Another worry is the size of the boomer population, and that they are passing away now and for the next while.
- 1,610
Well, pal, I hate to tell you this...STLEnginerd wrote: ↑May 04, 2023There is a third way which is 'have more babies' but short of illegalizing birth control i don't see that happening.
Yep, and a declining workforce typically means that labor costs (aka wages) increase commensurately. Fewer/more expensive workers make it hard to maintain all those extra miles of roads, transmission lines, sewerage, etc. that make suburbs livable. Our ruling class overlords seem determined to replace wage/debt slaves with robot slaves, but then who will buy the products the robo-slaves produce and service the debts that keep said ruling class on the proverbial throne? So many contradictions to resolve if we're to maintain the status quo...quincunx wrote: ↑May 04, 2023Another worry is the size of the boomer population, and that they are passing away now and for the next while.
- 3,766
^Agree on all points, but that said, peer cities are growing.
If we consolidate government to some extent, it is less likely the Kim Gardners of the world get elected. These type of "leaders" do nothing more than taint our national reputation and hurt residents.
The wider voting pool should get us stronger candidates and leaders. We need leaders that have a love and a vision for this region's future. If you are a local leader and you truly love
St. Louis and not yourself/your own political career, you would do what's best for it. Right now, none of the local leaders want to give up their power or their piece of the pie, for the greater good of St. Louis. Hell, the board of freeholders can't even get their act together, nor is there any push to get things moving. It is sad how much untapped potential is being left on the table while politicians here fight and argue about things that do not make our lives more prosperous.
If we consolidate government to some extent, it is less likely the Kim Gardners of the world get elected. These type of "leaders" do nothing more than taint our national reputation and hurt residents.
The wider voting pool should get us stronger candidates and leaders. We need leaders that have a love and a vision for this region's future. If you are a local leader and you truly love
St. Louis and not yourself/your own political career, you would do what's best for it. Right now, none of the local leaders want to give up their power or their piece of the pie, for the greater good of St. Louis. Hell, the board of freeholders can't even get their act together, nor is there any push to get things moving. It is sad how much untapped potential is being left on the table while politicians here fight and argue about things that do not make our lives more prosperous.
- 1,792
So i support consolidation, but i am not sure i agree a wider voting pool will get us better candidates. Who are these candidates that will arise suddenly post merger? Look at who is in charge in the county, will that suddenly change when the city merges. I actually think the city has a much more engaged leadership at the moment.
I'm not even entirely convince Kim Gardener was bad and certainly not as bad as the narrative would have us believe. The Greitens and McCloskey stuff were politicized and she overplayed her hand. I think her approach to staying in power has ultimately been destructive to the CAO, but I think the move to oust her is more political than about making the office operate better. They should have just funded a campaign to unseat her which is fair play IMHO.
Some peer cities are growing. Some are not. Our city stats look worse than other cities but our actual results at an MSA level are pretty on par with many of them. Consolidation improves perception which ultimately influences reality in positive ways, but these are second order effects.
I'm not even entirely convince Kim Gardener was bad and certainly not as bad as the narrative would have us believe. The Greitens and McCloskey stuff were politicized and she overplayed her hand. I think her approach to staying in power has ultimately been destructive to the CAO, but I think the move to oust her is more political than about making the office operate better. They should have just funded a campaign to unseat her which is fair play IMHO.
Some peer cities are growing. Some are not. Our city stats look worse than other cities but our actual results at an MSA level are pretty on par with many of them. Consolidation improves perception which ultimately influences reality in positive ways, but these are second order effects.
- 1,642
There is no "e" in Gardner. You need to update your chatbot.
But know that there is an "e" in Nurse.
- 985
Get the sense that some the next few years will be hard to shake out and what may have been true with metro growth trends in the past and present won't be true going forward.
There are a couple of things that do play into the St. Louis area's favor that could cause growth. One is that cost of living is starting to make a number of areas less desirable to even undesirable so a desire for lower cost of living areas will make people seek new areas. Another is water availability. Since a number of places don't have sustainable long-term supplies of water and that will hurt quality of life for residents and also a number of industrial processes consume large amounts of water.
There are a couple of things that do play into the St. Louis area's favor that could cause growth. One is that cost of living is starting to make a number of areas less desirable to even undesirable so a desire for lower cost of living areas will make people seek new areas. Another is water availability. Since a number of places don't have sustainable long-term supplies of water and that will hurt quality of life for residents and also a number of industrial processes consume large amounts of water.
- 733
3 movements will spur growth:
1) consolidation
2) emphasis on security for our national and international reputation improvement
3) emphasis on education
1) consolidation
2) emphasis on security for our national and international reputation improvement
3) emphasis on education
Is it true that most metros (other than Texas) aren't really growing absent immigration adds? Existing americans aren't really having kids so cities that are growing are mostly adding new residents via immigration.
