HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2019, 8:46 PM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,500
at first I assumed this would be Richard Florida Man
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2019, 11:41 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Business News July 19, 2019 / 6:16 AM Howard Schneider 8 Min Read


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1UE13B



The article is long so I quoted what I thought was the biggest take away. There's some interesting stuff about Nashville and Houston so feel free to bring up what you think is important. Kinda surprised nobody else posted this here yet.
The chart does not seem right. It may be due to when they chose to compare employment. For example, I think Austin, Orlando, Grand Rapids, Denver and Seattle has had much stronger job growth than the 1-2 percent, from reading all of the business articles on corporate expansions and relocations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 1:35 AM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
The chart does not seem right. It may be due to when they chose to compare employment. For example, I think Austin, Orlando, Grand Rapids, Denver and Seattle has had much stronger job growth than the 1-2 percent, from reading all of the business articles on corporate expansions and relocations.

Its the share of all jobs nationally, not proportional job growth
.

Grand Rapids might have 10% relative job growth but that's a tiny fraction of the national share.

High population places have the advantage for obvious reasons but as you can see by NY and Chicago and other older rust belt/northeastern metros they arent gaining as big a slice of new jobs as sunbelt and western metros in general.

TBH its more a demonstration on migration patterns than anything,
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 1:25 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,524
The only surprise on the map is Detroit, Michigan. Aside from that, everything seems about right -- Sun Belt cities along with Denver and Pacific NW cities.

This is what we continually see with the census each and every year. The South and The West are the winners in terms of population and job growth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 1:44 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
The chart does not seem right. It may be due to when they chose to compare employment. For example, I think Austin, Orlando, Grand Rapids, Denver and Seattle has had much stronger job growth than the 1-2 percent, from reading all of the business articles on corporate expansions and relocations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
Its the share of all jobs nationally, not proportional job growth
.

Grand Rapids might have 10% relative job growth but that's a tiny fraction of the national share.

High population places have the advantage for obvious reasons but as you can see by NY and Chicago and other older rust belt/northeastern metros they arent gaining as big a slice of new jobs as sunbelt and western metros in general.

TBH its more a demonstration on migration patterns than anything,
It's a bizarre way of measuring things... Share of national job gains? By that measure places with lots of new Amazon warehouses that employ 2500 people each and pay them $10/hr to sit in a 100 degree warehouse are going to look better than places where Google or Facebook added 1000 developer jobs.

It's very strange to measure things not based on percentage growth but to then list the numbers as a percentage of something. The way I'm understanding this is that it's not really a measure of economic or job growth as much as it is a measure of population growth. Places people are migrating to are going to have a higher number of "job gains" than slow growing massive metros. That's why Detroit shows up, because people are returning there rapidly so it looks good by this measure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 1:52 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
It's very strange to measure things not based on percentage growth but to then list the numbers as a percentage of something. The way I'm understanding this is that it's not really a measure of economic or job growth as much as it is a measure of population growth. Places people are migrating to are going to have a higher number of "job gains" than slow growing massive metros. That's why Detroit shows up, because people are returning there rapidly so it looks good by this measure.
Exactly.

The only thing that the sunbelt is winning is people.

Quality over quantity. I will take the increasingly vibrant built environment of our big urban centers any day of the week over that stuff
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 2:11 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 18,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
The only surprise on the map is Detroit, Michigan.
It's hardly surprising. Look at the chart title.

They're looking at growth from 2010-2017. Metro Detroit has one of the least diversified economies in the U.S. and underwent the deepest recession (almost a depression) in 2008 and 2009.

It makes sense, that as the national economy recovered, and people started buying consumer goods again, that the nation's auto center would show higher-than-average job growth, which isn't indicative of a boom, but rather the reclaiming of some of the hundreds of thousands of previously lost jobs. The Big 3 and their suppliers generally had record earnings and sales during that time period, as households that had put off new car purchases reversed course, and as Chinese consumer demand boomed.

If your regional economy shrinks by 20%, and then grows by 5%, it isn't really faster growth than if your regional economy shrinks by 5% and then grows by 2%. The worse the economic hole, the better the recovery looks. And of course the inverse is true. When Silicon Valley crashed after the early 2000's dot-com bust, the jobs data for San Jose MSA were comically bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 2:17 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
Its the share of all jobs nationally, not proportional job growth
.

Grand Rapids might have 10% relative job growth but that's a tiny fraction of the national share.

