Maricopa County Added Over 222 People Per Day in 2016, More Than Any Other County

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by mhays

I wonder how much of the NE/MW outflow is a new trend and how much is just the pent-up pressure from people unable to leave until home values recovered. In other words, is it fairly temporary.

Been happening since the 1960s when my grandmother made the move and probably before that.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't buy it. There are very few people deciding between Manhattan and exurban North Carolina.

The people I know who have moved from the NYC area to North Carolina, Texas, Florida, are almost all working class, suburban, and living in cheap areas with unremarkable schools . . . .

Cities have always been playgrounds for the rich. The move to the Sunbelt is a fairly recent phenomenon, and likely has zero to do with the desirability of urban cores or school quality.

The most expensive areas in the Northeast are generally the fastest growing, BTW. NYC, inner suburbs of NYC, DC and wealthy parts of MD and VA, and Boston and inner suburbs of Boston, are the fastest growing areas. The cheapest areas along the Northeast Corridor have almost all the population loss.

Any of your friends named Donald Trump? He'd obviously rather live in Florida than Manhattan--it's where he goes every weekend. But how many people over 55 do you know? Nobody moves when they are still working.

I am on the other end of the pipeline, having lived in Florida, North Carolina and Arizona . . . and having known a lot of former northerners there (northeasterners tend to go to FL, northern Midwesterners to AZ). Yeah most of them are middle class that move full time. The more affluent just have second homes in the sunbelt. Take a look at the demographics of places like Kiawah Island, SC, Asheville, NC, John's Island, FL, Scottsdale, AZ, Paradise Valley, AZ etc some time.

The "wealthy areas" of the northeast may be growing but not necessarily with wealthy people. When I was growing up in Montgomery County, MD it was purportedly the second wealthiest county in the US. No longer by a mile: a lot of immigrants have moved in since my high school days.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Any of your friends named Donald Trump? He'd obviously rather live in Florida than Manhattan--it's where he goes every weekend.

Um, I'm fairly certain that Trump is hiding in Mar-a-Lago because he's hated in NYC and DC, and avoiding the press and his executive responsibilities, not because he's making some social commentary on the benefits of sprawl vs. urbanity. Is Melania now hiding in NYC because she's a committed urbanist, and hates Walmart?

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

But how many people over 55 do you know? Nobody moves when they are still working.

The vast majority of people who move are working age. And plenty of under-55s move to the Sunbelt. The pipeline of elderly to the South has actually decreased in recent years.

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

The "wealthy areas" of the northeast may be growing but not necessarily with wealthy people. When I was growing up in Montgomery County, MD it was purportedly the second wealthiest county in the US. No longer by a mile: a lot of immigrants have moved in since my high school days.

None of this is true. Montgomery County has never been wealthier or more expensive. It's also the fastest growing county in MD.

And I don't know what immigrants have to do with anything. You realize that immigrants are most concentrated in the wealthiest parts of the U.S., right? Immigrants and wealth are extremely heavily correlated.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Been happening since the 1960s when my grandmother made the move and probably before that.

Net domestic outflow from the Northeast has probably been happening since the 1600's, but the point was that the outflow was tiny during the recession, because the working class people who tend to move had cratered housing values. Now the values have recovered and they can sell.

[urbanactivist]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Revised figures show Houston area adding 18,000 jobs 12/2015-12/2016.http://www.bauer.uh.edu/centers/irf/houston-updates.php The article provides a pretty realistic appraisal of the impact of the fracking bust on the Houston economy and an historical overview that illustrates how this energy slump is so different from the one experienced in Houston in the 1980s.