As such, I think the best (but not easiest) way to turn-around the population decline here is to attract more immigrants.
As such, I think the best (but not easiest) way to turn-around the population decline here is to attract more immigrants.
4) immigration.whitherSTL wrote: ↑May 05, 20233 movements will spur growth:
1) consolidation
2) emphasis on security for our national and international reputation improvement
3) emphasis on education
- 2,430
Not quite sure about most metros but it is true that most principle cities have seen net domestic migration loss even before the pandemic and have depended upon international migration and natural increase (more births than deaths) for growth.soulardx wrote: ↑May 05, 2023Is it true that most metros (other than Texas) aren't really growing absent immigration adds? Existing americans aren't really having kids so cities that are growing are mostly adding new residents via immigration.
As such, I think the best (but not easiest) way to turn-around the population decline here is to attract more immigrants.
Also folks should keep in mind the Census Bureau has been estimating recent population struggles in most core counties across the country. That includes for our strongest peers such as Cuyahoga/Cleveland and Allegheny/Pittsburgh as well as counties such as Davidson/Nasvhille and Marion/Indianapolis. All of these counties have smaller 2022 population estimates than the 2020 Census count. (2022 city estimates will be released later this month.)
Really interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ities.html
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
- 1,610
What is the x-axis on this chart? I don't understand what I'm looking at.PeterXCV wrote: ↑May 15, 2023Really interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ities.html
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
- 337
Years 2010 through 2020Bart Harley Jarvis wrote:What is the x-axis on this chart? I don't understand what I'm looking at.PeterXCV wrote: ↑May 15, 2023Really interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ities.html
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
- 985
I'm curious if there is any context as to why there is some sharp changes in the graphs in a short period of time? Did certain events happen at those time periods?PeterXCV wrote: ↑May 15, 2023Really interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ities.html
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
This coming decade will be very intersting to see how forutunes change in areas. The cost of living issue is changing migration patterns. Some of the sun belt cities are starting to get expensive, which could potentially cause the growth to slow down.
Assuming Global Warming isn't just a conspiracy to take away our freedumbs, then we'll start seeing climate-related migration within the next decade as well. All of the maps I've seen project a hard time for the StL region, but it will get way worse and sooner in the sunbelt and southwest. We're gonna have a real problem with wet bulb temperatures, but we're at least unlikely to run out of potable water or arable land....
Stltoday - Low fertility rates, high housing prices mean fewer children in most states
"Missouri saw its child population decline by 1% during the same period."
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... ccfd3.html
"Missouri saw its child population decline by 1% during the same period."
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... ccfd3.html
- 1,792
A bit confusing. there are 13 intervals on the chart which doesn't correspond to a data point each year between 2010 and 2020 (should be 11). What am I missing?LArchitecture wrote: ↑May 15, 2023Years 2010 through 2020Bart Harley Jarvis wrote:What is the x-axis on this chart? I don't understand what I'm looking at.PeterXCV wrote: ↑May 15, 2023Really interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ities.html
St. Louis has been pretty stable in terms of inflow of both college educated (slight positive) and non-college educated (slight negative) people. Midwestern cities had some surprising results. Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all look bad, Kansas City's doing quite well, Indy & Columbus are starting to struggle. Minneapolis had a huge inflow of college-educated people in the 2010s that's slowing.
The main reason i started digging is to figure out the timeframe of each data point to try and understand local drivers of population changes. Things like plant closures or loss of major contracts or relocations/mergers by some of our local companies could have a pretty large local migration impact. would be very interesting to overline against a timeline of local events.
- 1,291
TL;DR: hardly anyone can afford to have kids these days, and it's not going to get better.quincunx wrote: ↑May 16, 2023Stltoday - Low fertility rates, high housing prices mean fewer children in most states
"Missouri saw its child population decline by 1% during the same period."
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... ccfd3.html
- 2,056
^honestly the Expanded Child Tax Credit needs to make a comeback once inflation gets under control. Cut child poverty in half, and from personal experience the extra $$ is a godsend for daycare/schooling costs.
- 1,610
^socialistpattimagee wrote: ↑May 17, 2023^honestly the Expanded Child Tax Credit needs to make a comeback once inflation gets under control. Cut child poverty in half, and from personal experience the extra $$ is a godsend for daycare/schooling costs.
Stltoday - Area population down
"In St. Louis County, the state's most populous, all but six of 88 municipalities lost population, according to the estimates. So did most of the 46 municipalities in Madison, Monroe and St. Clair counties in the Metro East."
https://www.stltoday.com/area-populatio ... 23d4c.html
"In St. Louis County, the state's most populous, all but six of 88 municipalities lost population, according to the estimates. So did most of the 46 municipalities in Madison, Monroe and St. Clair counties in the Metro East."
https://www.stltoday.com/area-populatio ... 23d4c.html