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.
Several agencies predict Idaho and especially the Boise area to have a high amount of growth (as we've seen for years) well into the future. COMPASS projects more than 1 Million in the Boise metro by 2040 which is still a ways away. I agree 1 Million in a metro is a lot, look at SLC which now has more than a million in its metro and imo that area is one big nasty mess but part of that is most of Utah's population lives along the Wasatch corridor/I-15. Idaho is more spread out.
The projected job growth for Boise and Idaho means job growth, opportunity, etc. A shift in local and state leaders over time will be a positive for the area.
Of the states that surround us, Montana and Wyoming will have less opportunity because their population is smaller than Idaho's. I can't imagine Nevada having much more opportunity except for more hotels (and casino's) to land a job at.
Oregon and Portland can be a conundrum, Portland for instance is a tough place to land a good job because everyone wants to live there and the job market is crowded and fierce, much like Boise, and people in Portland (as well as SLC) complain the jobs don't pay enough. Boise has grown so much since I've lived here, it's insane.
I don't expect it will take 40 years to reach a million. Montana and Wyoming both have climate to contend with as growth limiters, and that's especially true with Nevada.
Portland has deliberately imposed limits on its growth which may or may not create even greater problems in its future than growth alone.
Boise is not so remote that it presents great disadvantages, and its climate is no worse than that of the great cities of the midwest. Its metro has no natural barriers to expansion, like the Salt Lake Valley has, and its religious diversity is greater.
Traditionally, our political history has also been much more neutral that our neighboring states. Some of them have greater traditions of either conservatism or progressivism than ours, and our political leadership has had many more sings back and forth between the two than our neighbors. This is to our long-term advantage, especially if we turn back to our traditions in a time when all politics is increasingly divisive in the states where new growth is most possible.
Idaho slowness to arrive on the national awareness is to our favor if we are wise. Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon and Washington all provide us many examples of what works or not to best build a big metro.
So far, Boise has shown it's more willing to do things that are best for Boise than most of the other cities in our state. Extremes of either conservative or liberal have been balanced better in Boise than in most of our other cities as well, and Boise is now an old hand at what some cities are now only beginning to discover. While it is not alone, few other cities have gone their own way as much as Boise has.
All of this adds up, and I think the West in general is much like the South- the places that make themselves attractive to big business have gotten it while other cities have languished.
As somebody who grew up in and affiliates with Colorado, but currently lives in California, and is thinking about purchasing a property in northern Idaho, I feel compelled to add my thoughts to this thread.
I don't know if there's a disproportionate amount of animosity toward Californians in Idaho or not, but I do know that anyone who paints people with a broad brush based on the state they hail from is too idiotic to bother with and probably suffers from tendencies toward bigotry. Take state politics for example, even in a hyper "blue" state like California about 1 in every 3 or 4 people identify as conservative. Multiply that by our population base and you're talking about millions upon millions of people.
But looking more broadly than just politics, every single state in the country has a significant measure of socioeconomic and cultural diversity. California is particularly eclectic. Socal "feels" different than norcal. Coastal people tend to delineate themself from inland people. Spend three weekends in Fresno, Irvine, and Oakland and then come back to me and argue about how all Californians are the same.
And this is coming from somebody who doesn't like living in California and wishes he could move elsewhere. But I'd like to think I'm wise enough to not draw too many conclusions about a person based upon their license plate. People are individuals, and they come in all varieties in all states.
--
When people ask questions of this variety on city-data, I think it's important to bring up the issue of selectivity bias. This entire forum is predicated upon people making generalizations about this place versus that place. There's a lot of utility in geographic comparisons, don't get me wrong. But the people who are going to be drawn to a web site like this are often going to be people who have tribal-esque attitudes toward where they live. This is pervasive on every subforum I read. The Colorado people tell outsiders how hard it is there and to stay out. The Maine people say the same thing about Maine. The Bay Area people say the same thing. Heck, there are probably a few Detroit homers begging people to stay away from their beloved Motor City. My point is that it's unwise to extrapolate general attitudes about people from a particular place based on what you read in this forum. The members of city-data's forums might fancy themselves the self-anointed spokespeople for where they live, but the fact is, their opinion is no more qualified than anyone else's.
--
Lastly, on the subject of out of towners driving up real estate prices, get over it. The Idaho panhandle looks cheap compared to what I'm used to. That may prompt me to make a purchase up there. Real estate only has value if somebody else is willing to pay more for it than you did. The problems associated with rising real estate prices are a heck of a lot more palatable than the problems of declining prices. And you have no intrinsic or moral right to shut other people out just because they are coming from a higher C-O-L state. We live in the same country, which happens to be a free society with a dynamic economy. People moving from expensive states to cheap states is just part of natural economic activity. A red state like Idaho ought to be the first to accept that .