This is not a great number, but there are maybe two things to note. Oil exploration and domestic drilling activity are on the upswing. This should have Houston firmly back in the official job creation game in 2017. Secondly, Houston is a bit like the LA area in that there are a lot of small businesses operated by immigrant families that provide employment opportunity (lots of it probably off the books) for many new arrivals. This is especially true for immigrants arriving from overseas (East and SE Asian mostly) and to a lesser extent to new arrivals from Latin America. There is no question that Houston's large natural increase is mostly derived from the immigrant population, and this causes additional strains on an already bare bones safety net and probably predicts additional problems associated with poverty, crime, public education, etc.

Lots and LOTS of it off the books.

I've lived in Houston for over 10 years now, but most of that time was spent living inside the loop (central Houston between downtown and the Galleria). But late last year, I moved to SW Houston/ Alief. It's a whole other world out here from the diversity standpoint. The international populations seem to be expanding more rapidly than census numbers could reckon. Who's to say if they are adding to the overall population, or (as the latest numbers suggest) replacing domestic folks that are moving away from the cities.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Why is it so hard for people on this forum and City-Data to admit that's it's simply hard to raise a family in a dense city these days especially with how expensive the neighborhoods with GOOD schools are? It's not about living a "generic" life. It's about doing what's best for your family.

Exactly.

Once kids enter the picture, everything changes. What was once an easy affordable DINK lifestyle in the city is often no longer desired or even possible with a growing family. That dual income must now support more than the 2 income earners in a larger home. Instead of just saving for retirement, now one must save for retirement plus college funds, plus the coming added expenses to clothe, feed and shelter another person(s) for the next 18 - 25 years. On top of it all, parents must find a safe learning environment for their kids to have the best chance to succeed in this world.

It's really not that complicated as to why we consistently see domestic migration patterns to certain regions compared to others.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Will they have enough water though.

In addition to the previous discussion about water banking, it's interesting to note that Arizona uses the same amount of water now as it did in the 1950s, and about 33% less than in the 1980s. See an interesting NPR discussion on the topic here. As the population has increased, there has been a corresponding decrease in agriculture. And agriculture is the real water hog. Water conservation programs have helped too.

There is an interesting discussion in this book about water in Phoenix and sustainability more generally. It's been a little while since I read it, but my recollection is that, even assuming a decrease in water supply due to climate change, Arizona could double its population and likely have sufficient water resources to sustain the people, provided that there is a corresponding decrease in agricultural water use.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

For Canada, Toronto is the sunbelt.

Let's not kid ourselves--if the US border to Canada opened up completely today, Canadian cities like Toronto would see drastic population drops almost overnight.

The draw of people of mediocre means to bland sprawl in the southern United States is irresistible

I don't think so. It's one thing to move from Chicago or NY to Phoenix or Houston...same country, laws, values, etc but someone from MTL or Toronto is less inclined to move to an area starkly in contrast to their own values even if it means shorts in December. Besides, most major Canadian cities are in pretty decent shape economically....by far the biggest driver of outward migration. I never would have left upstate NY if the economy was still decent.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

Exactly.

Once kids enter the picture, everything changes. What was once an easy affordable DINK lifestyle in the city is often no longer desired or even possible with a growing family. That duel income must now support more than the 2 income earners in a larger home. Instead of just saving for retirement, now one must save for retirement plus college funds, plus the coming added expenses to clothe, feed and shelter another person(s) for the next 18 - 25 years. On top of it all, parents must find a safe learning environment for their kids to have the best chance to succeed in this world.

It's really not that complicated as to why we consistently see domestic migration patterns to certain regions compared to others.

There are so many demographic, economic and psychological factors at work on why sunbelt and western cities are now growing faster than northeast/Midwest cities. For example, the Hispanic population boom (please no comment about legal vs illegal immigration here), the civil rights changes rendering southern states becoming more attractive for African American, who were fleeing to North/Midwest, and also to businesses. Many in my family and NY neighborhood moved from NY to Atlanta because they could sell their house and get a much bigger one and still get a decent, if not better job... Even in the South/West, there are winners and losers - like Nashville (winner) versus Memphis (loser); OKC versus Tulsa. A much more interesting question is why cities like Columbus/Minneapolis/Indianapolis/Grand Rapids/KC are growing at a decent pace but others like Rochester/Pittsburgh/Milwaukee are not. Are the faster growing NE/Midwest cities attracting the rural people in their state?

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by JManc

I don't think so. It's one thing to move from Chicago or NY to Phoenix or Houston...same country, laws, values, etc but someone from MTL or Toronto is less inclined to move to an area starkly in contrast to their own values even if it means shorts in December. Besides, most major Canadian cities are in pretty decent shape economically....by far the biggest driver of outward migration. I never would have left upstate NY if the economy was still decent.

Agree. Canadians who want warmer weather than is on offer have left Canada already, buy winter homes down south, or go to Mexico/Cuba in February. If the US-Canada border were removed, there might be a small initial increase in out migration but it would be insignificant.

Climate is just one factor and for the vast majority of Canadians they're not willing to give up living in Canada for a few extra months of sun. The idea that Canadians live in Canada because they can't live in the US dismisses the differences between the countries entirely not to mention it being rather insulting.

We like being Canadian and Toronto is a fabulous city. They're not option 'B'.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Crawford

None of this is true. Montgomery County has never been wealthier or more expensive. It's also the fastest growing county in MD.

And I don't know what immigrants have to do with anything. You realize that immigrants are most concentrated in the wealthiest parts of the U.S., right? Immigrants and wealth are extremely heavily correlated.

Of course it's wealthier now than it used to be, but it is not wealthier by comparison to other places as it used to be. There are wealthy, high skilled immigrants--as in Silicon Valley--and there are low skill immigrants--as in the Central Valley--and the DC suburbs have both but many of the latter which they never used to have.

No, I don't know that "immigrants and wealth are highly correlated". See Fresno. Again, it depends on the skill level of the particular folks but in recent years low skilled immigration in the US has swamped high skill immigration.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Net domestic outflow from the Northeast has probably been happening since the 1600's, but the point was that the outflow was tiny during the recession, because the working class people who tend to move had cratered housing values. Now the values have recovered and they can sell.

Sitting in Brooklyn I'm sure you know all about this while you imagine I, sitting in the heart of the sunbelt and having done so for decades, know nothing. What you think you know from internet data, I see first hand.

On this particular point--that the period 2008-2014 or so was one when the movement to the sunbelt slowed down--is one on which we agree. But for decades BEFORE 2008 such migration had proceeded apace. In fact, in 2005-2007 I used to get letters from people (usually people in the upper Midwest) I'd never met begging me to sell my house to them. I don't get those letters any more, even now. But property is selling pretty well again in the usual way, again usually to people from the north (as far north as eastern Canada and Alaska, but usually Michigan, Minnesota, the Dakotas, Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois, Wisconsin).

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by JManc

I don't think so. It's one thing to move from Chicago or NY to Phoenix or Houston...same country, laws, values, etc but someone from MTL or Toronto is less inclined to move to an area starkly in contrast to their own values even if it means shorts in December. Besides, most major Canadian cities are in pretty decent shape economically....by far the biggest driver of outward migration. I never would have left upstate NY if the economy was still decent.

Canadians who move to the US for year-round residency and work tend to be highly entrepreneurial and/or ambitious types but one encounters plenty of such all over the US. Perhaps this brand of Canadian has different values--ones that they think they can take advantage of in a more competitive economic climate.

In the sunbelt, however, one very commonly encounters Canadians (snowbirds) who come to Arizona or Florida for the coldest months but not to live permanently. Some have second homes, some just rent. But there are plenty of them, even just in the area where I live.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

I'm very skeptical about those über-optimistic forecasts about Toronto's growth. 1.9% is way too high, not in line with Canadian current growth.

About the undercount, if there was in 2016, there was also in 2011, which would not change the growth rate. To jump from a five-year average of 1.2% to 1.9% is very unlikely.

