Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Heartofsong83
The largest decreases from the most populous metropolitan statistical areas (from Table 3. of the report) are:

Area / 2000-04 annual rate per 1000 / average annual number

San Francisco-Oakland-Freemont / -14.7 / -60,984

New York-Norther New Jersey-Long Island / -11.4 / -211,014

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy / -9.5 / -41,851

Los Angles-Long Beach-Santa Ana / -9.3 / -177,780

Not exactly the conservative hot beds. These are significant because the represent regional declines, not just people moving to the suburbs which is common in most major cities.

37 posted on 04/20/2006 2:37:23 PM PDT by Faraday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Faraday

I don't see any decline in LA. Likely for every person leaving, five more are coming in from across the border. Doubtful those people are taking the census poll.


41 posted on 04/20/2006 2:48:07 PM PDT by SixIron (Golf and liberal thinking- life's great frustrations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Faraday

Yet strangely, all four metropolitan areas have experienced tremendous housing price appreciation. Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh are in decline but with cheap housing.

The young people I know leaving Boston do so because they can't afford a home in which to raise a family. The job market and quality of life are still excellent here, as in the other metro areas, but supply and demand for housing are out of whack so the people who have the most to gain (young people with no current toehold in the housing market) have been moving elsewhere.


42 posted on 04/20/2006 2:48:37 PM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Faraday
This study doesn't take into account foreign immigration, birth rates or death rates. It's possible that many of the metropolitan areas and states with net domestic outmigration are sill growing, but that more Americans are moving out of those areas than moving in. For example, according to the census bureau, Utah has net outmigration for the 2000-2004 period, but is still growing faster than the rest of the U.S. due to relatively high birth rates and foreign immigration.

By the way, the Census Bureau changed the way they defined metropolitan areas for the 2000 census, divorcing many of the exurban parts of the largest metropolitan areas (like New York and L.A.) from the larger Metro. For example, Orange and Dutchess County, NY (which are a growing exurban area north of NYC) are no longer part of the larger NYC metro area, and San Bernadino-Riverside was removed from the L.A. Metro area. Comparisons between 2000 and 1990 metro area numbers aren't necessarily accurate unless the 1990 numbers have been adjusted to reflect the new metro area definitions. I assume that the census bureau has done so for the purposes of the study on their website.
100 posted on 04/20/2006 10:32:13 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson