how low can we go (city/metro population) (Pittsburgh, Scranton: 2015, tech jobs)

[gameguy56]

According to statistics the City of Pittsburgh is still bleeding population.

I'm guessing the City will bottom out at around 260-280,000 It can't go much lower and still support all the university students.

I'm guessing the metro will go down to about 2 million before stabilizing.

What do you guys think?

[SteelCityRising]

Ohhhhh!!! This could be fun! Anybody have the limbo stick and some cheesy music? I'm warning you all I'm very flexible and am a limbo extraordinaire!

In all seriousness though I predict that the city's population will continue to show a steep decline from 2000-2010 with moderation coming in the way of slower decline from 2010-2014 or so being offset by a small gain from 2015-2020 to show a slight increase in the city's population by 2020. I say no lower than 295,000 by 2014 or so with perhaps a rebound to 300,000 by 2020 and then maybe up to 320,000 again by 2030. Nationwide there has been a trend to encourage more suburbanites to rediscover the joys of city living. I myself plan to move from a suburban enclave into the heart of a city near me (I'll let you guess which one) to enjoy the benefits of being within walking distance to nearly every amenity I could ever dream of---parks, restaurants, night clubs, shopping, coffee shops, book stores, etc. I just like to feel a lively "pulse" through my veins (hence why I'm a runner I guess).

Pittsburgh is a very underrated city in my opinion. You can take Cranberry Township and shove it!

[Tallysmom]

Originally Posted by SWB

Pittsburgh is a very underrated city in my opinion. You can take Cranberry Township and shove it!

Hey! Not while my Mom still lives there!

Since I grew up there, and Daddy's buried there, I will always have a soft spot for Cranberry. But my Cranberry isn't what Cranberry is today....

[RockLobster]

From what I have been told from folks working in the census dept.. The city will be around 290,000 for this upcoming count. The metro will be around 2.198 and this should be the bottom. However, how long have they said we have been at or near the bottom? Until we get job growth I would guess no gain will be seen. It's a nice place to live but you have to have job growth and not just service sector employment gains. The worse part is the negative media attention that will be given to Pittsburgh and the fact we have fallen below 300,000 folks. Amazing we have a 62 floor building, 3 professional sports teams, and the culture we do in a city that is now just a bit larger in population than Lincoln Nebraska or Des Moines Iowa, etc..This is one of the true odd population moves in all of the country of all time.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by RockLobster

From what I have been told from folks working in the census dept.. The city will be around 290,000 for this upcoming count. The metro will be around 2.198 and this should be the bottom. However, how long have they said we have been at or near the bottom? Until we get job growth I would guess no gain will be seen. It's a nice place to live but you have to have job growth and not just service sector employment gains. The worse part is the negative media attention that will be given to Pittsburgh and the fact we have fallen below 300,000 folks. Amazing we have a 62 floor building, 3 professional sports teams, and the culture we do in a city that is now just a bit larger in population than Lincoln Nebraska or Des Moines Iowa, etc..This is one of the true odd population moves in all of the country of all time.

Hey, if y'all keep on dropping maybe Scranton will be bigger than Pittsburgh someday! (Hey, a guy can dream! LOL!)

[boardmanite]

If a city can't add population during the booming 90s or while the national "move downtown" trend is in full swing, I'm not sure that it ever will. I see Pittsburgh declining even further in the next few decades. I think it could definitely sink to 250,000 or less. The metro may dip below 2 million, depending on which counties are included...

[guylocke]

I don't think it will ever dip below 2 million. I will try to find the facts, but I think in 2007 we lost like 4 thousand people. Is that bad? Well, yeah I guess, but it's certainly not tens of thousands of people. lol. There are several programs that will start to bear fruit in the next couple of years including The Pittsburgh Promise and the city-neighborhood living development (including all the residency going up downtown). I don't think it will be for much longer that Pittsburgh will lose population, not decades.

If a city can't add population during the booming 90s or while the national "move downtown" trend is in full swing, I'm not sure that it ever will

Pittsburgh's population loss is certainly not unique to the North East and some Midwest Cities. In fact, even the state of California had net-population loss in either 2005 or 2006 (possibly also the years that followed, I just happened to see the data a couple years ago). Florida also is expected to have net population loss. It's just all about the national migration of people. The Northeast is the oldest part of the country, people are heading to the most unpopulated and "purest" states for a fresh start.

Pittsburgh loses population for fundamentally bad reasons, too, like a very slow growing job sector, and it's something that needs to improve. I'm just saying, people are fickle, and even sun-belt cities have and will experience population loss due to their own fundamental problems. We just have the energy and drive to improve our situation! I very much believe the Pittsburgh Promise and neighborhood redevelopment will help.

[BrianTH]

Part of the big picture is that the United States as a whole is barely at the replacement rate when it comes to fertility, meaning we just barely have enough children to maintain a stable population. And I believe if you look only at second generation rates and beyond, we are actually below the replacement rate.

What that means is that as a whole, the United States depends on a combination of immigration and fertility among immigrants to maintain and grow its population. Of course an individual city would not necessarily need to do the same if it was a net beneficiary of internal migration, but the bottomline is that if a U.S. city is not a significant beneficiary of either external or internal migration, then it will likely struggle to maintain population.

[gallacus]

I'm going to have to agree with guylocke... the population loss has been relatively slow recently, and there's a lot of things excellent things in Pittsburgh's future. There are just too many amazing developments in the works, or scheduled to begin for Pittsburgh to continue losing population. As quoted in an article in the Post Gazette:

"...analysts believe this negative trend has just about run its course and this relentless, pessimistic elephant of a downward population spiral is about to stop in the next decade -- and may have already halted, according to one projection."

Old story on population about to change

I think Pittsburghers do have a tendency to paint a doom and gloom future for the city, and most people will tell you that the city is going to continue to lose population for a while. The emergence of high tech jobs and more cultural amenities than ever before will, in my opinion, prove them wrong.

[Geeo]

The region's population drop is a combination of many many factors. An older population because so many young people left inthe 80s with the collapse of steel is one. Pittsburgh itself was a very overcrowded city at one time until after World War II. Smaller households. More out-migration than in-migration until the last couple of years. I read (I think Pitt's School of Urban Studies) report said that birth rate should start exceeding death rate around 2010, so there will begin to be a natural population increase. Then we need to get more in-migration from other parts of the country as well as more immigrants. Most northeastern and midweatern cities would have had huge population losses were it not for immigrants from other countries.

So it's not as if people are fleeing the region anymore - that happened 20 years ago. It's just that we're not attracting as many to make up for the natural population decline.

A more robust economy with more job opportunities is the key,as has been mentioned on these forums many times. I think we're heading in the right direction.