Do you think the upper-south/lower-midwest is about to take off population growth wise? (tornadoes, earthquakes)

[MattDen]

I was wondering if you think that states with Missouri, Kentucky, Eastern Oklahoma, Western Virginia will start to see large influxes of growth.

It seems like alot of the affluent older baby-boomers have been moving to places like Montana, the resort towns in Colorado, Idaho and pacific north-western states.

But it seems like around the country increasing interesing in places like Springfield, Missouri; Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri; Eastern Kentucky; Knoxville and Johnson City, TN; The lakes areas of eastern Oklahoma and places like Roanoke, West Virginia.

All these places are topographically interesting whether they have a lake, mountains, hills and have much lower values then alot of the country. Not only that they tend to have a moderate winter as opposed to the frigid winters in the way up north.

I was just wondering if anyone elese here thinks the upper-south will end up being the new lower-south when it comes to very high growth rates?

[missymomof3]

I dunno but I hope not.

[Vagus]

1990-2000 Population Change - Interactive 2000 Census Data Web Map

Based on 2000 census, so a little old, but you can draw your own conclusions . . .

Overall I suspect that yes, growth in these areas will probably accellerate, as long as they can generate jobs. Otherwise, they are relatively affordable, and as you pointed out are geographically nice and not "too hot/too cold" like the north or more traditional sunbelt.

[LouisvilleJake]

Louisville's growth has been on an upswing in the past few years - but I certainly hope it does not turn into a situation like Nashville or Austin. Too much growth, too fast. That would be awful.

[dullnboring]

I don't think that it's about to take off anytime soon. I think we've still got quite a few years of "Sunbelt-itis" ahead of us where the bulk of the growth will be taking place further South and West. But sure enough, eventually for the same reasons that previous hotspots like Florida and California have become less appealing, issues like traffic, overcrowding, prices of housing, etc. people will move onwards from the Carolinas, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, etc. looking for the next hotspot, and it wouldn't surprise me if places like Kentucky and Missouri reaped the benefits from that. Both have cheap costs of living, slow but stable growth, at least one area with a vibrant economy and growth rate (Kansas City and Louisville) and weather isn't too extreme. I think that growth will continue at a stable rate in these areas in the meantime, but perhaps in another 15-20 years, the pace will pick up.

[ajf131]

Hold on a second...the lower Midwest and Upper South are not the same regions. THe lower Midwest is Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. The Upper South is Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, ARkansas, and arguably Oklahoma. In any case, I hope that these very high-growth rates do not happen. Illinois aside from Chicago does not have high costs of living, and indiana and OHio are as cheap as Missouri.

[vasinger]

I doubt Southwest Virginia will boom economically. Its just too remote in them thar hills. But its lovely country.

Ironically, places like Asheville, NC are doing very well and were once considered very back woodsy places. The lower midwest is even worse. Southern Ohio is extremely poor , as well as Illinois, and Indiana. I don't see much change for that area.

[i35vagabond]

Originally Posted by LouisvilleJake

Louisville's growth has been on an upswing in the past few years - but I certainly hope it does not turn into a situation like Nashville or Austin. Too much growth, too fast. That would be awful.

I doubt if Louisville will ever grow as fast or as large as Austin. Totally different league. Austin is closing
in on 900,000 population.

Louisvile will continue to compete with it's neighbors Indianapolis, and Cincinnati. Austin is the destination. Louisville, Indy and Cincy are just passing thru.

[Zoness]

Truly, there is appeal for the lower cost of living and generally slightly better weather but show me the money first. Unless major tech companies start moving to downstate IL, IN, OH or parts of KY, MO, and maybe Oklahoma, its still not a major consideration for me personally.

[Phil P]

From a climatic and geographic standpoint, this area of the US is wonderful. No earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanoes, and not as many wildfires or tornadoes as other areas. Also, the landscape in this area is beautiful. It's green (unlike Colorado), yet temperate. Why so many people choose to move to Arizona, California, and Florida, I don't know. Arizona is ugly and has a rather unpleasant climate, California = yuck in general, and Florida has too many hurricanes and alligators.