Toronto maintained a 2% growth rate for a very long time before the dip that started around 2010. It's true that it's impossible to maintain a large growth rate indefinitely as it requires an ever increasing absolute increase but I don't think Toronto is at that point yet. Skepticism is healthy but you're completely dismissing the effects of the western resource boom on Canadian migration patterns. I guess we'll just have to wait till the official numbers come out.

Btw, most Canadian CMAs grow faster than the national rate. The population outside of the CMAs barely budges. Almost all growth occurs in the bigger cities so Toronto posting a faster rate than Canada is to be expected.

[big W]

Originally Posted by JManc

I don't think so. It's one thing to move from Chicago or NY to Phoenix or Houston...same country, laws, values, etc but someone from MTL or Toronto is less inclined to move to an area starkly in contrast to their own values even if it means shorts in December. Besides, most major Canadian cities are in pretty decent shape economically....by far the biggest driver of outward migration. I never would have left upstate NY if the economy was still decent.

Others things to remember when Canadian cities enter the equation is pension plans and health care. Most snowbirds head down for a few months in winter to escape the snow but come right back up in the spring. That way they retain all benefits tied to residency most importantly health care. Remember for many Canadians going down to the US for 4 months might mean travel insurance premiums of approx. $600 US to be fully covered for anything while down there. That would be significantly cheaper than having to buy health insurance in the US year round.

[softee]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Toronto maintained a 2% growth rate for a very long time before the dip that started around 2010. It's true that it's impossible to maintain a large growth rate indefinitely as it requires an ever increasing absolute increase but I don't think Toronto is at that point yet. Skepticism is healthy but you're completely dismissing the effects of the western resource boom on Canadian migration patterns. I guess we'll just have to wait till the official numbers come out.

Btw, most Canadian CMAs grow faster than the national rate. The population outside of the CMAs barely budges. Almost all growth occurs in the bigger cities so Toronto posting a faster rate than Canada is to be expected.

Yeah, Toronto receives a huge amount of immigrants relative to its population:

Figures are in for 2015

Immigration by metro area, USA and Canada, 2015

1. New York: 162,175
2. Los Angeles: 82,979
3. Toronto: 82,110
4. Miami: 77,647
5. Montreal: 39,365
6. Washington: 37,340
7. Chicago: 36,658
8. Houston: 34,591
9. San Francisco: 34,152
10. Dallas: 29,660
11. Vancouver: 28,385
12. Boston: 22,836
13. Calgary: 21,700
14. Atlanta: 20,875
15. San Jose: 19,866
16. Seattle: 19,007
17. San Diego: 18,524
18. Philadelphia: 18,210
19. Edmonton: 16,745
20. Riverside: 15,915

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Persons Obtaining Lawful Permanent Resident Status By Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) Of Residence: Fiscal Years 2013 To 2015
https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-stat...ok/2015/table5

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
Permanent Residents by Census Metropolitan Area
http://open.canada.ca/en/open-data

[big W]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Canadians who move to the US for year-round residency and work tend to be highly entrepreneurial and/or ambitious types but one encounters plenty of such all over the US. Perhaps this brand of Canadian has different values--ones that they think they can take advantage of in a more competitive economic climate.

In the sunbelt, however, one very commonly encounters Canadians (snowbirds) who come to Arizona or Florida for the coldest months but not to live permanently. Some have second homes, some just rent. But there are plenty of them, even just in the area where I live.

Well for Canadians who move the US permanently its for jobs that would be higher paying then they might have got back home.

For middle class families for example it makes no sense to go to the US unless you have a job that would pay more you consider schools, health care, family etc. Middle class Canadians with kids etc generally find it better to be in Canada vs the US when all things are considered. The tax difference for most Canadians vs most place in the US is not large in their income brackets but are more pronounced once one makes over $150,000 a year. When many consider cost of health care, education, subsidized day care, maternity leave, child benefits (monthly income per child from the government till age 18 for middle and low income familes which I don't believe you have in the US). It may not make sense to go.

