HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 2, 2021, 11:18 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossabreezes View Post
Absolutely. I work in tech and my regions are the Southeast and West Coast. While the West Coast (California in specific) is very strong, it is not growing nearly as fast as Texas and Florida.

I am actually more surprised with how robust Florida is, at least in my industry it is absolutely booming at avalanche levels. Florida is big, big money.

People love to make fun of Florida but the reality is that it is much more than the stereotype that coastal elitists like to paint it with. I'm less familiar with Texas, but it's also doing really well. These two state will definitely pull away and above from the CAs and NYs of the country in a near future without question IMO.
How is Florida big money? it's economy is pretty medicore. I don't see it getting anywhere near California for anything. Any it might surpass NY state in population (or has) but it's nowhere near the stature or the economy of NYC and it's suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 2, 2021, 11:29 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...mericas-future
Do you agree or disagree? What are your thoughts?
I'm lazy, I don't want to click the link and then have to read, I want the information right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 2, 2021, 11:45 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
How is Florida big money? it's economy is pretty medicore. I don't see it getting anywhere near California for anything. Any it might surpass NY state in population (or has) but it's nowhere near the stature or the economy of NYC and it's suburbs.
Florida won't ever get anywhere near California. And yes, it passed New York in population, but even that's not apples-to-apples. The economic powerhouse city of New York State is also the economic powerhouse for two other states (NJ & CT).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 2, 2021, 11:56 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Florida won't ever get anywhere near California. And yes, it passed New York in population, but even that's not apples-to-apples. The economic powerhouse city of New York State is also the economic powerhouse for two other states (NJ & CT).
I would hope Florida never has 40 million people living there, what a humanitarian disaster that would be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 1:20 AM
Dariusb Dariusb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Belton, TX
Posts: 1,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelback View Post
I'm lazy, I don't want to click the link and then have to read, I want the information right now.
Lol!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 1:23 AM
Dariusb Dariusb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Belton, TX
Posts: 1,125
I remember something I read months ago regarding the effects of climate change on the US and said that the Great Lakes region may become the most appealing and livable at least climate wise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 1:47 AM
BG918's Avatar
BG918 BG918 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
I remember something I read months ago regarding the effects of climate change on the US and said that the Great Lakes region may become the most appealing and livable at least climate wise.
I see that happening but not for a few decades. Florida and Texas (and to an extent Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia) will be the big population and economic growth winners this decade. The next decade could see Idaho and Montana move into that list (already close) along with perhaps South Carolina, Oklahoma and Kentucky. The Midwest revival would be beyond that especially if climate change ramps up which would adversely affect Texas and Florida.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 1:50 AM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
I remember something I read months ago regarding the effects of climate change on the US and said that the Great Lakes region may become the most appealing and livable at least climate wise.
Maybe, but it also depends on technology. Technology is what made places like Phoenix and Las Vegas inhabitable in the first place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 2:19 AM
twister244 twister244 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
I see that happening but not for a few decades. Florida and Texas (and to an extent Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia) will be the big population and economic growth winners this decade. The next decade could see Idaho and Montana move into that list (already close) along with perhaps South Carolina, Oklahoma and Kentucky. The Midwest revival would be beyond that especially if climate change ramps up which would adversely affect Texas and Florida.
Yep.... Agree with this completely. Eventually major weather events (hurricanes hitting FL/TX) and major drought/wildfires in the west will eventually begin to force people to evaluate cities like Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 2:42 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
A climate exodus to Chicago and places due north would be a long term scenario. I don't foresee Houston or Miami falling into the ocean anytime soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IluvATX View Post
Why would anyone want to live in Anchorage? Jk I currently live in Anchorage, but don’t see the appeal other than job related reasons.
I'm in Anchorage right now and while not exactly an urban paradise, cannot beat the unspoiled natural beauty close by. The drive up Turnagain Arm is breathtaking.

I couldn't live here though..too damn cold and the older I get, the less Houston's heat and humidity bothers me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 3:04 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossabreezes View Post
Not that different than California in that regard, in all honesty. California infrastructure is highly limited to highways, similarly to Texas and Florida. The difference is that CA is a mature state and should have gotten their act together decades ago in regards to infrastructure and public transport.

Also, climate change is causing issues in all states but notably is worst in these three.
I think you aren't that familiar with CA.

The state's 2 largest metro areas have decent--not what it should be but what American metro does have what it should be outside of maybe NYC?--transit and are gradually expanding it. I'm obviously most familiar with SF and SF's Muni system pre-COVID provided a bus to most residents within 2 blocks of their doors and with service every 15-20 minutes on the least active routes and every 8 minutes or so on the most. The city also has a pretty extensive light rail network (still growing with the Central Subway line about to open soon) and a linear underground heavy rail (BART) through the center of town and through 5 major spokes into the suburbs. There are also supplementary rail systems in suburban counties that feed into the central system like SMART (Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit) and the East Contra Costa BART Extension.

LA is building out its rail transit as rapidly as a 21st century city can. It costs a lot more to do it now than 100 years ago when some of the world's great cities did it. But it now not only has a respectable subway/rail transit system but a decent commuter rail system as well.

But beyond that, CA subsidizes intercity rail like pretty much no other state: It pays for service on multiple AMTRAK routes: CalTrain, Capital Corridor, San Joaquin, Altamonte Express, Pacific Surfliner. And of course it has provided $10 billion of state funding for HSR which actually has a segment under construction (and a gorgeous new downtown SF station just waiting).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 5:17 AM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is online now
Birds Aren't Real!
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossabreezes View Post
Not that different than California in that regard, in all honesty. California infrastructure is highly limited to highways, similarly to Texas and Florida. The difference is that CA is a mature state and should have gotten their act together decades ago in regards to infrastructure and public transport.

Also, climate change is causing issues in all states but notably is worst in these three.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
I think you aren't that familiar with CA.

The state's 2 largest metro areas have decent--not what it should be but what American metro does have what it should be outside of maybe NYC?--transit and are gradually expanding it. I'm obviously most familiar with SF and SF's Muni system pre-COVID provided a bus to most residents within 2 blocks of their doors and with service every 15-20 minutes on the least active routes and every 8 minutes or so on the most. The city also has a pretty extensive light rail network (still growing with the Central Subway line about to open soon) and a linear underground heavy rail (BART) through the center of town and through 5 major spokes into the suburbs. There are also supplementary rail systems in suburban counties that feed into the central system like SMART (Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit) and the East Contra Costa BART Extension.

LA is building out its rail transit as rapidly as a 21st century city can. It costs a lot more to do it now than 100 years ago when some of the world's great cities did it. But it now not only has a respectable subway/rail transit system but a decent commuter rail system as well.

But beyond that, CA subsidizes intercity rail like pretty much no other state: It pays for service on multiple AMTRAK routes: CalTrain, Capital Corridor, San Joaquin, Altamonte Express, Pacific Surfliner. And of course it has provided $10 billion of state funding for HSR which actually has a segment under construction (and a gorgeous new downtown SF station just waiting).
Yeah, I concur with Pedestrian: when it comes to transportation infrastructure, California has invested heavily in much more than just freeways. I am surprised to see such an uninformed claim.

California's massive airports, seaports, and freight railroad networks are top notch. They greatly lessen the burden on the state's road networks.

And in terms of public transport, California transit agencies carry far more commuters per capita than those in Texas. For example, before the pandemic the state's fourth busiest transit agency--San Diego's--provided 282,300 daily rides, while Texas' largest agency, in Houston, provided 297,900 daily rides. California has the fifth- and ninth-busiest heavy rail systems in America, six different light rail systems that include the first-, third-, and fifth-busiest in the nation, and the sixth- and eighth-busiest metropolitan commuter rail networks in the country. The state also funds the nation's third-, fourth-, and seventh-busiest interurban Amtrak routes.

Yes, Texas and Florida are America's future--they are currently growing fastest--but so are all of the other states 'America's future.' America isn't just one or two states.
__________________
Donald Trump is America's Hitler.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 5:25 AM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
six different light rail systems
I can only think of Muni, VTA, Sacramento's, LA's and San Diego's... what am I missing?
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 6:51 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
I can only think of Muni, VTA, Sacramento's, LA's and San Diego's... what am I missing?
Northern San Diego county, Sprinter. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprinter_(light_rail)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 1:07 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,204
Also there is a streetcar under construction in Santa Ana, and if local DMU’s count the one between San Bernardino and Redlands.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 3:07 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,182
Florida always struck me as more or less the state version of a Ponzi scheme.

First, when it comes to migrants, it is heavily dependent on attracting an ever-increasing number of them. This is really going to lead to a demographic crunch for the state in around a decade, when the newly retired demographic shifts to older Xers, simply because there aren't anywhere near enough of them to replace dying boomers.

Second, there's of course the climate issue. The Miami area in particular is arguably already fucked. No sea walls will ever keep the water out, because the "bedrock" is porous limestone (more or less old reefs) and when there's heavy flooding water just seeps up from the ground.

