[Evergrey]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/fl-slow-growth-fla-20091106,0,2285820.story

Shrinking Florida faces tough choices as residents flee, jobs vanish

By Jeff Kunerth
Orlando Sentinel

November 15, 2009

Rick Desrochers is leaving. And he's not coming back.

He and his wife are moving in with her parents in Michigan after the couple lost their jobs, their Hunter's Creek home to foreclosure, and everything else to bankruptcy. The trauma of going broke in the Sunshine State has convinced them that when the good times return to Orlando, they won't.

"I've talked to a lot of people who say they aren't coming back," said Desrochers, 39, who moved to Orlando nine years ago from Hilton Head, S.C.

....

[PA Pride]

:( oh noes.

[WonderlandPark]

Is Florida actually losing population? Or is this just press hyperbole?

(Finally! NOT a "leaving California" article, so sick of the dumping on California articles, its someone else's turn)

[leftopolis]

Is Florida actually losing population? Or is this just press hyperbole?


I 2nd that sentiment. Since the Great Recession of the last 2 years--I've seen story after story of people moving away in droves from places like Florida, Phoenix, Las Vegas, California, Pretty much any outer-ring-exurb throughout the US...If that's the case, where the hell are they all moving to? Those are all high-growth places in recent decades. I've yet to see a story on places that are experiencing sudden population booms due to the "moving away from xyz town" phenomenon.

[plinko]

...If that's the case, where the hell are they all moving to?

Texas?

[DBR96A]

Everybody's moving back in with their parents.

[pablosan]

^
To some degree, you are right. Many people are actually moving in with parents, siblings, immediate relatives or friends.

[Strange Meat]

Back to michigan? Ouch.

[BTinSF]

"He and his wife are moving in with her parents in Michigan after the couple lost their jobs, their Hunter's Creek home to foreclosure, and everything else to bankruptcy."

They must have had a lousy bankruptcy lawyer. Florida has among the country's most generous (to the person going bankrupt) bankruptcy laws. Among other things, your house cannot be taken nor a substantial value in "workman's tools" and other possessions. That's why people like OJ Simpson who are facing large potential judgements move to Florida (and usually put most of their net worth into a monster house when they do).

It may still be possible to foreclose on the house if you cannot keep up the mortgage payments. I'm not sure about that. But, as I said, a good lawyer should be able to protect that asset in Florida.

[Grego43]

It may still be possible to foreclose on the house if you cannot keep up the mortgage payments. I'm not sure about that. But, as I said, a good lawyer should be able to protect that asset in Florida.

Yes, it is indeed possible to lose your Florida homesteaded primary residence by any of the following:

-defaulting on your mortgage
-not paying taxes
-unsatisfied construction liens

Also, Florida has lost population mostly to GA, SC, NC, & TN, but also a fair amount of people moving back to the Northeast. High taxes and high insurance rates are chasing away a lot of teachers, nurses, firefighters, & policemen.

[arbeiter]

GA, SC, NC and TN all have pretty bad unemployment rates and job growth too. Maybe it's a family connections thing.

That is probably a bigger phenomenon than we think. I am an example of that, living with family for the first time since 2001.

[LMich]

Is Florida actually losing population? Or is this just press hyperbole?

Yes and Yes.

Florida's population drops for the first time in more than 60 years (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/orl-florida-population-drops-081809,0,2074385.story?track=rss)

This was a big story a few months back. So, yes, the Census predicted a slight net loss in population for 2008 (58,000), and since they use the same formula to estimate population across the board, it's not like they were picking on Florida.

But the subsequent crowing is most likely hyperbole, because you can't spot a trend off a single year, particularly with an organization as notoriously dubious at predicting population as the US Census Bureau. Florida is going to post a healthy population gain from 2000 to 2010, regardless. It just may not be anywhere as high as originally expected.

[Jasonhouse]

Is Florida actually losing population? Or is this just press hyperbole?

Yes... We lost about 500,000 current residents to migration and such, but gained only 440,000 new ones. That's a net loss of roughly 60k... And this has been widely confirmed in key indicators, like school enrollment. Some school districts have had far fewer students than they expected, and have wound up closing several 'empty' schools.