[big W]

Originally Posted by softee

Yeah, Toronto receives a huge amount of immigrants relative to its population:

Figures are in for 2015

Immigration by metro area, USA and Canada, 2015

1. New York: 162,175
2. Los Angeles: 82,979
3. Toronto: 82,110
4. Miami: 77,647
5. Montreal: 39,365
6. Washington: 37,340
7. Chicago: 36,658
8. Houston: 34,591
9. San Francisco: 34,152
10. Dallas: 29,660
11. Vancouver: 28,385
12. Boston: 22,836
13. Calgary: 21,700
14. Atlanta: 20,875
15. San Jose: 19,866
16. Seattle: 19,007
17. San Diego: 18,524
18. Philadelphia: 18,210
19. Edmonton: 16,745
20. Riverside: 15,915

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Persons Obtaining Lawful Permanent Resident Status By Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) Of Residence: Fiscal Years 2013 To 2015
https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-stat...ok/2015/table5

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
Permanent Residents by Census Metropolitan Area
http://open.canada.ca/en/open-data

Its not just the numbers of immigrants where Canada admits more relative to population but also the type of immigrants. I will not wade into the whole US illegal immigrants etc debate but only talk legal immigrants.
Due to immigration system differences, immigrants to Canada typically have higher education and higher income outcomes vs those American Immigrants. These educated immigrants are more likely to live in the cities due to jobs than than far flung regions which impacts how the cities develop as well.

[mhays]

Some US cities get more educated immigrants as well, particularly tech centers.

[YSL]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Of course it's wealthier now than it used to be, but it is not wealthier by comparison to other places as it used to be. There are wealthy, high skilled immigrants--as in Silicon Valley--and there are low skill immigrants--as in the Central Valley--and the DC suburbs have both but many of the latter which they never used to have.

No, I don't know that "immigrants and wealth are highly correlated". See Fresno. Again, it depends on the skill level of the particular folks but in recent years low skilled immigration in the US has swamped high skill immigration.

You're wrong, actually.

Millionaires per metro area, top 10

2007
NYC 650,000
Los Angeles 253,000
DC 151,000
San Francisco 142,000
Houston 86,000
San Jose 80,000

2016
NYC 800,000
Los Angeles 288,000
DC 190,000
San Francisco 174,000
Houston 111,000
San Jose 107,000
Dallas 94,000

https://www.worldwealthreport.com/uswr
https://www.capgemini.com/sites/defa..._US_Cities.pdf

NYC has added a massive 150,000 millionaires from 2007 to 2016 while Houston's millionaire population has grown by 25k or so. The wealth gap between cities like NYC, SF, DC versus sunbelt cities like Houston is larger than ever even though sunbelt cities like Houston beat those cities in population growth every year multiple times over. In other words - Houston was closer to NYC in wealth a decade ago than it is now...

And keep in mind that Houston is actually an economic powerhouse and the true star of the sunbelt. If Houston is falling farther behind slow growth cities like NY, DC, SF in wealth, the numbers must be dire for the smaller sunbelt cities. Phoenix, Atlanta etc are too poor to make the list even though they are some of the biggest metro areas in the country. This firm only ranks the top 10.

And what do you know...this study backs that up:

Why the Economic Fates of America’s Cities Diverged


The Atlanta metro area is a notable example of a “thriving” place where per capita income has nonetheless fallen farther and farther behind that of cities like Washington, New York, and San Francisco. So is metro Houston. Per-capita income in metro Houston was 1 percent above metro New York’s in 1980. But despite the so-called “Texas miracle,” Houston’s per-capita income fell to 15 percent below New York’s by 2011 and even at the height of the oil boom in 2013 remained at 12 percent below.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...iverge/417372/

So Crawford was right.