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.
Top 20 States with the most jobs gained since January 2010 (recession peak).
1. California: 2,126,000
2. Texas: 1,649,000
3. Florida: 1,055,000
4. New York: 809,600
5. Georgia: 470,300
6. Michigan: 444,600
7. North Carolina: 435,700
8. Ohio: 428,500
9. Washington: 379,000
10. Illinois: 341,500
11. Colorado: 321,100
12. Massachusetts: 308,700
13. Tennessee: 295,900
14. Indiana: 281,200
15. Arizona: 280,400
16. Pennsylvania: 279,600
17. Virginia: 234,600
18. Minnesota: 234,400
19. South Carolina: 231,600
20. Utah: 217,600
Total Jobs Gained by Region since January 2010.
North: 4,513,300
West: 3,900,800
South: 4,985,400
Again, it seems clear to me that California and Texas pretty much rule the fate of their respective regions. New York certainly does with the Northeast, but to a much less extent.
It was good that you separated out the Midwest as these figures show that it has solid growth with a more reasonable cost of living. I think some people tend to think that the Rustbelt is the entirety of the Midwest, which just isn't true.
The traditional Rust Belt is basically just a bit of area along the Lakes, stretching from Chicago through Buffalo.
However, if we broke this down further to just include Great Lakes states, the totals for all 3 years would still be higher than the South or West. The growth for the 2000-2014 would be lower than the West, but higher than the South, and for the 2010-2014, it would still have the highest growth vs. either. So yeah, this area gets maligned, but all the numbers I've shown so far do not indicate it is a failed or failing region by any means. People need to remember that it isn't 1970 anymore, and just because these states may not be adding a million people a year does not mean anything as to their strength.
You don't seem to understand what trends are. It is similar to crime rates. They can spike up or down in single years, but their long term trends can be entirely different than the short term spikes. And these are different in that crimes are actually directly reported, while these are merely estimates based on past performance, not necessarily the reality of current conditions. There is really no reason to believe that out migration jumped dramatically in a single year, and they seem to be similar to the 2000s when estimates were harsher than what the 2010 census ultimately showed. The point is, that the census loves to overestimate both gains and losses.
When every state in a region except for North Dakota (which gained more) and Kansas (just barely lost less) loses more people than they lost in a previous year, that counts as a trend.
People just aren't digging the Midwest. Glad you have more jobs but that's not enough to convince people to move there.
States like Oregon are gaining jobs too, and that state gained domestic migrants when it was one of the hardest hit job loss states.
Last edited by SyraBrian; 12-30-2015 at 01:44 PM..
When every state in a region except for North Dakota and Missouri loses more people than they lost in a previous year, that counts as a trend.
People just aren't digging the Midwest.
I do wonder how much of this is retiree driven however. I mean, compared to the Northeast, the unemployment rate is lower, and the cost of living is generally much lower. Indeed, the cost of living in the Midwest is pretty similar to the South overall, and wages are generally higher. Hell, if you're talking about only the states in the South that domestic migrants are heading to, the COL is generally higher than the Midwest. The comparison is even worse when looking at the Midwest versus west.
Taken together, it just doesn't seem in the economic interest of working-age people in the Midwest to move south or west, unless they're in a very high cost metro like Chicago and looking at a lower-cost metro.
I do wonder how much of this is retiree driven however. I mean, compared to the Northeast, the unemployment rate is lower, and the cost of living is generally much lower. Indeed, the cost of living in the Midwest is pretty similar to the South overall, and wages are generally higher. Hell, if you're talking about only the states in the South that domestic migrants are heading to, the COL is generally higher than the Midwest. The comparison is even worse when looking at the Midwest versus west.
Taken together, it just doesn't seem in the economic interest of working-age people in the Midwest to move south or west, unless they're in a very high cost metro like Chicago and looking at a lower-cost metro.
It may not be a problem of people leaving. States can have few people leave and still have negative domestic migration if even less people move into those states.
States like Michigan and Ohio top the rankings in terms of percentage of residents who were born in the state in which they're currently residing. Could be an inflow problem.
Again, it seems clear to me that California and Texas pretty much rule the fate of their respective regions. New York certainly does with the Northeast, but to a much less extent.
Florida is up there with Texas, especially considering population differences. According to population estimates as of 2014, Texas has 35% more people than Florida, and adjusting for population this would mean Florida would gain 1.4 million jobs (compared to Texas' 1.6 million) if they had the same population.
In other words, Texas is doing better, and Florida is right on her heels.
When every state in a region except for North Dakota (which gained more) and Kansas (just barely lost less) loses more people than they lost in a previous year, that counts as a trend.
People just aren't digging the Midwest. Glad you have more jobs but that's not enough to convince people to move there.
States like Oregon are gaining jobs too, and that state gained domestic migrants when it was one of the hardest hit job loss states.
Actually, it doesn't. Again, I think you misunderstand what a trend is. It would only be a trend if it continued in future years AND could be verified as factual to begin with. I would place a good bet that every single Midwestern state exceeds the estimated numbers by 2020.
Top 20 States with the most jobs gained since January 2010 (recession peak).
1. California: 2,126,000
2. Texas: 1,649,000
3. Florida: 1,055,000
4. New York: 809,600
5. Georgia: 470,300
6. Michigan: 444,600
7. North Carolina: 435,700
8. Ohio: 428,500
9. Washington: 379,000
10. Illinois: 341,500
11. Colorado: 321,100
12. Massachusetts: 308,700
13. Tennessee: 295,900
14. Indiana: 281,200
15. Arizona: 280,400
16. Pennsylvania: 279,600
17. Virginia: 234,600
18. Minnesota: 234,400
19. South Carolina: 231,600
20. Utah: 217,600
Total Jobs Gained by Region since January 2010.
North: 4,513,300
West: 3,900,800
South: 4,985,400
Again, it seems clear to me that California and Texas pretty much rule the fate of their respective regions. New York certainly does with the Northeast, but to a much less extent.
California/Texas are also two of the largest states in the nation in terms of population and land area so of course, they're capturing a large portion of job growth.
Florida is up there with Texas, especially considering population differences. According to population estimates as of 2014, Texas has 35% more people than Florida, and adjusting for population this would mean Florida would gain 1.4 million jobs (compared to Texas' 1.6 million) if they had the same population.
In other words, Texas is doing better, and Florida is right on her heels.
Florida did well in the job gains metric, but Texas still beat it by more than half a million. And in all the other numbers I have posted, Florida doesn't come close. That's why I say that Texas is the true determiner of Southern performance as a region. It far dominates all the competition.
California/Texas are also two of the largest states in the nation in terms of population and land area so of course, they're capturing a large portion of job growth.
Yes, I am just suggesting that when people beat the hype drum of "Everyone is moving South and West, just look how great we're doing!", they owe much of that hype to just 2 states.
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.