High population places have the advantage for obvious reasons but as you can see by NY and Chicago and other older rust belt/northeastern metros they arent gaining as big a slice of new jobs as sunbelt and western metros in general.

TBH its more a demonstration on migration patterns than anything,
I'd like to see current share of national jobs for top 25 metros. It's a lot harder for an established metro that already has like 10% share of jobs (think NY) to grow an additional 2%+ than it is for a place like Austin that is rapidly growing and expanding to make the same jump. If NY was growing at that rate it would be taking over the entire Atlantic seaboard in no time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 3:03 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post

It makes sense, that as the national economy recovered, and people started buying consumer goods again, that the nation's auto center would show higher-than-average job growth, which isn't indicative of a boom, but rather the reclaiming of some of the hundreds of thousands of previously lost jobs. The Big 3 and their suppliers generally had record earnings and sales during that time period, as households that had put off new car purchases reversed course, and as Chinese consumer demand boomed.

If your regional economy shrinks by 20%, and then grows by 5%, it isn't really faster growth than if your regional economy shrinks by 5% and then grows by 2%. The worse the economic hole, the better the recovery looks. And of course the inverse is true. When Silicon Valley crashed after the early 2000's dot-com bust, the jobs data for San Jose MSA were comically bad.
lol here comes the broken record, you've been making this exact comment for literally years now, how many more years after this point? I should start bookmarking these pages.

While it's true that metro Detroit had a lot of catching up do the great recession is fully recovered and this time to growth is much more diversified and replaced with other types of jobs. Auto industry sales have plateaued now for many years and the growth is still coming (you've already been told this though obviously). Let's not act like most metros in the northeastern/midwest didn't have similar collapses yet I don't see them on here. Why isn't Chicago even in the top 40?

Also Grand Rapids weathered the recession well and they're still on here, Columbus is in the next 20 as well.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 3:16 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Exactly.

The only thing that the sunbelt is winning is people.

Quality over quantity. I will take the increasingly vibrant built environment of our big urban centers any day of the week over that stuff
population growth is cool and all.

but as a full-blown skyscraper nerd, skyline growth is even cooler!


MSA population growth 2000 - 2018:

dallas - 2,317,910‬ (44% increase)
chicago - 341,176 (4% increase)


# of 500' buildings built since 2000:

dallas - 2 (11% increase)
chicago - 51 (70% increase)



chicago ain't gaining many people these days, but holy crap does this town like to build towers, which is nice.......
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Aug 16, 2019 at 4:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:01 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
lol here comes the broken record, you've been making this exact comment for literally years now, how many more years after this point? I should start bookmarking these pages.

While it's true that metro Detroit had a lot of catching up do the great recession is fully recovered and this time to growth is much more diversified and replaced with other types of jobs. Auto industry sales have plateaued now for many years and the growth is still coming (you've already been told this though obviously). Let's not act like most metros in the northeastern/midwest didn't have similar collapses yet I don't see them on here. Why isn't Chicago even in the top 40?

Also Grand Rapids weathered the recession well and they're still on here
, Columbus is in the next 20 as well.
Chicago's peak unemployment rate during the recession was about 13%, roughly the national average and similar to Grand Rapids, who in your words "weathered the recession well."

Detroit's unemployment rate was nearly 26%.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:05 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 18,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Let's not act like most metros in the northeastern/midwest didn't have similar collapses yet I don't see them on here.
No U.S. metro area had remotely similar economic numbers as Detroit.

In 2008-2009, Detroit was basically in a depression, as the auto industry teetered on the brink of collapse. You might recall that GM & Ford almost failed. Michigan lost over 800,000 jobs, which is crazy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:06 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
It's a bizarre way of measuring things... Share of national job gains? By that measure places with lots of new Amazon warehouses that employ 2500 people each and pay them $10/hr to sit in a 100 degree warehouse are going to look better than places where Google or Facebook added 1000 developer jobs.

It's very strange to measure things not based on percentage growth but to then list the numbers as a percentage of something. The way I'm understanding this is that it's not really a measure of economic or job growth as much as it is a measure of population growth. Places people are migrating to are going to have a higher number of "job gains" than slow growing massive metros. That's why Detroit shows up, because people are returning there rapidly so it looks good by this measure.
But the chart shows the exact opposite. It shows the biggest increases occurred in places with a large highly skilled workforce.