[leftopolis]

Yes... We lost about 500,000 current residents to migration and such, but gained only 440,000 new ones. That's a net loss of roughly 60k... And this has been widely confirmed in key indicators, like school enrollment. Some school districts have had far fewer students than they expected, and have wound up closing several 'empty' schools.

I'm amazed a net loss hadn't happened sooner, given the high percentage of 90 year-old Floridians!

All joking aside, 60K would be concerning in a State the size of Wyoming or Alaska...it's not a big number for Florida, though.

[JordanL]

GA, SC, NC and TN all have pretty bad unemployment rates and job growth too. Maybe it's a family connections thing.

That is probably a bigger phenomenon than we think. I am an example of that, living with family for the first time since 2001.

As am I. I lost my job a year ago and haven't been able to find work despite two government programs to assist with it, and 12 months of looking. I had to move back with my parents, or I wouldn't have anywhere to go at all.

I've refused to take unemployment though. I'm probably one of the few people who, as a Libertarian, despise such government programs, and also refuse to take part in them.

If it came down to it, I would seek help from volunteer programs for food and shelter, such as those run by churches.

[TonyAnderson]

I think this happens with certain cities and especially states - people are attracted to the area for things like beautiful weather and scenery, etc. instead of jobs, and over saturate an area and prices / costs. You see it in Florida and California right now.

[glowrock]

As am I. I lost my job a year ago and haven't been able to find work despite two government programs to assist with it, and 12 months of looking. I had to move back with my parents, or I wouldn't have anywhere to go at all.

I've refused to take unemployment though. I'm probably one of the few people who, as a Libertarian, despise such government programs, and also refuse to take part in them.

If it came down to it, I would seek help from volunteer programs for food and shelter, such as those run by churches.

I respect your stance as a Libertarian concerning most government programs, but unemployment insurance is paid for by employers and employees, not necessarily the state or federal government. You and your employer put money into it, you should get your money back out of it! :tup:

Not taking unemployment if and when it's offered is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. Not a good idea...

Aaron (Glowrock)

[JordanL]

I respect your stance as a Libertarian concerning most government programs, but unemployment insurance is paid for by employers and employees, not necessarily the state or federal government. You and your employer put money into it, you should get your money back out of it! :tup:

Not taking unemployment if and when it's offered is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. Not a good idea...

Aaron (Glowrock)

Taxes are collected to pay for a lot of programs I don't agree with. I don't participate in those programs, where possible, despite the fact that such taxes are forcibly taken.

I look at it this way: if I believe that there is no need for the program to exist, then why perpetuate need for it to exist?

I understand that taxes are taken to pay for it. Just like Social Security. Just like Medicare/Medicaid. Just like the Military. Just like the creation of new roads.

But that doesn't change the fact that using those programs is in fact justifying them.

[Jasonhouse]

I've refused to take unemployment though. I'm probably one of the few people who, as a Libertarian, despise such government programs, and also refuse to take part in them.

Bro, it's insurance... Your employer has been paying a tax on your salary during your entire career, so that you've got a degree of stability when a day like this inevitably comes (it's proven that this way is better for everyone, not just the individual). Naturally, businesses view the tax as a labor cost and reduces wages by the amount of the tax.

So in your case, money you worked for and earned is literally going unclaimed right now, as you read this. Your money, that you earned is being spent on God knows what by bureaucrats who surely don't have your interests in mind, because you're too 'Libertarian' to stand up and rightfully take what's yours... Something about that doesn't make sense.

[JordanL]

Bro, it's insurance... Your employer has been paying a tax on your salary during your entire career, so that you've got a degree of stability when a day like this inevitably comes (it's proven that this is better for everyone, not just the individual). Naturally, businesses view the tax as a labor cost and reduces wages by the amount of the tax.

So in your case, money you worked for and earned is literally going unclaimed right now, as you read this. Your money, that you earned is being spent on God knows what by bureaucrats who surely don't have your interests in mind, because you're too 'Libertarian' to stand up and rightfully take what's yours... Something about that doesn't make sense.

If I did take unemployment, I can virtually guarantee that I would be drawing more than I had put in, as I'm only 23. Fifty-two weeks of unemployment would be quite a bit more than I put in actually.

And if it is my money, paid as insurance, then bureaucrats can't be spending it... it's limited to the program it was collected for.

Regardless, I don't begrudge people who do take it. It's not really their fault the program exists, and they probably don't have any personal dilemmas with it. I just try to find another way for myself, and so far, I have.

[Jasonhouse]

^Generally, employers pay roughly $400-500 a year in unemployment taxes per employee.(the wage base is very low, so basically every year that you have worked, even if it was a few hours a week, the tax was paid). So you've worked what, 5-6 years of your life? Then that's roughly $2500 in deferred income of yours (which is what insurance is) that is being dumped into some beaurocrat's expense account, instead of being put in your pocket, where it rightfully belongs...

Good grief dude, if you take unemployment, you don't have to keep claiming it. Just take it for a few weeks and get on your feet bro!

[JordanL]

^Generally, employers pay roughly $400-500 a year in unemployment taxes per employee.(the wage base is very low, so basically every year that you have worked, even if it was a few hours a week, the tax was paid). So you've worked what, 5-6 years of your life? Then that's roughly $2500 in deferred income of yours (which is what insurance is) that is being dumped into some beaurocrat's expense account, instead of being put in your pocket, where it rightfully belongs...

Good grief dude, if you take unemployment, you don't have to keep claiming it. Just take it for a few weeks and get on your feet bro!

Well it doesn't matter at this point. The state of Oregon is doing pretty much everything they can now to deny new unemployment claims, and the fact that I owe about $100 in state taxes would be just the thing.

[arbeiter]

I'm sorry, but such a 'noble' libertarian belief seems kind of trite. Clearly if you have been unemployed for a year and haven't had to resort to church hand outs or unemployment then you're surviving. It's not like you're the Gandhi of the unemployment tax.

[JordanL]

I'm sorry, but such a 'noble' libertarian belief seems kind of trite. Clearly if you have been unemployed for a year and haven't had to resort to church hand outs or unemployment then you're surviving. It's not like you're the Gandhi of the unemployment tax.

I never said I was... I didn't even make that big a deal out of it. I wrote one sentence and had questions asked of me. It was never supposed to make me look good or anything like that, I was simply explaining why my situation may be different than others.

And the only reason I'm surviving is because of family.

[Jasonhouse]

I'm the one that made a big deal out of it... Don't dig on the guy.



But anyways, I wish that Florida's leaders would stop blowing so much money on 'tax incentives' and juicy contracts for companies run by their campaign donors, and instead use that money to bolster our education and public transportation in this state.

[rbehs]

This was a pretty bald statement from the linked article:

"Florida has little to worry about in terms of future growth, contends Carl Haub, a demographer with the Population Reference Bureau in Washington. Traditional growth states such as Florida, Texas, California, Arizona and Nevada will continue to attract new residents because they remain better places to live than Idaho, Nebraska, Michigan and Iowa."

[alex1]

jordan, go with it. If you don't believe in government programs such as unemployment, then don't partake. Your decision...

Me, I'm 100% behind unemployment. It's saved my brother's father-in-law. The man, a lifelong Republican with a personal responsibility dogma I've never seen before lost his job 3 years ago. He found out his age wasn't very attractive in the market place and he finally succumbed to this evil government program. In fact, he finally agreed to allow the state to help him care for his insanely sick and old mother.

As far as Florida is concerned, it'll get its mojo back, eventually.

[Omaharocks]

This was a pretty bald statement from the linked article:

"Florida has little to worry about in terms of future growth, contends Carl Haub, a demographer with the Population Reference Bureau in Washington. Traditional growth states such as Florida, Texas, California, Arizona and Nevada will continue to attract new residents because they remain better places to live than Idaho, Nebraska, Michigan and Iowa."

I'll say. I know Michigan is suffering big time, and Idaho has had high foreclosure rates (and Texas is doing well), but I could make some pretty easy arguments that the last four states are all just as good or better places to live (both before and during recession) than the first four states mentioned.

I currently live in the Southwest, and I can't honestly understand how anyone believes the major sunbelt states have a stronger future. In the end, infrastructure costs (impact fees only cover the cost of initial infrastructure in new developments) are going to bury what remains of the budgets of all four - Florida, Texas, California, and Arizona.

[arbeiter]

I'll say. I know Michigan is suffering big time, and Idaho has had high foreclosure rates (and Texas is doing well), but I could make some pretty easy arguments that the last four states are all just as good or better places to live (both before and during recession) than the first four states mentioned.

I currently live in the Southwest, and I can't honestly understand how anyone believes the major sunbelt states have a stronger future. In the end, infrastructure costs (impact fees only cover the cost of initial infrastructure in new developments) are going to bury what remains of the budgets of all four - Florida, Texas, California, and Arizona.

I don't see how it would bury Texas, yet - the vast majority of development is in subtropical areas with higher rainfall - most of the suburban development is on former grazing land.

[Omaharocks]

^I meant more the cost of maintaining all of the associated costs of new development, especially if we continue to see the reversal of the low-income-inner city/high income outer burbs in areas such as Phoenix. The costs of infrastructure combined with the costs of services for low - density housing will be mind-boggling when compared with the revenue these areas will provide...

I'm not saying this will be an issue only within these four states, but they may be the hardest hit.

[fleonzo]

Yes, it is indeed possible to lose your Florida homesteaded primary residence by any of the following:

-defaulting on your mortgage
-not paying taxes
-unsatisfied construction liens

Also, Florida has lost population mostly to GA, SC, NC, & TN, but also a fair amount of people moving back to the Northeast. High taxes and high insurance rates are chasing away a lot of teachers, nurses, firefighters, & policemen.

If they're leaving because of "high taxes" then moving back to the Northeast wouldn't make any sense...I suspect it has more to do with family ties as many had moved down there from the Northeast during the boom!

[BTinSF]

I never said I was... I didn't even make that big a deal out of it. I wrote one sentence and had questions asked of me. It was never supposed to make me look good or anything like that, I was simply explaining why my situation may be different than others.

And the only reason I'm surviving is because of family.

Personally, I would have far fewer qualms about taking unemployment compensation, a social benefit to which I have a right by law and have essentially paid for through taxes (or reduced wages paying the tax), than I would about taking handouts from relatives.

Just saying . . . .

[Texan101]

If they're leaving because of "high taxes" then moving back to the Northeast wouldn't make any sense...I suspect it has more to do with family ties as many had moved down there from the Northeast during the boom!

I believe you are correct, I’m sure its more of a family type deal “Having a good base to start over“. One of the main reasons people head to the sunbelt in the first place is cost of living.

[BTinSF]

impact fees only cover the cost of initial infrastructure in new developments)

In most places that may be true but it doesn't have to be and there are places, like San Francisco, where it isn't. It's amazing how much my city extracts from developers--from "affordable" unit set-asides to community improvement fees and more.

If impact fees are inadequate to truly address the situation, they should be raised. This will, of course, raise the price of housing which may reduce growth (and sprawl) somewhat--not necessarily bad.

[Texan101]

Personally, I would have far fewer qualms about taking unemployment compensation, a social benefit to which I have a right by law and have essentially paid for through taxes (or reduced wages paying the tax), than I would about taking handouts from relatives.

Just saying . . . .

I see where your coming from, As far as his choice. Id say look at it this way. If your someone who doesn’t believe in abortion, yet you have one… Well you get where I’m going. You’re a hypocrite . As someone who doesn’t agree with welfare nor ever supported it he didn’t want to be a hypocrite I’m sure pride has a lot to do with it as well.

[Omaharocks]

Originally Posted by Omaharocks
impact fees only cover the cost of initial infrastructure in new developments)

In most places that may be true but it doesn't have to be and there are places, like San Francisco, where it isn't. It's amazing how much my city extracts from developers--from "affordable" unit set-asides to community improvement fees and more.

If impact fees are inadequate to truly address the situation, they should be raised. This will, of course, raise the price of housing which may reduce growth (and sprawl) somewhat--not necessarily bad.


Impact fees cover various things depending on where you are - i.e. in some places impact fees help pay for schools, parks, etc and in other places they may only cover the costs of roads, water, utilities and so on. However, to my knowledge at least, there isn't an impact fee ordinance that requires developers to also put money into the pot for future upkeep of said development. This is where things become problematic down the line. As for simply raising impact fees - the precedence of law (Dolan & Nolan) states that impact fees must only be used for the infrastructure development directly attributable to the development that requires the funds. Raising impact fees will run into major political and legal hurdles, though you're correct, raising the cost is very much needed.

[LMich]

I see where your coming from, As far as his choice. Id say look at it this way. If your someone who doesn’t believe in abortion, yet you have one… Well you get where I’m going. You’re a hypocrite . As someone who doesn’t agree with welfare nor ever supported it he didn’t want to be a hypocrite I’m sure pride has a lot to do with it as well.

You know, I don't want to belabor the point too much more, sense everyone else has, but first, this isn't welfare. And, secondly, as BTinSF pointed out, for someone to have more qualms about collecting something they pay into than taking from family is at the very least ironic. This would even seem strange if we actually were talking about public assisstance. This is the very definition of the phrase "cutting off one's nose to spite their face", and in this case, for nothing because unemployment isn't public assisstance.

[JordanL]

Personally, I would have far fewer qualms about taking unemployment compensation, a social benefit to which I have a right by law and have essentially paid for through taxes (or reduced wages paying the tax), than I would about taking handouts from relatives.

Just saying . . . .

Yeah... It frustrates me as well. I don't force my family to assist me. The reasoning in my head goes something like: My family get to make an active, informed decision about whether or not to help me. Taxpayers do not.

And as the core principal of Libertarianism is letting people make their own decisions, that matters to me. :tup:

I'd prefer to be employed and not have to choose, personally.

I took the opportunity to start a business though. The bottom half of a downward slide is the best place to start a business... low interest rates, high opportunity, and a glut of competition that is stifled by overextension.

[BTinSF]

My family get to make an active, informed decision about whether or not to help me. Taxpayers do not.


But you aren't actually being helped by taxpayers. Unemployment (at least without the "extensions" Congress keeps passing in the recession) is an insurance scheme--YOU (or your employer using money that would otherwise be paid to you in wages) pay into it just like you pay car insurance or homeowner insurance premiums. I've been paying my homeowners premiums since 1977 and never made a big claim (for which I'm grateful). If you are one of the unfortunates who gets laid off, you collect. Otherwise you don't. But you have the same moral and legal claim on the money as you do on the proceeds of any insurance policy.

[Don B.]

Yeah... It frustrates me as well. I don't force my family to assist me. The reasoning in my head goes something like: My family get to make an active, informed decision about whether or not to help me. Taxpayers do not.

Your family likely feels obligated to help you. I'd hardly call this free choice. Just admit it...you were a boob in not claiming unemployment benefits, and instead shifted the burden to your family. That's okay...leaves more for the rest of us unemployed...and for the record, I've worked continuously since 1989 and never needed any form of government assistance, ever, until I lost my job in April. All I can say is thankfully unemployment was there, as my family can't afford to help me out and I possibly would be homeless by now.

--don

[bobdreamz]

wow how did this thread get so off topic! Nearly half of the responses has to do with one poster's personal situation!
Anyways i don't see this as necessarily a bad thing since Florida couldn't sustain the rapid growth it has been for decades. At some point things were going to slow down and the economy started affecting us years ago even before the recession was official especially with the housing market. Florida will bounce back but I doubt we will see the huge population gains of the past.

[Jasonhouse]

Florida will bounce back but I doubt we will see the huge population gains of the past.
The way the whole country is growing is changing. It has to if we want to continue to be a going entity.

[brickell]

If Florida can overcome this blimp and cut it's reliance on growth as an industry, that'll be a very good thing.

That's a pretty big IF however.

I'm a little more optimistic than most though.

[subterranean]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/fl-slow-growth-fla-20091106,0,2285820.story

Evergrey: are you the one in the story they speak of?

[subterranean]

Back to michigan? Ouch.

I see a lot of posts by you bashing Michigan. Where are you from, anyway? Let me pick on you for awhile.

[subterranean]

As am I. I lost my job a year ago and haven't been able to find work despite two government programs to assist with it, and 12 months of looking. I had to move back with my parents, or I wouldn't have anywhere to go at all.

I've refused to take unemployment though. I'm probably one of the few people who, as a Libertarian, despise such government programs, and also refuse to take part in them.

If it came down to it, I would seek help from volunteer programs for food and shelter, such as those run by churches.

What a terrible way to live. Just think, if you had an income, you may have been on your feet by now. Instead you'd rather mooch off the rents for a year.

