Florida exodus? Statistics show residents starting to leave for less costly locales
 

Quite a change for what was for years the fastest growing state in real numbers.

---------------------------------------------

By Paul Owers
South Florida Sun-Sentinel

For the first time in 30 years, United Van Lines Inc. says it moved more people out of Florida than in, and analysts see that as a sign that consumers are looking elsewhere for a cheaper slice of life.

The nation's largest moving company reported 16,212 inbound shipments to Florida last year and 17,019 outbound shipments. United moved more people to Florida in each year from 1999 to 2004, but the number of inbound moves fell in 2005, spokeswoman Jennifer Bonham said.

The study isn't scientific, but it does underscore a recent trend in which fed-up Floridians are moving to other parts of the country, in part to escape rising property taxes and insurance rates.

United's report shows that North Carolina, Oregon and South Carolina were the top destination states in 2006. Michigan, hit hard by automobile industry layoffs, North Dakota and New Jersey were the states that saw the most people leave.

The housing boom brought more people to the Sunshine State at the start of the decade, but the run-up in home values during the past five years sent property-tax rates soaring. Many residents now say they can't afford to move elsewhere in Florida because of the huge hit they'd take on taxes.

What's more, busy hurricane seasons in 2004 and 2005 led to massive rate hikes from the state's largest home insurance companies.

"It all just pushed us past the breaking point," David Levin, a Delray Beach-based housing consultant, said Wednesday....


-------------------------------

Full article:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...home-headlines

People are leaving, especially the older people, but overall, growth is still strong. We're replacing retiree villages with international commerce centers. Sounds like a fair trade to me.

could be a trend or just a one time blip. United Van Lines shipped a whopping difference of 807 outbound shipments last year. Over 1,000 people move to Florida each day. I wouldn't put much emphasis on their numbers.

I left Florida last month, and I had never lived anywhere but.

It wasn't at all because of property taxes or insurance rates, and I didn't use United. :koko: Thank you, useless article! :D

Though it's true that I moved to a much less costly locale. I'm renting a 680 sq ft, 2 bedroom apartment for $425/mo. :banana: Of course, I'm at ground zero for the next New Madrid Seismic Zone event, and I'm in a URM bldg. :sly:

For better or worse . . .

Florida 2060
Florida Population and Developed Land Projected to Double Over Next 50 Years
http://www.1000friendsofflorida.org/planning/2060.asp

that's kind of scary to think about Brickell...so by 2060 we will have California's current popualation but on about a third of it's land size!

I left in 05 and moved to Oregon....
Although I hardly consider it reasonable to think that FL will slow down too much...There is plenty of developable land inland that is much lower in price than the coastal property people naturally associate with Florida.

Neither state could possibly use all of its land. You have to look at developed area to see how much of Florida will fill up.

EXODUS? That's a little harsh to say when you're dealing with a net of 807 families moving out of Florida, only looking at one moving company.



I can't imagine 36 million people. They'd better start building more roads, it's already a mess down there. I've been on the west side down by Naples/Marco Island/Ft. Myers quite a few times, and each year the relaxation and natural beauty of it all is diminished just a little more by the rampant traffic and crowds of people.

I want quiet, palm trees, beaches, no traffic, relaxation. I guess this is what happens when a couple million other people have the same idea.

The 16,200 vs 17,000 isn't just about 800. Just like a CNN poll isn't just about 1,600 votes vs. 1,400 votes. It's an indicator.

Of course you've got to know the limitations of your indicator. For example, the moving company is hired mostly by people with more money. So the article probably says more about people in the upper 1/3 of the income spectrum than the lower 1/3.

So we'll still be about half as dense as the typical European country.

Actually, that would put Florida around 670 per sq mile....slightly higher than the current UK and Germany, but significantly higher than Italy Poland France Spain, etc...

Not that Im nitpicking...