As for Detroit, it does have a large engineering talent pool, but until recently, that pool has been geared towards mechanical, logistical, supply chain, etc -- the less sexy engineering jobs. However, Silicon Valley's encroachment onto automotive turf has sparked an industry Cold War over the past 5 - 10 years. They are all fighting to become "mobility" companies, instead of companies that sell cars. The German automakers are deep into this as well. I don't know if that's the complete story behind Detroit's rebound, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a major factor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:18 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
No U.S. metro area had remotely similar economic numbers as Detroit.

In 2008-2009, Detroit was basically in a depression, as the auto industry teetered on the brink of collapse. You might recall that GM & Ford almost failed. Michigan lost over 800,000 jobs, which is crazy.
I don't think that 800K number is correct. That would be almost every manufacturing job in the state. The state's unemployment peaked at 14.5%, which is insanely high, but unemployment was insanely high everywhere.

NYC also lost a LOOOOT of jobs, and I don't think the financial sector has fully recovered to pre-recession. What helped NYC mask the financial sector losses was a major increase in tech sector activity this decade.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:23 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 18,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
I don't think that 800K number is correct. That would be almost every manufacturing job in the state. The state's unemployment peaked at 14.5%, which is insanely high, but unemployment was insanely high everywhere.

NYC also lost a LOOOOT of jobs, and I don't think the financial sector has fully recovered to pre-recession. What helped NYC mask the financial sector losses was a major increase in tech sector activity this decade.
Again, Michigan was in a one-state depression. The NYC financial industry never had remotely similar job cuts.

Michigan actually lost more jobs than the the U.S., as a whole, which is insane. Michigan lost 806,000 jobs, which was one out of every six jobs. The U.S. lost 786,000 jobs during the same time period. When nearly 20% of your jobs vanish, the recovery will look stronger than elsewhere, where 2% of jobs vanished.

https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/20582
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 4:34 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Again, Michigan was in a one-state depression. The NYC financial industry never had remotely similar job cuts.

Michigan actually lost more jobs than the the U.S., as a whole, which is insane. Michigan lost 806,000 jobs, which was one out of every six jobs. The U.S. lost 786,000 jobs during the same time period. When nearly 20% of your jobs vanish, the recovery will look stronger than elsewhere, where 2% of jobs vanished.

https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/20582
This is saying something different than what you were saying, but I understand your point better now... Actually, I lived it. The state's poor job market is one of the primary reasons I ended up in New York after college. Those losses were happening well before the financial collapse.

But Michigan's job losses that were directly attributed to the financial collapse were not out of line with the rest of the country. They just compounded an already bad economic climate. Also, the post-2010 recovery is not a rebound of those pre-recession losses. Those 2000-2007 jobs are gone forever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 5:45 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,916
Umm no, Ford was never close to failure, they never went bankrupt.

You're arguing a fallacy and spreading misleading points. The dramatic surge in jobs and diversification is not some unsurprising predictable thing for Michigan that was expected. Somehow I highly doubt you were running around in 2008 telling everybody how everything will rebound in the next 9 years. If you really believed this and collected property in metro Detroit during that time it would have been the best investment of your life, you'll probably never have an opportunity like that again.

The entire lost 00's decade has been recovered now and then some with better jobs, no other city in the northeast is seeing this sort of surged rebound. It's significant no matter how you slice it and shows no signs of stopping with flat auto sales.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 6:15 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,916
Just to be clear, the US lost 8.8 million jobs during the great recession and it continued to 2010. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/04/art1full.pdf

Subtracting that 7.6 million 00's growth (going by the article) before it hit still leaves 1.2 million for total US loss. That 5 year article you dug from the grave is highly dubious.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 6:20 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Exactly.

The only thing that the sunbelt is winning is people.

Quality over quantity. I will take the increasingly vibrant built environment of our big urban centers any day of the week over that stuff
Bless your heart.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2019, 6:27 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
It's a bizarre way of measuring things... Share of national job gains? By that measure places with lots of new Amazon warehouses that employ 2500 people each and pay them $10/hr to sit in a 100 degree warehouse are going to look better than places where Google or Facebook added 1000 developer jobs.

It's very strange to measure things not based on percentage growth but to then list the numbers as a percentage of something. The way I'm understanding this is that it's not really a measure of economic or job growth as much as it is a measure of population growth. Places people are migrating to are going to have a higher number of "job gains" than slow growing massive metros. That's why Detroit shows up, because people are returning there rapidly so it looks good by this measure.
I mean people who don't have degrees in computers and engineering need jobs too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:15 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.