[tredici]

If Florida can overcome this blimp and cut it's reliance on growth as an industry, that'll be a very good thing.

That's a pretty big IF however.

I'm a little more optimistic than most though.

The problem is that most big industry is scared to locate in Florida except in the northern areas.

It's no surprise that Jacksonville and Tallahassee will probably bounce back more quickly than other cities in Florida, because they aren't exposed to the hurricane threat like the Gulf Coast of FL.

Tallahassee has an industrial based economy, not tourist based. Jacksonville, IMO, has a more industrial based economy than other large cities in the state, but I could be wrong.

In my mind, the weather of the state has scared of a number of industries, which has caused the state to rely on tourism. And tourism, as we all know, is a shaky industry to base an economy on.

Cities benefiting the most from this?

Atlanta
Birmingham
Charlotte
Columbia
Greenville
Knoxville
Nashville

Most of the transplant residents in FL that leave and do not return to their original homes are swarming to places in Alabama, Georgia, Tennesse, South Carolina and North Carolina. Alabama and Georgia have gained quite a lot of citizens from Florida, but no one has gained more than the Atlanta area has.

[Rail Claimore]

The problem is that most big industry is scared to locate in Florida except in the northern areas.

It's no surprise that Jacksonville and Tallahassee will probably bounce back more quickly than other cities in Florida, because they aren't exposed to the hurricane threat like the Gulf Coast of FL.

Tallahassee has an industrial based economy, not tourist based. Jacksonville, IMO, has a more industrial based economy than other large cities in the state, but I could be wrong.

In my mind, the weather of the state has scared of a number of industries, which has caused the state to rely on tourism. And tourism, as we all know, is a shaky industry to base an economy on.

Cities benefiting the most from this?

Atlanta
Birmingham
Charlotte
Columbia
Greenville
Knoxville
Nashville

Most of the transplant residents in FL that leave and do not return to their original homes are swarming to places in Alabama, Georgia, Tennesse, South Carolina and North Carolina. Alabama and Georgia have gained quite a lot of citizens from Florida, but no one has gained more than the Atlanta area has.

North Alabama is being invaded by Floridians and Atlantans. Heck, even Texans are moving here in droves, reasons beyond me. I thought their state was in better economic shape than ours?

[BTinSF]

In my mind, the weather of the state has scared of a number of industries, which has caused the state to rely on tourism.

I don't think the problem is the weather itself. The problem is the economic chaos, particularly in the insurance market, that the recent hurricanes have caused. It is no longer possible to buy commercial homeowners insurance in FL. Pretty much everyone is now getting insured by the state at high rates for coverage that is barely adequate and subject to an assessment if a large storm hits (since the state insurance entity is not actuarially sound). This is bad enough on individual homeowners but it's horrible for businesses.

[dimondpark]

Is Florida actually losing population? Or is this just press hyperbole?
Well according to the article 500,000 are leaving and after factoring in people moving in, there's going to be a net loss of 60,000 so Florida is indeed losing population.

(Finally! NOT a "leaving California" article, so sick of the dumping on California articles, its someone else's turn)
California's situation is different because despite people leaving, California has never had a net population loss from one year to the next.

[brickell]

And this is Florida's first since the post war boom.

[dimondpark]

And this is Florida's first since the post war boom.
I'm not one to think this is the beginning of some long slide-instead its probably just a hiccup caused by the economy.

Florida is too desirable to count out.

Californians are accustomed to being told that our state sucks and everyone is leaving-for about 20 years now we've been forced to listen to a chorus of naysayers. Ironic cause despite the moaning by rightwingers, technically, California has had a net gain every year unrelentlessly since statehood in 1850.

*knock on wood*:D

[BTinSF]

Florida is too desirable to count out.


For most Floridians of my acquaintance, the idea that the place would stop growing is sort of wishful thinking.

[Jasonhouse]

^That's a very typical attitude.

[Capsule F]

I'm not one to think this is the beginning of some long slide-instead its probably just a hiccup caused by the economy.

Florida is too desirable to count out.

Californians are accustomed to being told that our state sucks and everyone is leaving-for about 20 years now we've been forced to listen to a chorus of naysayers. Ironic cause despite the moaning by rightwingers, technically, California has had a net gain every year unrelentlessly since statehood in 1850.

