Where do you think Texas' population will ultimately reach? (Houston: apartments, home)

[supfromthesite]

Personally I would rather live in America than Mexico.

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by supfromthesite

Personally I would rather live in America than Mexico.

Exactly. People from Monterrey to Texas, stay in Houston, Dallas... not Laredo. The people who move to the border towns move from worst places. Monterrey is not one of those worst places which was my point. So the fact that Laredo is connected to Monterrey and the major Texas cities via major highways is not a big boon for Laredo as they are just passing through.

McAllen on the other hand is a destination for those coming from more dire situations and the fact that you go through less busy terrain via smaller roads is a plus for travelers wanting a more low key passage. That is why I think the RGV became more populated than Laredo.

[supfromthesite]

I don't think illegal immigration has much to do with the population growth of either place or the population difference. People from Monterrey move to both the valley and Laredo. Definitely moreso the valley.

[orl.avila]

As a regiomontano I'd rather choose RGV over Laredo when it comes of shopping and living, RGV has the beach and Starbase. I guess that around Colombia Solidarity bridge it's still Laredo, when the Government of Nuevo Leon will finish La Gloria highway, the whole area (Laredo-Nuevo Laredo-Anahuac) might see a slightly grow IMO. Of course and going back to the thread, Texas triangle will continue to concentrate almost all population of the state.

[supfromthesite]

Originally Posted by brock2010

I see what you're saying. It'd seem like Laredo's metro would be larger considering it being such an important city for trade. Then again, and I don't know this for sure but maybe Brownsville, McAllen and Harlingen may have partnered up to recruit business and industry to the RGV and as a result attracted more people. Correct me if I'm wrong. I do wonder if there are any plans to extend I-2 all the way to Laredo? It's going to be interesting about the long term growth trends in the areas from San Antonio all the way up to Waco. I remember reading about Waco and the Killeen/Temple areas one day becoming a CSA as well as big growth is predicted from Temple down to Georgetown. One thing's for sure. Traffic along I-35 will be even more of a headache or a migraine. We know that the Texas Triangle (DFW, Houston, San Antonio and Austin) will continue to be the heart of our economy. Out of the western metros (Lubbock, Amarillo, Midland/Odessa) which do you think is better prepared or has the best future in regards to growth and sustainability?

Laredo is not surrounded by any cities on the American side, it is just Laredo and then small towns. Mcallen has grown into other cities near it and then not far is Brownsville, Harlingen, and the coast. Geographically the valley has the advantage being near the beach. I also think the area has always been more populated in general, when you add up all the towns. Lastly, Mcallen is a bigger city and if you had to pick one based on things to do and that sort of thing you would probably pick Mcallen over Laredo. This keeps it growing whereas Laredo feels stagnant. Laredo feels like a big town or a tiny city, you have to like that sort of thing to prefer it to Mcallen imo. Both places have had lots of people leave and lots of people from Mexico or smaller towns around them move there. Mcallen has more opportunity so that probably brings more people back after they have graduated college and possibly worked in a different city for a while. People in both places love to move to San Antonio, Houston, and Austin.

[malcorub16]

Originally Posted by atadytic19

I would rather live in Monterrey than any border town.
Why would you live in one of those towns over Monterrey?

Monterrey is definitely more progressive and an actual city with industry when compared to anything on the Texas border on either side. They actually get international concerts/entertainment with their newer 1st world arenas/stadiums. Terrain is also more varied and interesting to than anything along the Texas border. If I could continue to earn dollars and pick any of these areas, it's likely Monterrey.

[yadigggski]

I'd rather live in Monterrey than Laredo or the RGV. I've never even been there or speak Spanish but from what I've heard it's very Americanized, most younger people speak English and there's lots of luxury high rises/nice restaurants, etc (in San Pedro Garza Garcia specifically)

The South TX border cities just seem depressing IMO. Maybe Brownsville wouldn't be so bad being near SPI but still... wouldn't want to live there. El Paso on the other hand *while I still wouldn't choose to live there* is slightly more diverse, has the mountains/sunshine and the West side/Coronado area was a nice surprise to me. The downside is how isolated it is but I guess you can kind of say the same thing about the RGV.

In response to one of the other posters, are wealthy people from Monterrey really going to DFW in a sizable amount? This is the first I've heard of that. There's a ton in San Antonio, I'm sure down in McAllen and apparently The Woodlands, but I've never heard that about DFW.

[brock2010]

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/as-w...it-40-million/

Says Texas will likely hit 40 million by 2049. I think it'll do so before then.

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by brock2010

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/as-w...it-40-million/

Says Texas will likely hit 40 million by 2049. I think it'll do so before then.

It looks VERY conservative. For example, they are projecting Travis County to only grow from 1.2M to 1.7M by 2060. That's 500k in 40 years, or 12,500 a year.

The City of Austin alone was growing by about 18k a year last decade so 12.5k for the county is really keeping it tight.

[brock2010]

^Right. That's what I was thinking.