When will Philadelphia start GAINING population? (Chester, Chesterbrook: credit rating, home, employment)

[Jfoldno7]

I believe the corrected adjustment because that is the Census Bureaus current stance on the population. We could get into the debate of the accuracy of the census, and how it may or may not be missing huge populations in larger cities, but I'll accept whatever the current estimate stands at as the best "guess" of the population.

You don't have to be impressed thekish, but the reality is that most of the U.S. population is drifting west and south. A large part of the reason for that is that when you look at a map of population density in the U.S. the more open areas are west and south. Unless someone has a plan for reigniting the manufacturing jobs that kept large cities in the north-east (and especially the north mid-west) thriving Philly, and most cities in this part of the country will be lucky to just hold their populations.

[thekish]

Originally Posted by Jfoldno7

I believe the corrected adjustment because that is the Census Bureaus current stance on the population. We could get into the debate of the accuracy of the census, and how it may or may not be missing huge populations in larger cities, but I'll accept whatever the current estimate stands at as the best "guess" of the population.

You don't have to be impressed thekish, but the reality is that most of the U.S. population is drifting west and south. A large part of the reason for that is that when you look at a map of population density in the U.S. the more open areas are west and south. Unless someone has a plan for reigniting the manufacturing jobs that kept large cities in the north-east (and especially the north mid-west) thriving Philly, and most cities in this part of the country will be lucky to just hold their populations.

Philly is not losing ground because of manufacturing jobs being lost. Philly is losing ground becuse the city is a slum and people are moving to the burbs. There are 3.5 million people in the burbs.

[Jfoldno7]

People moving to the burbs is not the sole reason the city is losing population. Like I said in my last post, the trend of the U.S. population is west and south, and here are some Census projections to illustrate the point:

California: 2000 population = 33.8 million; 2030 estimate = 46.4 million
Texas: 2000 population = 20.8 million; 2030 estimate = 33.3 million
Florida: 2000 population = 15.9 million; 2030 estimate = 28.6 million
Georgia: 2000 population = 8.1 million; 2030 estimate = 12.0 million
North Carolina: 2000 population = 8.0 million; 2030 estimate = 12.2 million
Washington: 2000 population = 5.8 million; 2030 estimate = 8.6 million
Arizona: 2000 population = 5.1 million; 2030 estimate = 10.7 million
Nevada: 2000 population = 2.0 million; 2030 estimate = 4.2 million

Now, compare that to many north east and north mid-west states:

New York: 2000 population = 18.9 million; 2030 estimate = 19.4 million
Pennsylvania: 2000 population = 12.3 million; 2030 estimate = 12.8 million
Ohio: 2000 population = 11.3 million; 2030 estimate = 11.5 million
Michigan: 2000 population = 9.9 million; 2030 estimate = 10.6 million
New Jersey: 2000 population = 8.4 million; 2030 estimate = 9.8 million
Massachusetts: 2000 population = 6.3 million; 2030 estimate = 7.0 million
New Hampshire: 2000 population = 1.2 million; 2030 estimate = 1.6 million
West Virginia: 2000 population = 1.8 million; 2030 estimate = 1.7 million

Its not just the cities that are losing population, or barely hanging on, its the states as well. Also, calling the entire city of Philadelphia a slum shows incredible ignorance. Must be why those Old City apartments are selling for so little.......

[h0tmess]

Philly will get better once they put harder restrictions on welfare and actually make people go out and get jobs.. LOL

So glad my family was smart enough and we eventually moved!!

[solibs]

Originally Posted by Jfoldno7

I believe the corrected adjustment because that is the Census Bureaus current stance on the population. We could get into the debate of the accuracy of the census, and how it may or may not be missing huge populations in larger cities, but I'll accept whatever the current estimate stands at as the best "guess" of the population.

The census always shortchanges large, older cities. It's the way that they do the estimating then, on top of that, the way the estimate for their undercounting. They know they miss a lot of people so they try to find an average of people that they miss.