*knock on wood*:D

Net gain but 13+% unemployed? Why would people still move right now?

[shane453]

I've yet to see a story on places that are experiencing sudden population booms due to the "moving away from xyz town" phenomenon.

Here's one
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1944947.html

2010 Census will be really, really interesting.

[Evergrey]

Evergrey: are you the one in the story they speak of?

wtf

[futuresooner]

Here's one
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1944947.html

2010 Census will be really, really interesting.

Very good, well written story.

[BTinSF]

Net gain but 13+% unemployed? Why would people still move right now?

Because a lot of new Floridians are retired and could care less about the job market. Others think such statistics don't apply to them (some correctly like my sister who is self-employed and has customers all over the country--she lives in FL because she likes it).

[Wheelingman04]

I'm not one to think this is the beginning of some long slide-instead its probably just a hiccup caused by the economy.

Florida is too desirable to count out.

Californians are accustomed to being told that our state sucks and everyone is leaving-for about 20 years now we've been forced to listen to a chorus of naysayers. Ironic cause despite the moaning by rightwingers, technically, California has had a net gain every year unrelentlessly since statehood in 1850.

*knock on wood*:D

I would agree. It is a hiccup. Many people I always talk to say they hate the cold weather and mention Florida everytime and that they would like to move there and some end up doing it. This won't last long even though moving to a place just for the weather is kind of bullshit but whatever.

[brickell]

This won't last long even though moving to a place just for the weather is kind of bullshit but whatever.

Who are you to judge why people move where they do?

[Wheelingman04]

Who are you to judge why people move where they do?

Because most of these people don't know jack shit about Florida and they only think about the weather and beaches, like it will solve all of life's problems but they don't think about all the negatives regarding the weather, crime, cost of living, jobs, etc.(not that every part of Florida is like that or any place in the US) People always say things about states and cities that are not true because they don't know anything about them or are oblivious to everything. People need to learn more about places before they move to them or talk about how great they are. I am not questioning them in there motives for moving, but they should at least have a job lined up or have money already like many of the retirees do.

I am not really even refrencing Florida per say. I have nothing against it. This could be anywhere. I talk to people from Wheeling or even the Pittsburgh suburbs that think Pittsburgh's crime rate is extremely high and the whole city is dangerous and I just turn my head and walk away. That is just one example of the ignorance. I guess it's because people on this forum know so much more about geography and what's true as compared to the layman.

[BTinSF]

moving to a place just for the weather is kind of bullshit but whatever.

Everybody's different, but weather is one of my own chief motivators and a reason I have NOT moved back to Florida where I lived for a total of about 10 years (in Gainesville and Winter Park). I've never been a fan of the sort of heat and humidity I grew up with in Washington DC before most single family homes had central air conditioning, and you find that in FL at least 8 months of the year. All those memories of all those nights sticking to the sheets depress me.

But there are many things that attract me to Florida--enough so the decision to go back is a close thing. The natural environment there--anyplace in the state you can find that hasn't yet been developed, is awe-inspiring. I am someone who grew up near the water (Chesapeake Bay in my case) and much prefer living near the ocean. Florida is cosmopolitan enough to have an adequate amount of culture, good dining and shopping to satisfy me. And there's lots of variety and diversity there to keep the place interesting.

The biggest problems in FL are what people have done to it: terrible sprawl, a lot of it tacky, and government that hates taxes so much it won't raise enough money for good roads or schools any more (once upon a time it did).

[Wheelingman04]

Everybody's different, but weather is one of my own chief motivators and a reason I have NOT moved back to Florida where I lived for a total of about 10 years (in Gainesville and Winter Park). I've never been a fan of the sort of heat and humidity I grew up with in Washington DC before most single family homes had central air conditioning, and you find that in FL at least 8 months of the year. All those memories of all those nights sticking to the sheets depress me.

But there are many things that attract me to Florida--enough so the decision to go back is a close thing. The natural environment there--anyplace in the state you can find that hasn't yet been developed, is awe-inspiring. I am someone who grew up near the water (Chesapeake Bay in my case) and much prefer living near the ocean. Florida is cosmopolitan enough to have an adequate amount of culture, good dining and shopping to satisfy me. And there's lots of variety and diversity there to keep the place interesting.

