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.
It's not a matter of jusr expanding itself, it's a matter of keeping up with all these rapidly booming other cities. Philly isn't stagnant, it's just that others have been booming more rapidly
True, but most *hot* cities level off eventually. I can't imagine people will endlessly pour into these sunbelt cities, especially the ones most prone to climate disasters, or that have abysmal traffic patterns and urban sprawl. But hey what do I know, I'm surprised some of them are still growing at the rate they are.
True, but most *hot* cities level off eventually. I can't imagine people will endlessly pour into these sunbelt cities, especially the ones most prone to climate disasters, or that have abysmal traffic patterns and urban sprawl. But hey what do I know, I'm surprised some of them are still growing at the rate they are.
We have issues with urban sprawl but migration patterns tell a different story. The suburbs of sunbelt cities are growing as fast as ever. We praise inner city living on here and look down on suburban life styles but in the real world it's just the opposite.
But fear not. From 2000 to 2018 the percentage of inner city dwellers remained the same while suburban dwellers increased by 2% to 25%.
I mean there’s a mix of tastes in real life, just as there are a mix of tastes on this site. Perhaps this site (esp this subforum) has a disproportionate number of “urbanists,” but I don’t know. Yeah the sunbelt is hot as ever, in a few senses of the words. My point is none of us really know for how much longer it will grow rapidly. But it would be myopic to think this rate of growth will last into any sort of practical infinitum.
Houston and Atlanta are not overrated. Within 2 years, both will have larger economies and a bigger metro population than Philly. The difference between the cities is two are growing and thriving while one is stagnant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19
We have issues with urban sprawl but migration patterns tell a different story. The suburbs of sunbelt cities are growing as fast as ever. We praise inner city living on here and look down on suburban life styles but in the real world it's just the opposite.
Don't confuse affordability and availability of land and sprawl for thriving or even desirability. Once that affordability goes away, I'll be curious to see how sustainable that suburban sprawl really is.
Houston and Atlanta are not overrated. Within 2 years, both will have larger economies and a bigger metro population than Philly. The difference between the cities is two are growing and thriving while one is stagnant.
Can you share figures that suggest Philadelphia is "stagnant"? Or is this your anecdotal experience.
Both are growing faster, but more thriving is a relative term.
Atlanta and Houston also experience big city QOL issues. All 3 have high crime, all 3 have near identical poverty rates, and Philadelphia ranks better in most per capita economic metrics... I can go on...
And as Muinteoir mentioned above, "it would be myopic to think this rate of growth will last into any sort of practical infinitum".
Can you share figures that suggest Philadelphia is "stagnant"? Or is this your anecdotal experience.
Both are growing faster, but more thriving is a relative term.
Atlanta and Houston also experience big city QOL issues. All 3 have high crime, all 3 have near identical poverty rates, and Philadelphia ranks better in most per capita economic metrics... I can go on...
And as Muinteoir mentioned above, "it would be myopic to think this rate of growth will last into any sort of practical infinitum".
Exactly. Not to mention, if everyone should have learned one lesson over the past couple of years, it's that nothing about the future is guaranteed.
The economy and global order are more unpredictable than ever before. And the "boom" days of the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s are never coming back for myriad reasons.
We're in unchartered territory, folks. Let's all wait and see where the chips fall.
New York and LA are tier 1 on size and scale. NYC being the dominant one. Quite honestly LA isn't on NYC's level across the board, but that's another story.
There are a number of factors where SF, DC actually outshine LA. Chicago has LA beat in urban rankings and a real downtown. LA is not invincible, but due to size and scale gets placed with NYC all the time, per capita it doesn't necessarily perform better than DC/SF. Which is why I see tier 1 cities in the US being the 5 at the top as a lock, and then later discussions about the others.
Again we're discussing what's the current status of Philadelphia though, not all the others.
DC/SF out performs NYC in some metrics on a per capita basis. I don't understand what you mean by a "real downtown," can you elaborate?
In any event, DC and SF are not in the same tier as NYC & LA.
I'm not sure Philly is in the top 10 at this point as other cities are caught up to, and surpassed it.
NYC
LA
CHI
DC
SF
DAL
HOU
MIA
BOS
(Toss up between ATL, Philly, Seattle)
Can you share figures that suggest Philadelphia is "stagnant"? Or is this your anecdotal experience.
Both are growing faster, but more thriving is a relative term.
Atlanta and Houston also experience big city QOL issues. All 3 have high crime, all 3 have near identical poverty rates, and Philadelphia ranks better in most per capita economic metrics... I can go on...
And as Muinteoir mentioned above, "it would be myopic to think this rate of growth will last into any sort of practical infinitum".
Regarding Philadelphia, Atlanta, and Houston, here is why I say growing and thriving versus stagnant. However, I could interchange stagnant with slightly moderate to be fair.
2000 MSA Population
Philadelphia: 5,687,147
Houston: 4,715,407
Atlanta: 4,247,981
2021 MSA Population
Houston: 7,122,240
Philadelphia: 6,228,601
Atlanta: 6,144,050
Regarding Philadelphia, Atlanta, and Houston, here is why I say growing and thriving versus stagnant. However, I could interchange stagnant with slightly moderate to be fair.
Projected Future Job Growth 2020-2029
Atlanta: 46.8% (U.S. Average 33.5%)
Houston: 30.9% (U.S. Average 33.5%)
Philadelphia: 28.4% (U.S. Average 33.5%)
Well, stagnant literally means not growing at all; so it's just plain factually incorrect to describe Philly's economy that way.
As for those projected future job growth rates, I'm sorry to say they're completely bogus. The US is lucky to grow jobs by 15% over the next decade, let alone twice that amount.
That's exactly what I was getting at in my last post. Population and workforce growth just aren't going to be anything like what it used to be in the coming years. Slowing birth rates and and a tsunami of retirements from the Baby Boomers are going to throw everything for a loop. It's already in progress, and it will become even more obvious as time goes on.
I don’t get the “still” part. Philly has upgraded over the last 25 years. It’s not a city in decline.
It’s still the #4 city on the Northeast Corridor behind NYC, DC, and Boston. It has a larger population than Boston but the per-capita numbers are lower.
But 25 years ago, Philadelphia was arguably a top 4 metro/city in the country (10% bigger than 5th place Dallas-Ft. Worth MSA in the 2000 census).
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.
