few months now so I'm not sure if this has been discussed.
1. LA
2. Dallas
3. San Francisco
4. Atlanta
5. Miami
6. Houston
7. Phoenix
8. Seattle
9. Riverside/San Bernardino/Ontario
10. Detroit
Some comments/observations:-
1. I didn't expect LA to be up so high, came as a surprise to me. San Francisco/Bay area seems to be stealing all the spotlight now days.
2. Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, Houston were expected to be in the top ten with their explosive population growth. People move where the jobs are.
3. Revival time for Detroit. Not sure if it will ever get back to it's previous glory but it will stand on it's feet.
4. San Francisco and San Jose combined as bay area will probably move it up a couple of spots behind LA. Also the quality of jobs created in San Francisco, San Jose and Seattle for the most part are of very high paying nature so the wealth generated in these areas is substantially higher compared to Dallas or Atlanta.
5. The balance of power has shifted considerably towards the South and West from the East Coast. Most of the job and population growth in the country is in the West coast or the South.
To be clear the numbers on that map don't represent job growth increases. They represent the increase in share of national job market. The actual job growth numbers from 2010-2017 would be much bigger percentages and the 10 biggest gainers would look a bit different.
So this isnt actual job growth but the change in every metro area's share of the nation's total jobs? What a confusingass premise and misleading title.
LAs job growth was NOT faster than SF nor is it faster than Dallas etc.during the period the authors of this article claim.
So this isnt actual job growth but the change in every metro area's share of the nation's total jobs? What a confusingass premise and misleading title.
LAs job growth was NOT faster than SF nor is it faster than Dallas etc.during the period the authors of this article claim.
Not sure what theyre trying to do with this.
If it was an increase in the national share of Jobs that would be 4.5 million jobs created in SF since 2010 which is obviously not what happened.
If it was an increase in the national share of Jobs that would be 4.5 million jobs created in SF since 2010 which is obviously not what happened.
I'm not sure your math is right on that. It's an increase in share, not physical increase. So if the SF job market had 3% of the national job market it's saying that it's share has increased by 2.81% so it would be 2.81% more than the 3%. This map is demonstrating a shift in concentration moreso than growth.
Last edited by mjlo; 07-22-2019 at 10:51 AM..
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.