Texas is a different case. It's more or less built itself on being the "runaway shop state" - poaching everything from manufacturing to tech jobs from other states with heavy subsidies. The thing is, this has happened before. Smaller Northeastern states like NH, NJ, CT, and DE experienced a postwar boom due to poaching jobs/residents away from NYC/Boston/Philly. But COL inevitably rose, and eventually they became both less competitive than the new Sun Belt and the revived urban cores. Texas will eventually be lapped by someone else in just the same manner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 3:10 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Florida always struck me as more or less the state version of a Ponzi scheme.

First, when it comes to migrants, it is heavily dependent on attracting an ever-increasing number of them. This is really going to lead to a demographic crunch for the state in around a decade, when the newly retired demographic shifts to older Xers, simply because there aren't anywhere near enough of them to replace dying boomers.

Second, there's of course the climate issue. The Miami area in particular is arguably already fucked. No sea walls will ever keep the water out, because the "bedrock" is porous limestone (more or less old reefs) and when there's heavy flooding water just seeps up from the ground.

Texas is a different case. It's more or less built itself on being the "runaway shop state" - poaching everything from manufacturing to tech jobs from other states with heavy subsidies. The thing is, this has happened before. Smaller Northeastern states like NH, NJ, CT, and DE experienced a postwar boom due to poaching jobs/residents away from NYC/Boston/Philly. But COL inevitably rose, and eventually they became both less competitive than the new Sun Belt and the revived urban cores. Texas will eventually be lapped by someone else in just the same manner.
Texas's playbook was also previously California's playbook.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 3:16 PM
Austinlee's Avatar
Austinlee Austinlee is offline
Chillin' in The Burgh
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Spring Hill, Pittsburgh
Posts: 13,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamaorama View Post
I agree that Texas and Florida are growing very fast at the expense of other places, but there are some other trends working against them:

1. The fastest growing cities for the past several decades have always been mid-sized metros in business friendly states that are still affordable for people wishing to buy a new house in the suburbs AND have major universities and a general atmosphere of being "nice" and just enough "coolness". In other words, Raleigh and Nashville. And Salt Lake City. Simply being cheap and in a red state isn't enough, Jackson is bleeding like Cleveland.

- This doesn't describe cities in Florida and Texas anymore. Austin is getting expensive and Florida has always been pricey relative to incomes. A lot of Florida is trashy and uncool and this is the mainstream sentiment. I think Texas and Florida will increasingly have to compete with these other popular locations and that will diminish the share of the relocation pie that they get.

2. COVID and Big Tech re-thinking the corporate office/ HQ moving tax break game. It used to be that a city like Dallas could dominate the competition for getting a Fortune 500 relocation and those companies would bring in 50,000 high paid office jobs at a new Plano campus. But FAANG and tech in general doesn't do that anymore. Instead they are building campuses in all in-demand cities, like Amazon splitting between NoVa and Nashville and NYC and Apple splitting between Austin and the Research Triangle. They also have smaller offices in smaller cities that people know about, like St. Louis's CORTEX, the Microsoft presence in Fargo, IBM in Baton Rouge, etc. The future might be where the biggest most prestigious companies only have mega campuses in a few places like Silicon Valley and Austin and then have offices pretty much everywhere there is also a workforce for them to tap into.

3. People might move less than they used to. As housing prices go up due to low interest rates and disparate incomes, people might have less incentive to relocate if they are already in a cheaper area. Obviously people in expensive areas like California will leave as will people in hard-up places like West Virginia, but middle class people in Kansas City may never have a rational motivation to leave. It used to be that if you advanced in your career you would have to move to a top-tier city, but now with remote work maybe that won't happen? A software developer from Indiana might get an entry level job out of college that's in an office at a local manufacturing company, but then when they are ready to move up instead of going to Austin they'd work remote and not bother with the higher costs of living.

4. Demographic changes. The US may never grow as fast as it did between 1950-2000 again. As the country gets grayer and has fewer kids and illegal immigration is slowed, the ability for cities and states to rocket in population slows too.
Well thought out write up llama. Thanks.
__________________
Check out the latest developments in Pittsburgh:
Pittsburgh Rundown III
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 5:49 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Northern San Diego county, Sprinter. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprinter_(light_rail)
ah, what strange system!
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted May 3, 2021, 5:55 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Texas's playbook was also previously California's playbook.
Right, CA used to be relatively cheap, and unregulated, and much of its growth was initially powered by the feds, from aviation, to military, to aerospace. TX cannot do this dance forever, though probably will boom a lot longer than FL.

The only sure thing is that states won't be "the same" relative to one another a generation from now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:28 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.