Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Greenville msa was 624,715 July 1 2008 and 639,617 on July 1 2009! I'm not a math wiz, but that's over 14k+! Greenville county grew at almost 9k by itself! And more in 2008. So are telling me a county can outgrow its msa? Hmmm? Check county estimates for 2008 and 2009 and tell me how that makes sense? It doesn't. There is a dead cat somewhere.
Just curious, but what are your sources for these figures? According to official Census estimates (http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/CBSA-est2009-annual.html - broken link), the Greenville MSA was at 630,098 for 2008 and 639,617 for 2009, which is a difference of 9,519. At any rate, it's not like any metro in SC is posting blockbuster numbers, so it's not really anything to get antsy about at all. The Big Three are all in the same category as far as growth rates are concerned.
Anyway, back to the original topic at hand, which is domestic migration. I actually found that statistic to be pretty surprising when I first ran across it. Columbia's MSA is in the top 25 nationally for domestic migration? That makes it first among all metros of its size nationally in that category, and I certainly wouldn't have thought that. I mean it's not head and shoulders above other similarly-sized metros, but I still wouldn't have expected Columbia to be leading in that category. The figure refers to how many people have actually moved to the region for the period between 2008-2009, and it excludes natural growth via births. Personally, I suspect that retirees, possibly a good bit of halfbacks, account for a significant chunk of that domestic migration. Columbia's been getting some positive press lately as a good place to retire.
So one MSA plus the vast majority of a second MSA gained more people than the Columbia MSA. I started this topic because the Census Bureau just released their latest MSA figures. Counties bore me.
If the roles were reversed, would you not say the same when the MSA numbers do not adequately represent the actual regional population? I thought so. Two contiguous counties (not currently considered one MSA, although that may change again) gained as many people last year as the largest MSA in the state (currently, although that may change), which is comprised of six contiguous counties. You may not like such factual and relevant data, however it is interesting to consider in light of this discussion, in my opinion.
Whether or not you choose to acknowledge the info above, my previous statement regarding the potential magnetism of our state's three largest metro areas provided a fair assessment nonetheless. We are living in exciting times if growth is a key to happiness.
Why is it whenever Columbia outshines Greenville for whatever reason (population growth, income, education, etc...) do we have Greenville boosters tagging on information that isn't apart of the original topic? If you want to discuss the gain or size of Greenville's CSA, MSA, or county population discuss it in your own forum, stop hijacking the threads boosting your area. Are you guys scared that someone from outside of SC forum will actually read the discussion and accept what the rest of the nation has for the past 10 years now? Get over it Columbia at least according to the United States Government is the state's largest MSA. It's unbelievable.
I know, it's amazing how some people from Greenville always have to stick their 2 cents in when it comes to Columbia. I couldn't tell you the last time I visited the Greenville forum on here.
The retailers see something different. Wonder if they use these political and government lines? Doesn't look like it. It'll come out in the wash. I guess if this makes you feel good I have no problem with it.
I know, it's amazing how some people from Greenville always have to stick their 2 cents in when it comes to Columbia. I couldn't tell you the last time I visited the Greenville forum on here.
What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? That's your choice!
Just curious, but what are your sources for these figures? According to official Census estimates (http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/CBSA-est2009-annual.html - broken link), the Greenville MSA was at 630,098 for 2008 and 639,617 for 2009, which is a difference of 9,519. At any rate, it's not like any metro in SC is posting blockbuster numbers, so it's not really anything to get antsy about at all. The Big Three are all in the same category as far as growth rates are concerned.
Anyway, back to the original topic at hand, which is domestic migration. I actually found that statistic to be pretty surprising when I first ran across it. Columbia's MSA is in the top 25 nationally for domestic migration? That makes it first among all metros of its size nationally in that category, and I certainly wouldn't have thought that. I mean it's not head and shoulders above other similarly-sized metros, but I still wouldn't have expected Columbia to be leading in that category. The figure refers to how many people have actually moved to the region for the period between 2008-2009, and it excludes natural growth via births. Personally, I suspect that retirees, possibly a good bit of halfbacks, account for a significant chunk of that domestic migration. Columbia's been getting some positive press lately as a good place to retire.
What's official? They are guessing right? At least until the true count is done. All other sources say 624,715, but your right. I concede.
If the roles were reversed, would you not say the same when the MSA numbers do not adequately represent the actual regional population? I thought so. Two contiguous counties (not currently considered one MSA, although that may change again) gained as many people last year as the largest MSA in the state (currently, although that may change), which is comprised of six contiguous counties. You may not like such factual and relevant data, however it is interesting to consider in light of this discussion, in my opinion.
Whether or not you choose to acknowledge the info above, my previous statement regarding the potential magnetism of our state's three largest metro areas provided a fair assessment nonetheless. We are living in exciting times if growth is a key to happiness.
You thought wrong. If the roles were reversed I would regret that my city had to share the glory with two other cities to get the numbers I wanted.
Just curious, but what are your sources for these figures? According to official Census estimates (http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/CBSA-est2009-annual.html - broken link), the Greenville MSA was at 630,098 for 2008 and 639,617 for 2009, which is a difference of 9,519. At any rate, it's not like any metro in SC is posting blockbuster numbers, so it's not really anything to get antsy about at all. The Big Three are all in the same category as far as growth rates are concerned.
Anyway, back to the original topic at hand, which is domestic migration. I actually found that statistic to be pretty surprising when I first ran across it. Columbia's MSA is in the top 25 nationally for domestic migration? That makes it first among all metros of its size nationally in that category, and I certainly wouldn't have thought that. I mean it's not head and shoulders above other similarly-sized metros, but I still wouldn't have expected Columbia to be leading in that category. The figure refers to how many people have actually moved to the region for the period between 2008-2009, and it excludes natural growth via births. Personally, I suspect that retirees, possibly a good bit of halfbacks, account for a significant chunk of that domestic migration. Columbia's been getting some positive press lately as a good place to retire.
Like I said in another forum, on another website I think, Columbia gained more than many southern MSAs in the same size category: Knoxville, Birmingham and Greensboro, for instance, and more than even some larger-sized ones like Richmond and Jacksonville. We also gained more than Albuquerque and Tucson this time.
Will you create links to the other sources, please?
All other sources other than the one official census bureau. Its government so it must be right. So everyone else is wrong I guess. Its no biggy! Hard to attach links using Blackberry. I'm just curious what retailers, etc use. Must be csa numbers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
