Quote:
|
Quote:
In the last 30 years, it's increased 12:million. So where are you getting this 50 million figure from? |
Quote:
In the last 30 years, it's increased 12:million. So where are you getting this 50 million figure from? And you yourself, post evidence Texas is slowing down.. 20.6 to 14.1 is a considerable slow down, but what do I know?. It's just facts and numbers. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
When growth is driven primarily by migration (as opposed to natural increase), the rate of growth is not compounded indefinitely. It's inherently going to slow as there are only so many prospective migrants available (in about 100 more years Texas' population will exceed that of the entirety of the US!) - as it already has since the 90s & 00s. And especially as boomers start to pass away in large numbers over the next few decades, we're going to see depressed growth rates across the board. Cities also tend to reach a certain threshold where growth slows considerably. Once they reach a size where distances & congestion increases to the point where it's no longer feasible to commute from the outer edge of the city, land values rise, and the forces that have driven much of the growth in Texas (low cost of living), will start to reverse. Houston and Dallas are likely to experience the same thing as Los Angeles, which saw a skyrocketing population during the mid-century suburban boom since gradually slow down more and more as the place has increasingly filled up. Put simply, greenfield suburban growth is a lot easier than growth through intensification. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I love San Antonio; it was my home, but the talk about it having some sort of airport that it neither needs nor can support is somewhat curious. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Where exactly did I state that San Antonio (alone) was worthy of that kind of an airport? Or, did I actually suggest that the San Antonio / Austin REGION might need / be able to support a larger regional airport (the likes of DFW) by 2050 and beyond as the Texas Triangle continues to grow? |
Quote:
And San Antonio's MSA was ~2.1M in 2010. Much closer to 2.6M today. |
I find San Antonio to be the most interesting city culturally in Texas. From being founded during the Spanish/ Mexican era to being the most famous battle site for Texan Independence, it has a rich history that pretty much started the lore of Texas as we know today. It's this for me, bring raised with the more Mexican, cowboy, Southwestern view, as oppose to the more Southern, "hillbilly",Bible Belt view of Texas much of the world has today.
|
Quote:
Agree 100%. |
Quote:
|
Looking back at all posts in this thread, it has an even greater amount of incorrect information than most city discussions at SSP, and some of it is from people who should know better. Sheesh.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
well there was plenty, but you can't wing it in el paso, you need to do your homework and have a game plan. a bit of pregame work pays off in spades. its been awhile since i have last visited, but i remember on the second visit i was disappointed to find starbucks had finally made it out there. i think they were the last major city to get one and i took that as a major badge of honor for them. :haha: anyway, as you can see on the link below on the first visit i practically went berserk with joy in old el paso: https://www.chowhound.com/post/el-pa...n-90461?page=2 |
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think the growth will still be high for the foreseeable future because they already have most big city amenities and are still relatively cheap. |
Quote:
Another factor I have been mulling over: just how big can cities in the 21st century actually get in red states with anti-urban, anti-transit, small-gov, low-tax majorities in state Congresses? I’m seriously asking. Or let’s flip this and say that were Dallas and Houston to actually pass Chicago in metro sizes and were Austin’s to reach 4-5 million, Texas would be California / New York blue. |
Quote:
One thing I appreciated about Texas that I didn't realize when I left for California was there is definitely a more diversity of ideas and opinions. It's not an echo chamber like California is. The housing issue in CA is way worse and it's because those same people "voting blue" tend to vote against any dense housing development because of some mundane reason like views or shadows. Like the only problem the "red state leaders" have had with Austin's growth so far has been the huge increase in homeless but that was entirely due to a city law the mayor passed. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 1:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.