When a Metro doesnt grow as fast as the Country as a whole (real estate)

[crystalblue]

Between 2000 and 2008, the US as a whole grew 8%

Table of United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

some of these cities, notably some of the largest ones, grew quite a bit less.

Does this have any significance?

[Thomas R.]

It could be due to suburbanization or possibly some cities are in areas where urbanization has stabilized and foreign immigration is not high. Or another nearby city is more "competitive" in some sense. The birth rate among native-born Americans I think is lower than foreign-born. Offhand guess I think if a city grew at just half the national rate it might be fine.

Although some of the more extreme declines in population might mean there's economic or other problems. Looking at that I might wonder if Ocean City, New Jersey; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Decatur, Illinois; or Wheeling, West Virginia are having a problem. Wikipedia indicates Wheeling had twice as many people in 1930 as it does now.

Of larger metros it indicates Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Detroit are in decline.

For myself a city with average growth sounds interesting. Boom towns sometimes go bust and all. Although the cities in the 8-9% range mostly don't look too interesting to me. Maybe Rapid City, SD or Lubbock, Texas have some appeal to me.

[tpk-nyc]

Much of the growth was encouraged by land prices and artificially maintained by the real estate bubble (with many jobs in construction related services). Whether this growth can be maintained is unclear. Certain areas with a diversified economy, like Texas or Georgia, should be fine. Other places, like Arizona and Nevada, will have a much harder time.

Only so many people in Vegas can work in the hospitality industry. The Wall Street Journal just reported that no new construction is likely to take place on the Strip for 10 years. The housing market has fallen so far (more than 33 percent) that developers aren't going to be building houses any time soon. Unless other industries move in to replace the construction industry, a lot of people are going to have a tough time finding jobs.

Growth is meaningless unless it's sustainable. Population growth without economic growth is a recipe for disaster.

[Thomas R.]

There are some metros in the list of fast-growers that were in states less effected by the bust.

Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area - Colorado appears relatively okay from what I can tell.

Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers Metropolitan Area - If I read the stats right Arkansas was less effected than many states. Its unemployment is high, but below US average and it's been higher in the state.

St. George, Utah - Utah is doing better on unemployment than Arkansas I believe. So Provo-Orem could also fit.