|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.249.98.28
Not surprising about the locations, but the numbers are alarming. Having been to all of these places, I'm surprised they aren't higher. Honolulu (island of Oahu) is surprising, having one of the highest losing percentages. You might not expect that, but its a tiny island with a whole lot of people slammed onto it. Notice that nowhere in the Pacific Northwest is in the top 20.
A corresponding map showing the top 20 places with gaining population would make a complete picture.
Follow Ups:
Everything is falling apart .
If I was WORTH 7 digits and had a mid-6 digit annual income, I could think of WORSE places to live than NYC.
Too much is never enough
populations ALWAYS shift around. Jobs? Weather? Closer to relatives? School? Lifestyle?
So when a huge area like say, #14 from the map above is down <1/2%? I'm not overly concerned.
At a compounded rate, it would take something like 144 years (rule of 72 calculation) for 1/2 the people to leave. That is without births, deaths, or new move-ins.
And since this is an analysis of CENSUS DATA, is this loss over a 10 year period? That is the interval between mandated census. (censi?)
I also like the idea of seeing where populations are increasing. That would be an increase OVER AND ABOVE the rate of increase in the USA without population shift.
Too much is never enough
no need to live "close" to where you worked, etc. Makes sense to move to a perhaps less expensive place, use part of your city place's equity to help fund retirement, slower pace, all that.
-0.81% of New York-Newark Jersey City has got to be a lot of people though, I mean compared to (-0.38% of) Albuquerque, Rochester, Syracuse etc.
In the DC area where I grew up which made the map there are cities and towns that either didn't exist or have grown immensely. Loudoun county for instance which has Leesburg, Ashton, Sterling and others along with Fairfax county have so many more people than they did in the past. It's just migration from closer into the DC area to further out. Often this was due to attractive housing prices and lower taxes.
I'm sure this model holds true in at least some of the other areas. The ones that didn't lose industry to China and Mexico that is.
E
T
Two story homes with the same design, huge foyer types.. big lots with gigantic lawns. All to become the slums of 2070..
Prime farmland being destroyed. Stupid as Hell.
Areas that used to be farmland a few minutes outside of the Metro area? now all suburban crap. Huge 6 lane roads filling in the old two lane county trunk roads..
When the automobile made it possible for people to get out of the stinking, crowded cities. I grew up in a home built in the 1950s on what had been a corn field. The small town nearby has lost over half of its population since 1945, while the old farms and woodlands all around it are increasingly developed.
It's what people want.
...it has accelerated a lot in just the last 15 years with the cost of money being at an all time low and many other factors. Like I said in the 60's the suburbs went out only a few miles from DC then you were in farmland in almost every direction. I mean about 5-10 miles. Now you can go almost 30,40 miles and still be in suburban sprawl so there is a difference now.
E
T
Current trends are for denser population centers as land is becoming more precious, i.e., little is being left undeveloped.
However, as population grows, what do you do?
Limiting population growth has never been officially considered, except in China AFAIK.
I don't think vasectomies should be mandated at all but we can certainly offer some incentives. Especially when you consider that it's a reversible procedure.
> ...it has accelerated a lot in just the last 15 years with the cost of money being at an all time
> low and many other factors.
On a nationwide basis, I'm skeptical that this is true. There's actually been a return to many cities and towns in more prosperous areas. And the cities in your map? People aren't getting out of Detroit because they can finally afford a home in the suburbs. They're just plain getting out . And people aren't leaving New York City because they'd rather live in New Jersey.
nature will deliver to us, I have no doubt.
Getting MIGHTY crowded.
Next big quake should help.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Oh give me a home where the buffalo roam and the skies are not cloudy all day...
"Home on the Range" is our state song.
However, things are a little weird here right now. The state is walking a very thin line, just inches away from bankruptcy due to Governor Brownback's misguided attempts at jump starting the economy. Roads and schools aren't being kept up due to lack of funding from the state. Housing prices are low. You'd be surprised at what $250,000 will get you for the house and lot.
No mountains,no seashore, but if you like wide open spaces, you'll find plenty here.
And besides, "Home on the Range" best describes places like Northern Wyoming in this day and age.
Edits: 07/23/15 07/24/15
You must not know much about Seattle.
I do know about Seattle. It's why I'm not there.
LOL!
"Seattle! Seattle Washington!" Who said that on what album? ;)
:)
Didn't Arnie Tirebiter say that on one of the Firesign Theater albums?
Too much is never enough
It was the lead singer for The Guess Who on their "Live At The Paramount" album. 1972.
:)
I was at that concert my 18th birthday.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: