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.
For one, Memphis is the main city for one of the historically poorest sections of the country, the Mississippi Delta. What’s more, due to it’s location it was a natural transportation and manufacturing hub. Unfortunately manufacturing isn’t what it used to be in this country. Poverty is a vicious cycle and Memphis might be the prime example.
I do wonder if Memphis’ location hurts it, and whether it’s tri-state footprint made it difficult with legislators in Nashville. But that’s me just wondering.
For one, Memphis is the main city for one of the historically poorest sections of the country, the Mississippi Delta. What’s more, due to it’s location it was a natural transportation and manufacturing hub. Unfortunately manufacturing isn’t what it used to be in this country. Poverty is a vicious cycle and Memphis might be the prime example.
I do wonder if Memphis’ location hurts it, and whether it’s tri-state footprint made it difficult with legislators in Nashville. But that’s me just wondering.
Metro Memphis has not declined though; it's just been stagnant relative to Nashville which has boomed.
Nashville used to be a poor city in a poor region as well. As I said, until the 60s the two cities were quite similar.
Metro Memphis has not declined though; it's just been stagnant relative to Nashville which has boomed.
Nashville used to be a poor city in a poor region as well. As I said, until the 60s the two cities were quite similar.
This is a good call out and distinction to make, for sure.
Memphis had the unfortunate situation to be the location where Martin Luther King, Jr was assassinated. Granted, his life and legacy is now celebrated as a cultural, moving museum experience in Memphis present day, but that particular event really kicked off Memphis' perception, and sort of stalled development in Memphis in the decades after--or stalled development of "what could have been." Memphis did have some good skyscraper construction in the 70s and a bit in the 80s, but it was a shell of what could've occurred, I feel like.
Add in the decline of the cotton industry in the 60s, and "white flight" that occurred, as well as Memphis being a super poor region in general, and it has all piled on to create a stigma and stagnation for the city to move up and onward in a lot of economic areas.
I feel like Memphis is a hidden gem though, and a lot of good development projects are occurring in some neighborhoods in Memphis with gentrification and new housing, businesses, etc.
But it just doesn't have the oomph right now to skyrocket into high growth mode, due to many factors at play going against it.
Metro Memphis has not declined though; it's just been stagnant relative to Nashville which has boomed.
Nashville used to be a poor city in a poor region as well. As I said, until the 60s the two cities were quite similar.
Well the Mississippi Delta is unique even among the South. But also I think it does come down to economic choices. Nashville adapted to a post-industrial America and diversified, and Memphis didn’t. Here’s one way to look at it. In 1969, the Memphis MSA’s income per capita was 94% of Nashville’s. It had slipped only to 92% by 2000. The big change has come in the last two decades, where the income per capita in Memphis is now at 82% of Nashville’s.
Nashville was able to pivot well to the eds and meds economy and adding tech as well, so now they are able to draw transplants from across the country while Memphis is drawing from a much more regional and poorer pool.
Are you kidding?? First off, Santa Fe isn't large and Taos is like an ant compared to Albuquerque.
Neither compares to Albuquerque in any way. Albuquerque is in no danger of being usurped in New Mexico. It would take generations to do so. And Albuquerque would have to be declining, which it isn't.
I hope whoever suggested that was joking or else is woefully uninformed. Santa Fe has some cultural recognition but ranks fourth in population in the state, in front of Roswell. Tiny Taos is the most dysfunctional place one could imagine but it seems to work for them. I like them both because of the culture and the quirky aspect but they cannot come close to Albuquerque. Rio Rancho is on the verge of surpassing Las Cruces in population to be number two in the state.
I'd also say that St. Louis vs. KC isn't a really good parallel either. Metro St. Louis continues to grow, just at a slower pace than Greater Kansas City of late.
In this instance, because St. Louis is its own county and cannot annex, the metro performance is what matters and I think St. Louis is holding its own. If you consider potential development, St. Louis might have the edge because of the hollowed-out core areas with good and easy access.
Surprised I haven’t seen Phoenix/Tucson yet unless I missed it. Of course this is in the context of the high growth sunbelt. But Tucson seems to be stagnating in the past decade or so and seems to have some major issues.
Maybe it Durant quite fit because Cincinnati is just as big and smack in the middle
Since when is Cincinnati smack in the middle of Cleveland and Columbus???
Cleveland and Detroit are both doing at least OK with their instate peers right now, and have closed the gap if nothing else.
For Detroit, it is at -1.24 percent of its March 2020 employment (April 2020 is when it crashed across the board throughout the country). Grand Rapids is -1.82 percent of its March 2020 employment.
In Ohio, Columbus just got back on the positive side last month at +0.98 percent of its March 2020 employment. Cleveland may hit that this month. It's at -0.66 percent below. Cincinnati is actually further behind at -1.18 percent. Cleveland based on recent gains will get back to the positive this month when preliminary May figures come out and Cincinnati still within reach as well (it may be short lived if there is a recession, but that's another story).
For the last year, Cleveland has also been leading the other two Ohio metros in total job gains and percent job gains.
Cleveland and Detroit also are the only two Midwest metros, outside Chicago, that currently have 600-plus foot skyscrapers currently under construction.
In this instance, because St. Louis is its own county and cannot annex, the metro performance is what matters and I think St. Louis is holding its own. If you consider potential development, St. Louis might have the edge because of the hollowed-out core areas with good and easy access.
Those are other areas where Cleveland and Detroit have advantages as well. The growing metros either have to build up or even more out. St. Louis, Detroit and Cleveland have the opportunity to grow just by infill. And in Cleveland and St. Louis' case, they can do that with a mass transit system already in place, so don't need to use resources just to get a functioning one going.
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.