As somebody who grew up in and affiliates with Colorado, but currently lives in California, and is thinking about purchasing a property in northern Idaho, I feel compelled to add my thoughts to this thread.
I don't know if there's a disproportionate amount of animosity toward Californians in Idaho or not, but I do know that anyone who paints people with a broad brush based on the state they hail from is too idiotic to bother with and probably suffers from tendencies toward bigotry. Take state politics for example, even in a hyper "blue" state like California about 1 in every 3 or 4 people identify as conservative. Multiply that by our population base and you're talking about millions upon millions of people.
But looking more broadly than just politics, every single state in the country has a significant measure of socioeconomic and cultural diversity. California is particularly eclectic. Socal "feels" different than norcal. Coastal people tend to delineate themself from inland people. Spend three weekends in Fresno, Irvine, and Oakland and then come back to me and argue about how all Californians are the same.
And this is coming from somebody who doesn't like living in California and wishes he could move elsewhere. But I'd like to think I'm wise enough to not draw too many conclusions about a person based upon their license plate. People are individuals, and they come in all varieties in all states.
--
When people ask questions of this variety on city-data, I think it's important to bring up the issue of selectivity bias. This entire forum is predicated upon people making generalizations about this place versus that place. There's a lot of utility in geographic comparisons, don't get me wrong. But the people who are going to be drawn to a web site like this are often going to be people who have tribal-esque attitudes toward where they live. This is pervasive on every subforum I read. The Colorado people tell outsiders how hard it is there and to stay out. The Maine people say the same thing about Maine. The Bay Area people say the same thing. Heck, there are probably a few Detroit homers begging people to stay away from their beloved Motor City. My point is that it's unwise to extrapolate general attitudes about people from a particular place based on what you read in this forum. The members of city-data's forums might fancy themselves the self-anointed spokespeople for where they live, but the fact is, their opinion is no more qualified than anyone else's.
--
Lastly, on the subject of out of towners driving up real estate prices, get over it. The Idaho panhandle looks cheap compared to what I'm used to. That may prompt me to make a purchase up there. Real estate only has value if somebody else is willing to pay more for it than you did. The problems associated with rising real estate prices are a heck of a lot more palatable than the problems of declining prices. And you have no intrinsic or moral right to shut other people out just because they are coming from a higher C-O-L state. We live in the same country, which happens to be a free society with a dynamic economy. People moving from expensive states to cheap states is just part of natural economic activity. A red state like Idaho ought to be the first to accept that .
Truthfully, I have to agree with him. Well said and thoughtful. VANDAL, reading a lot of your posts, you seem to generalize people a lot.
As somebody who grew up in and affiliates with Colorado, but currently lives in California, and is thinking about purchasing a property in northern Idaho, I feel compelled to add my thoughts to this thread.
I don't know if there's a disproportionate amount of animosity toward Californians in Idaho or not, but I do know that anyone who paints people with a broad brush based on the state they hail from is too idiotic to bother with and probably suffers from tendencies toward bigotry. Take state politics for example, even in a hyper "blue" state like California about 1 in every 3 or 4 people identify as conservative. Multiply that by our population base and you're talking about millions upon millions of people.
But looking more broadly than just politics, every single state in the country has a significant measure of socioeconomic and cultural diversity. California is particularly eclectic. Socal "feels" different than norcal. Coastal people tend to delineate themself from inland people. Spend three weekends in Fresno, Irvine, and Oakland and then come back to me and argue about how all Californians are the same.
And this is coming from somebody who doesn't like living in California and wishes he could move elsewhere. But I'd like to think I'm wise enough to not draw too many conclusions about a person based upon their license plate. People are individuals, and they come in all varieties in all states.
Very good points in your post.......this above is so true!
Funny, when you get to talking to most people living in Idaho, A LOT of them came to Idaho 30-40 yrs ago from California. I always thought this was uneducated for people to get mad at others for being from a state in the USA.......most who escape California for Idaho, didn't want to go to Nevada.
(Quote) So far, Boise has shown it's more willing to do things that are best for Boise than most of the other cities in our state. Extremes of either conservative or liberal have been balanced better in Boise than in most of our other cities as well, and Boise is now an old hand at what some cities are now only beginning to discover. While it is not alone, few other cities have gone their own way as much as Boise has. (End quote)
Boise is to Idaho, as Seattle is to Washington, as Portland is to Oregon.
Last edited by clearwater66; 07-16-2015 at 10:15 AM..
Reason: Correct
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.
.
