Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta3000
Let's just discuss some real facts. The pic below is from the Census Bureau from 2014- 2015 and the illustration details US Metros with the highest Gross Population increase for this time period. The Top 3: Houston, Dallas and Atlanta and they have virtually remained in those spots the past 10 years and are forecasted to continue to have the highest gross population increases for the next 30 years. Before some of the Austin or Nashville folks dispute my claim - note I am saying GROSS increase, not highest % increase.
So if I was Jeff f'en Bezos and I am deciding where to put my HQ2 that will need 50,000 employees I would probably pay special attention to those cities that have already demonstrated they have a high propensity to attract people to their city before Amazon and without a doubt Atlanta and Dallas will be in the top just as we are for most corporate relocations.
Noticeably absent are Chicago, Pittsburgh, Philly and Boston.
 |
Chicago is larger than Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston. Phildelphia is larger than Atlanta and comparable to both Dallas and Houston. Nothing last forever. That very much applies to rocket-speed growth. The COL in Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston is now equal to Chicago and Philadelphia. Pittsburgh is considerably more affordable and Boston considerably more expensive.
We're at a point now where it's unlikely Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston continue to put up the numbers they have been. The COL advantage is gone. The white collar culture is just as strong or stronger in metros like Chicago and Philadelphia. Places like Nashville, Charlotte, Raleigh, Birmingham, Louisville, Cincinnati, etc. will likely make aggressive campaigns to poach jobs from Atlanta, Dallas, or Houston in the same way these cities poached jobs from elsewhere.
You don't boom indefinitely and what works today is not guaranteed to work tomorrow. That's why we see such a shift in our built environments after 1950. I don't understand why so few posters here comprehend that. Chicago went from a frontier town to the second largest city in less than 40 years. City politicians were planning for 4+m residents by 1960. The city was growing at double digits per year...until it wasn't.
Detroit posted growth rates in excess of 35% per decade for 11 straight decades. Detroit wasn't going from 10,000 to 20,000 residents. It was growing from 285k to 500k. Where is that growth now?
Rapid growth brings about a lot of positive change, but it also brings to light the less attractive elements of a city. No city or region is immune to this.