Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2014, 12:02 PM
 
6,610 posts, read 9,044,792 times
Reputation: 4230

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian View Post
I would guess that by 2050, desalination will be much cheaper than it is today and many cities around the world will be relying on it. Especially the large cities in the Middle East. I don't really see the Sunbelt cities failing anytime soon, but the growth will eventually slow. But the warmer weather and mild winters will always be an advantage they have over Midwest and Northeast cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2014, 08:23 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C.
13,728 posts, read 15,780,745 times
Reputation: 4081
I predicted this:

Washington’s population growth slows - The Washington Post

The District, however, stood out among its neighbors. It gained 13,000 residents over the year, driving the population to over 646,000, according to the census figures. That was more new residents than any other jurisdiction in the region. Loudoun County also gained population, almost as much as the District.

More significantly, births were not the only reason the District had population gains. Last year, as in each of the previous three years, the city got more than 6,000 newcomers from outside the District, and almost 3,000 from other countries.

Frey called the District the region’s demographic bright spot.

“While the region as a whole is attracting fewer migrants from the rest of the country and is reliant largely on immigration and fertility for growth,” he said, “the primary source of growth in the District is migration from the suburbs and beyond. D.C. continues to remain demographically healthy despite ups and downs in the rest of the region.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 08:39 AM
 
2,262 posts, read 2,404,445 times
Reputation: 2741
Wow. DC's growth continues.

I remember reading something in the Washington Post about Northern Virginia accounting for over 60% of Virginia's growth which is why I'm still confused as to why with all this growth the DC area still has pretty poor road infrastructure which only worsens the already brutal traffic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,201,059 times
Reputation: 4407
^That makes perfect sense to me. Infrastructure improvements rarely (if ever) can keep up with population growth, especially if that growth is fast. Infrastructure isn't the only thing that lags either, schools, healthcare, public services, etc. usually fall behind also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 10:57 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
13,966 posts, read 24,186,892 times
Reputation: 14762
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
I know you said to take these with a grain of salt, and that's fine. But growth rates will obviously not stay the same for another 40 years. Boom cycles tend to last between 20-60 years. We're more than 40 years in for some of these. You will likely see major rate slow-downs with some of the most prolific growers of late.
Not exactly sure how these were calculated but if it were just applying the absolute numbers per year, then it would actually reflect a slowing rate, year over year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Charlotte
1,445 posts, read 2,323,489 times
Reputation: 881
A new report released by Bloomberg:

Fastest growing metros
1. Austin - 5.4%
2. Raleigh - 3.7%
3. San Antonio - 3.2%
4. Denver - 2.9%
5. Charlotte - 2.6%
6. Nashville - 2.6%
7. Oklahoma City - 2.6%
8. Orlando - 2.3%
9. Houston - 2.1%
10. Dallas 2.1%

Memphis, Chicago, Birmingham, Hampton Roads, New York, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, and a few others are among metros that lost population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 11:41 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 2,659,905 times
Reputation: 2672
Cities that derive the majority of their water supply from the Ogallala Aquifer (e.g., Austin, San Antonio, Dallas, OKC, et al.) are in big trouble, even more so than the cities that draw their water from the Colorado River (e.g., L.A., S.D., Phoenix, L.V., etc.), as the Ogallala is really in dire shape. I can't see this issue improving in the future either, esp. considering Austin, San Antonio, Dallas, OKC, et al. are currently among the fastest growing cities in the US and desalination seems like a less than optimal solution than for those cities compared to, say, cities in coastal California.

Last edited by 8to32characters; 04-14-2014 at 11:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 11:45 AM
 
381 posts, read 814,740 times
Reputation: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by caphillsea77 View Post
Does anyone else ever think that perhaps there may not be enough elbow room left? Just saying....
All the world's people could fit into Jacksonville...I wouldn't worry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:01 PM
 
558 posts, read 717,347 times
Reputation: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austincool View Post
A new report released by Bloomberg:

Fastest growing metros
1. Austin - 5.4%
2. Raleigh - 3.7%
3. San Antonio - 3.2%
4. Denver - 2.9%
5. Charlotte - 2.6%
6. Nashville - 2.6%
7. Oklahoma City - 2.6%
8. Orlando - 2.3%
9. Houston - 2.1%
10. Dallas 2.1%

Memphis, Chicago, Birmingham, Hampton Roads, New York, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, and a few others are among metros that lost population.
Percentages aren't as telling as actual population gains. If a city of 50 grows by 50 it can lead in percentages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:02 PM
 
558 posts, read 717,347 times
Reputation: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post
Not exactly sure how these were calculated but if it were just applying the absolute numbers per year, then it would actually reflect a slowing rate, year over year.
EXACTLY, that is why I did ot this way. The numbers may be off, but not as far off as percentages would be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top