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.
Not Indianapolis or Grand Rapids. Maybe Columbus, Minneapolis, or Madison, but even for them it's a stretch. Worldwide population growth is slowing down and the US is no outlier, and 3% annual growth is already uncommon.
I think maybe my 3% was to aggressive. Maybe 2.5 would have been more realistic. Much of the 3% growth rates in sun belt metros were due to the mass exodus from Northern metro areas of US born citizens. Due to bad economies and retirees, the Midwest lost a lot of people to the Sun Belt the last few decades, but with the improved economies of the Midwest and tightened immigration, reaching 3% will be hard for even Sun Belt metros.
I think Columbus and Indianapolis, which are fairly white collar cities, are attractive to people fleeing the industrial decline of Midwest Metros like Cleveland, Detroit, Flint, Chicago (yes Chicago was very industrial too), Youngstown, etc, but who want to remain within short driving distance from their hometowns.
Things related to climate, water, earthquakes etc, however, could shift migration patterns significantly in the next 20 years, potentially.
That's 34% growth every 10 years. I was going to say Des Moines because I love the city and it's growing at a very healthy rate, but when you're talking 34% every 10 years I wouldn't want to see the city grow that fast, it creates a lot of downward pressures on standard of living.
I feel like some people think the faster a city grows the better it is - growth is good, but there's certainly something to be said about growing far too fast.
Even if returning to the Midwest became a major trend, would it spread broadly or focus on a few cities? I'm imagining the former. That would keep the percentages down.
However a huge factor like HQ2 could change that. The 50,000 plus families plus jobs multiplier and their families, minus the people who wouldn't come because the city was more expensive, plus the additional people who would come due to the revival...a net increase of several hundred thousand people probably.
I don't know about currently, but a decade or more ago Orlando, Austin, Raleigh, Las Vegas...even Atlanta I think....were sustaining those rates. With the brakes being applied to immigration.....I am not sure 3% is viable. You would need strong net domestic migration rates, strong immigration rates and a good rate of natural increase. Currently the Midwest is not an immigrant magnet, so that is one strike against it.
As cities and metros get larger, it gets harder and harder to sustain high percentage growth rates because the base onto which the growth is applied expands. Even a 2% growth rate is challenging. IMO, any metro over a million that's growing 1% a year is doing an admirable job.
As cities and metros get larger, it gets harder and harder to sustain high percentage growth rates because the base onto which the growth is applied expands. Even a 2% growth rate is challenging. IMO, any metro over a million that's growing 1% a year is doing an admirable job.
True. I guess my 3% was my metric for a "boom" town. You are also right about base population size and larger metros being less likely to sustain that growth rate. This is probably why no really large metro in the Midwest has been mentioned. The largest metro that I could see possibly doing it would be Columbus. Des Moines would be my likely pick though. I think Madison, Wis has a lot of the ingredients and really is in an attractive setting.....it, along with Grand Rapids, baffles me why they don't grow at faster rates. I am in Madison several times a year and its a really nice place.
People are trend followers. The trend for the last several decades has been to the sunbelt. Even with great economies, cheaper cost and good quality of life, if you are not in the trendy regions its hard to attract new residents. When its hard to attract new residence.....its hard to attract the coveted best and brightest workers that all corporations seems to be wooing these days.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 04-18-2018 at 12:28 PM..
Columbus might attain 2% as steady rate. One thing to think about, is that Columbus is in a state of almost 12 million people. If people are going to stay in Ohio, Columbus tends to be the place to be. As the word gets out, I could see Columbus and Des Moines being the top draws for the next couple years.
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.
)