The biggest problems in FL are what people have done to it: terrible sprawl, a lot of it tacky, and government that hates taxes so much it won't raise enough money for good roads or schools any more (once upon a time it did).

Very well said. That was my point exactly.:tup:

[village person]

This is more than a hiccup. A study pops up showing a net loss, it hits the news, articles are published, and it seems like a sudden thing. But I've been looking at Census data for a couple of years now and going "hmmm". Here's what has been showing up on their radar:


Estimated Domestic Net Migration (aka Internal Net Migration), State of Florida:

1990-1991: 161,441
1991-1992: 101,294
1992-1993: 104,433
1993-1994: 141,421
1994-1995: 100,581
1995-1996: 115,954
1996-1997: 128,826
1997-1998: 112,837
1998-1999: 86,511
1999-2000: (couldn't find data)
2000-2001: 205,303
2001-2002: 176,531
2002-2003: 177,734
2003-2004: 249,807
2004-2005: 262,511 --- the peak
2005-2006: 165,757 --- down ~100K from previous
2006-2007: 35,301 --- down another ~130K
2007-2008: -9,286 --- down yet another ~44K

Estimated Total Numerical Population Change:

1990-1991: 271,132
1991-1992: 215,278
1992-1993: 208,818
1993-1994: 248,205
1994-1995: 223,605
1995-1996: 241,508
1996-1997: 256,439
1997-1998: 224,880
1998-1999: 203,014
1999-2000: ---
2000-2001: 342,187
2001-2002: 339,819
2002-2003: 327,367
2003-2004: 397,980
2004-2005: 404,434 --- the peak
2005-2006: 321,697 --- down ~80K
2006-2007: 193,735 --- down another ~130K
2007-2008: 128,814 --- down yet another ~60K

Since 2005, roughly 400K, then 300K, 200K, 120K... so for 2009, a total increase/decrease close to zero is not surprising.

But for this to be a blip, how short does it have to be? Already it's been a 4-5 year glissando... and how many more years would it take to build back up to the same 200K+ net gain per year as before the blip began... if ever?

Compare to the effects of WWII:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/08/30/us/0830-nat-webFLORIDA-sub.gif

Quick and sudden drop, but gradual climb afterwards.

:shrug:

[Jasonhouse]

The biggest problems in FL are what people have done to it: terrible sprawl, a lot of it tacky, and government that hates taxes so much it won't raise enough money for good roads or schools any more (once upon a time it did).
People are anti-tax, but that is actually tangential to what's angering people. What people really are is anti-corruption, waste and fraud. The system we have for electing and appointing top officials is outmoded, and we need reform, but nobody has the courage (or the authority really) to stand up and do something about it. And thus Florida wallows in its own self-inflicted morass.

(and if you think about all that Florida has going for it, you realize just how incompetent the 'establishment' has been for years.)

[Raining Inside]

Florida will do just fine in the long run. It has been doing so well for so long that people in the North are just loving this short downturn. If Texas ever has a downturn the same people will be all over that too. Just in case anyone wants to dis me for living in Texas, I am from Michigan and wish nothing but the best for Detroit and the rest of the rest of the Great Lake cities in this post industrial era.

[village person]

I don't think that many people up North are really cheering on a downfall of Florida. As you said, you're living in the Sunbelt but are originally from Michigan. Well.... so is half of Florida. ;) Florida is inhabited by the nearest cousins, and siblings, and grandparents of the Northern states' citizens. If anything, many are probably wringing their hands over the stories their getting from relatives and friends here. Why would they want to see them fall?

That said, I'm a native of Florida with ancestry here going back at least 6 generations, including natives of the land as well as European immigrants (who landed directly at St. Marks, FL, not a Northern port like you picture most immigrants.) I would rather see a happy medium between Florida's recent legacy for rampant, rapid growth and the other extreme of stagnation/decline. I don't care to see either one. Neither of what this state saw in the early 2000s (with adding over 300,000 people a year) nor what we're seeing right now are very desirable. But, as others on this forum are probably more qualified to detail, the former undesirable period is what brought on the current undesirable period. So... I don't know if a happy medium is in this state's blood, to be honest.