In the 1997 estimate they said Philly lost 120,000 people since 1990. When the 2000 census came out the city had actually lost half that.

In '97 they had NYC losing people then in 2000 they showed a gain of 500,000.

I think Philly stopped losing people in the late 90s and has been slowly gaining them back since then.

the reality is that most of the U.S. population is drifting west and south. A large part of the reason for that is that when you look at a map of population density in the U.S. the more open areas are west and south. Unless someone has a plan for reigniting the manufacturing jobs that kept large cities in the north-east (and especially the north mid-west) thriving Philly, and most cities in this part of the country will be lucky to just hold their populations.

This may have been the case from 1970-2005 and it may continue as a trickle but the days of mass migration to the sunbelt are over. Places like Atlanta and Phoenix are running out of water and the duration and severity of droughts are only increasing. As the Colorado River dries up not only will Las Vegas be out of water (along with the rest of the southwest) but it'll also be out of power. At least San Diego and LA are on the ocean and can spend massive amounts of money on giant desal plants. San Diego board approves desalination plant on coast | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times.

For landlocked cities with no port facilities, cheap gas and 18-wheelers are the lifeblood of their economies. Most of their populations live and work in places built around interstates and highway commuting. They're at a competitive disadvantage. People are focused so much on all of the speculative bubbles of the last 10 years that they don't realize that the rubble of the economy we're standing on was built on $1.25/gallon gas.

Places like Florida (already posting population losses), Nevada, Arizona, etc depend on retirees. With so many people losing their shirts in the stock market a lot of people just don't have the money to retire or to move across the country.

[G Goo]

Originally Posted by h0tmess

Philly will get better once they put harder restrictions on welfare and actually make people go out and get jobs.. LOL

So glad my family was smart enough and we eventually moved!!

Welp, seems this thread has reached the lowest common denominator and is no longer worth following.

[G Goo]

Originally Posted by solibs

For landlocked cities with no port facilities, cheap gas and 18-wheelers are the lifeblood of their economies. Most of their populations live and work in places built around interstates and highway commuting. They're at a competitive disadvantage. People are focused so much on all of the speculative bubbles of the last 10 years that they don't realize that the rubble of the economy we're standing on was built on $1.25/gallon gas.

Excellent point and the prime reason that Northeastern cities with good public transporation infrastructure will be at a competitive advantage in the decades to come.

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by solibs

For landlocked cities with no port facilities, cheap gas and 18-wheelers are the lifeblood of their economies. Most of their populations live and work in places built around interstates and highway commuting. They're at a competitive disadvantage. People are focused so much on all of the speculative bubbles of the last 10 years that they don't realize that the rubble of the economy we're standing on was built on $1.25/gallon gas.

Places like Florida (already posting population losses), Nevada, Arizona, etc depend on retirees. With so many people losing their shirts in the stock market a lot of people just don't have the money to retire or to move across the country.

Couldn't have said it better myself! I think a lot of the Philadelphia negativists don't realize how much the city's location and infrastructure (i.e., East Coast port, relatively comprehensive public transit, middle of the NE Corridor, surrounded by extremely underutilized railroads) REALLY gives it a leg up compared to many other cities. Not to mention our strengths in the educational, healthcare (and now media) industries are FAR more sustainable than Sun Belt growth predicated on cheap real estate and -- as you noted -- cheap oil. Clearly those days are over.

Are there a lot of improvements that Philadelphia needs? Absolutely, but the fact that the city is really holding its own in this recession really speaks volumes about how well it is positioning itself for the future. When the economy begins to rebound, I think the city is poised for even more investment and revitalization.

[pman]

Pennsylvania is extremely unfriendly to business while texas is the opposite. california, well, it's california. weather and coast line.

[FindingZen]

Originally Posted by h0tmess

Philly will get better once they put harder restrictions on welfare and actually make people go out and get jobs.. LOL

So glad my family was smart enough and we eventually moved!!

You do have a good point to a degree...

...however, most of the job growth in the area these days is in the suburbs. Often, these locations are only reachable by car, which by design would not be an option for said welfare recipients.