I used to be a Floridian. I lived there for 10 years in the 70's and 80's and did my medical training at UF in Gainesville. I loved Florida back then--mostly for its natural beauty. My family still lives there so I visit every year and I've seen the changes. I think it has and will continue to have ONE "international commerce center" (Miami) and perhaps one of two other regional "commerce centers" (Orlando, Jacksonville, maybe Tampa). The rest is classic suburban sprawl which is well on the way to eliminating what I loved about the place. Cap that with the fact that it used to be an inexpensive place to live and own a home but is no more (not only the cost of the home but the taxes and especially the insurance) and I can understand why its attractiveness is diminishing. I know I have considered, now that I'm fully retired, moving back, but after my most recent visit (got back night before last--while there, visited my old house in Winter Park near Orlando), I just can't see it even though, with the profits from high-appreciated homes in San Francisco and southern Arizona I could still afford a very nice place there.

I think that, if Florida is lucky, it will gradually become the playground of the wealthy who can afford the most attractive coastal property and also afford to self-insure or to absorb the loss if more hurricanes come. Such folks will also have ways to avoid the horrible traffic snarls that are I-95, I-4 and I-75 (helicopters, private planes, chauffeurs and the ability to have much of what they need brought to them).

But for average folks, it IS getting less attractive and will be much less so unless the state finds a way to make homeowners' policies that cover hurricane risks affordable.

I lived in Winter Park myself for a while. Beautiful city. I agree that a lot is being lost, but I blame that on the politicians, not the growth. There's still an awful lot of empty space just waiting to be built on. Whether we do it intelligently or not is still not known.

As for the playground for the wealthy, that sounds a lot like California. They seem to be doing rather well for themselves in spite of that.

It's probably a lot easier to self-insure your home if you build it to withstand a hurricane. How much extra did this house cost instead of a normal house?

http://www.katrinadestruction.com/im...ch-mississippi

The page link if that photo doesn't hotlink:
http://www.katrinadestruction.com/im...geViewsIndex=1

^

True, but look what they wake up to every morning.

If at least half the homes in your area don't build like that, you're going to be pretty depressed to come home every day.

Someone has this quote as their sig on the forum. I think it fits.

It's so crowded nobody goes there anymore - Yogi Berra

There's a reason why home prices have gone through the roof. There's a reason why sprawl has continued unabated. There's a reason the Condo market is booming. It's the people and they keep moving here. It's causing a lot of people to wax about the good old days, and quite a few of them to move, but this is nothing new. I think the media is just looking for them more often.

I was thinking more specifically of my current home, San Francisco, where I could not afford to live if I had not bought a condo in 1982. At least the state created an agency, the California Earthquake Authority, to provide earthquake insurance at somewhat (yes, some would argue that it's not) affordable rates.

Good question and that's one detererent for me to moving back. If I did, I think I would want a custom-built "hurricane-proof" home but, frankly, I don't want to go through all the hassle to design and build. Unlike earthquakes, I do think it's possible to build structures at reasonable cost to withstand hurricanes. You probably have to forgo the shorefront locations, though, but I could be happy living on a lake or maybe the St. John's River.

Are you reffering to Florida's rural and natural areas? If so, and if I'm not misinterpreting, then I'm somewhat offended by this statement. Like BTinSF, I, too, most love what is most threatened by Florida's uncontrolled, outward growth. Rural Florida is my roots, my family, my heritage. Natural Florida was my playground, my place for reflection. What other people see in that state when they choose to move there, it's not what I loved about the place. Call it a conflict of interest. I know it's probably a minority of Floridians or former Floridians that feel this way, but I think it's an important perspective to acknowledge, because it's this kind of sentiment that has the power to keep Florida from building itself to death.

The peninsula isn't going to get any bigger, its natural resources any more abundant, so limits must be set! I think some of us would just rather see them sooner than later. It's true growth and demand is nothing new in this state, but with each passing decade, as sprawl becomes a higher and higher percentage of this land's limited, physical area, concerns for this land's future are going to rise exponentially. Expect the media to reflect this.

My :2cents: