Who is driving newfound Midwestern population growth?

Posted on by

I wrote in January about the modestly increasing population in the Midwest and this piece from yesterday suggests housing affordability is behind the change. Let’s say this is true and it is more than a one or two year pattern: more people are moving to the Midwest and they are doing so because they can still get good housing for less than $350,000. Who exactly are these movers? Some speculation from yesterday’s piece:

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

Take Rockford, the most popular housing market from the Zillow report. Although it’s within easy driving distance of Chicago, the average home value is about $170,000, to Chicago’s $300,000. A hybrid worker could conceivably work from Chicago a day or two a week while paying much less for a house than if they lived in the city. The same goes for Milwaukee, which is also an hour and a half from Chicago…

In addition to proximity to a large city, what distinguishes bright spots such as Columbus and Indianapolis from less desirable midwestern cities is the availability of good-paying jobs. After all, few people can buy a house, even for $300,000, if they can’t find work nearby. According to OSU’s Partridge, the midwestern cities that were less reliant on manufacturing in the 1950s are the ones doing well now. These places were never dependent on factory jobs, so they were better able to weather the steep decline in U.S. manufacturing that began decades ago. “Because they had a more service-oriented composition of businesses, they did much better,” Partridge said. Today, these cities offer plentiful finance, tech, and health-care jobs. JPMorganChase employs 18,000 people in Columbus, for example; the pharmaceutical company Lilly is headquartered in Indianapolis.

Two kinds of people are referenced: people who work remotely at least part-time and those who can access good-paying white collar jobs. This may require certain levels of education and/or job experience.

For years, I have read discussions about how Americans who need cheaper housing could move to places with cheaper housing. Particularly in comparison to the most expensive housing markets, often on the coasts, there is decent housing to be had in other places. This is easier than it looks. People have ties to particular social and family networks as well as places. Additionally, if a lot of people moved to these cheaper places, this drives the prices up.

What might a more accurate version of this story be (and someone must have some data to support or counter this)? Something like: those with some resources and education can move to the Midwest for particular jobs and take advantage of comparatively cheaper housing compared to high-priced housing markets. This means this potential opportunity is not necessarily available to everyone.

Voter turnout in the Chicago suburbs slightly up or down last week

Posted on by

Voter turnout numbers in last week’s primary elections show limited change from previous years:

Photo by Edmond Dantu00e8s on Pexels.com

Voter turnout Tuesday was greater than 2022’s midterm primary in suburban Cook, DuPage and Kane counties, but lower than four years ago in Lake, McHenry and Will counties…

DuPage County is currently reporting the highest turnout level at 24.6%, which could increase when mail-in stragglers are eventually reported. In the 2022 midterm primary, DuPage was the only county with more than 20% turnout among the suburban collar counties…

Lake County had the lowest voter turnout in the suburbs at 17.7% Tuesday. That’s down from 18.4% in 2022…

McHenry County is currently reporting 18% voter turnout, down from 19.6% in 2022. In Will County, turnout was 19.1% Tuesday, down slightly from 19.5% in 2022.

Most of the article tries to explain why these numbers are what they are. The underlying question seems to be this: have Americans eligible to vote lost interest in voting? About a fifth of suburban voters do so. What, if anything, would really change that number?

The apathy of suburban voters also matters because candidates will want their votes in numerous elections in November and in 2028. In plenty of states, suburbanites will determine elections because of the number of people who live in such places and the presence of both Democrats and Republicans.

Of course, in later races that are not really contested, these low turnout primary votes then set who will win the November election. To not vote in some primaries means voters will have limited choices in November.

Blood plasma centers showing up in wealthier suburbia

Posted on by

Suburban strip malls and office buildings now house more blood plasma centers:

Photo by Charlie-Helen Robinson on Pexels.com

Every day, an estimated 215,000 people donate plasma, the yellowish liquid component of blood. Mr. Briseño is among them. He is not jobless or facing eviction, but, like many in the American middle class, he is caught in the vise of rising expenses and wages that aren’t growing fast enough to cover them. So he is turning to a method more commonly associated with the lowest-income Americans. For people like him, an extra $600 or so a month can mean making a mortgage payment or covering increased health-insurance costs.

While no one publishes statistics on the exact incomes of people who sell their blood plasma, the location of the centers suggests a shift toward a less financially desperate clientele. A recent study by researchers at Washington University in St. Louis and the University of Colorado, Boulder, observed that while older plasma centers are clustered in low-income areas, newer centers were increasingly likely to open in middle-class neighborhoods. A New York Times analysis shows the trend has continued: Centers have sprung up in more than 100 such neighborhoods, in suburbs and wealthier sections of cities, since researchers finished collecting their data in 2021…

For decades, plasma centers have been concentrated largely in impoverished and under-resourced neighborhoods and faced charges of exploitation. In her 2023 book, “Blood Money: The Story of Life, Death, and Profit Inside America’s Blood Industry,” Kathleen McLaughlin explored how plasma centers targeted, among others, laid-off autoworkers in the Rust Belt and communities along the U.S-Mexican border.

The article interprets the findings as even the people who made it to suburbia – often assumed in American society to be wealthier – also feel the financial need to donate plasma.

But I wonder if this is the best way to interpret this. Suburbia is much more complex and diverse than the images of white and wealthier bedroom suburbs in the postwar era. The era of a single earner supporting a growing suburban family is long gone. Across metropolitan regions, a variety of residents live with wealthier communities right next to working-class communities, places with lots of white collar jobs near places with manual labor and working-class jobs.

And what if this is not just about financial need. For Americans of different social classes, what do they see as moral or permissible to sell or do if they need money? What if the perceptions about selling plasma have changed more broadly in American society?

Or what if this is more about expanding markets. If there are already concentrations of plasma centers in lower-income neighborhoods, perhaps this is the next stage of finding more people to donate. The other areas are already saturated; this is a growing industry. The article says there are billions of dollars at stake in the industry.

I have not seen any local suburban concerns about this but I wonder if some communities or leaders or residents see plasma centers as a negative use of land in the kind of community they are in.

Canadian geese on my roof

Posted on by

Living in the suburbs offers some connections with nature. Manicured lawns, trees, and geese on the roof?

This was the sight I saw a few days ago while driving away from my house: two Canadian geese sitting on my roof. It is not a surprise to see geese in the area. They fly overhead. They walk in the field in the park around the corner. They sit on the pond behind us and walk up into our yard. They occasionally try to cross local roads and tie up traffic.

But I have never seen geese on top of a house. Why would they want to go up there? There hopefully is a not good food up there. If they need a better view, they can fly. Is it safer from predators? Is it somewhere different?

I do not usually look up at my roofline while in front my house. Maybe I should. Perhaps there is more wildlife up there. How about the coyotes that have moved into suburban spaces? The hawk that sometimes sits in the big tree in our backyard? The many squirrels running? Or maybe the one-time appearance of the geese will keep others away.

Fewer children born in the US affects one of the major reasons given for living in the suburbs

Posted on by

Multiple intertwined social forces created the American suburbs as we know them today. One factor involves raising children in the suburbs. The suburbs are perceived by many to be the best places to raise children due to their houses, yards, quieter environments compared to the city, good schools, and other amenities. And since Americans often want or expect their children to do better than themselves, the suburbs are the place in which they believe this happens.

Photo by Yunuen Zempoaltecatl on Pexels.com

What happens if fewer children are born in the United States? This will not necessarily stop people from living in or wanting to live in the suburbs. But it could change their calculations about where to live or how to live in the suburbs. Some quick examples of how this might play out:

  1. Suburbs are built on the idea of growth: new subdivisions, new activity. If growth slows, communities have a different identity and have to draw on different revenue sources. With less growth, communities shift to maintenance or building in different ways (see #2).
  2. Suburbs have historically prioritized single-family homes as they provide space for nuclear families. But if fewer people need the space and yards of single-family homes (plus the issue of current prices), communities and developers will go for more townhouses and condos.
  3. There is a reduced need for schools. Education is often viewed in the United States as the tool for social advancement. Many suburbs take pride in their schools. Growing suburbs equaled more schools. But fewer kids in the community means fewer enrolled students.
  4. A suburban lifestyle built around kids’ activities and driving them around. The suburbs often require driving kids to school, sports, religious congregations, and more. The driving will not necessarily cease but the era of “Walmart moms” and “soccer moms” might diminish.

Many have complained that the streets of the suburbs are quieter than they used to be because kids are now inside or in organized activities. What if the suburban streets of the future (and schools and playgrounds and park districts and so on) are quiet because there are no kids living in suburbia?

Las Vegas quickly on the (sports) map

Posted on by

It is rare for a city to add professional sports teams at the rate at which Las Vegas is going:

Photo by Masood Aslami on Pexels.com

With the potential for a city to add an NBA franchise in time for 2028, Vegas could go from no Big Four teams to become the 13th city with an MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL team in the span of 11 years.

Several things may have happened in a relatively short amount of time:

  1. The city has grown rapidly in recent decades. The city had 125,787 people in 1970 (too small to have 4 sports franchises), 258,295 in 1990 (still on the smaller side), and 583,756 people in 2010 (a big city).
  2. It is a new market. This presents a chance to have new fans.
  3. Gambling is now okay with every major sport because of the revenue generated. That obstacle is gone.
  4. The city and other governments are willing to provide public money for stadiums. Owners and teams really like this.

At some point, Las Vegas will not grow like it has in the past (it already slowed between 2010 to 2020 to 10%). At some point, a team might want to leave Las Vegas for greener pastures. But for now, Las Vegas is a shiny new sports city. If the NBA does indeed start a franchise there in the next few years, the teams in the four major sports help give the city and region a certain status.

Lower US birth rates, closing K-12 schools

Posted on by

What happens in American communities when schools close because there are fewer kids?

Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels.com

The district is one among many in the United States that have closed schools and are considering closing more. One of the primary reasons is that many adults in the US are simply not having kids, or having fewer of them. And an increasing number of those who do are instead sending their kids to private schools or homeschooling them.

That trend, experts say, means that more US schools are becoming underenrolled, which places school districts in a difficult financial situation because that decline in students means they get less public funding. They must then decide between uprooting students from familiar surroundings and friends or keeping those institutions open even if it doesn’t make fiscal sense…

While districts had planned for fewer students in the coming years, the Covid-19 pandemic and the associated virtual learning accelerated that downturn, Dee said. In fall of 2020, enrollment in US public schools decreased by 1.1 million, according to a study co-authored by Dee.

This trend could have lots of different effects. What happens in communities where schools brought people together and also served like community centers? There might be other settings that could serve this purpose but schools have a way of bringing parents, students, and community members together. What happens to the school properties; how will they be used in the future? A school may have been there for decades and the neighbors might not like what is proposed next for the land. Or they may not like a vacant building if the property is not sold or there is limited interested in redevelopment.

Since Americans tend to think growth is good, do these changes also lead people to think schools are failing or doing worse? If the cause of closing schools is primarily having fewer schools, will people perceive schools are not doing what they should? Even more complicated: local populations could be growing or not declining and schools could still close if fewer people are having children.

Finally, what are good ways to memorialize or celebrate a school and what it meant when it closes? Even if the building is no longer there or it is no longer home to students, there are ways to keep its memory alive.

Patterns in foreclosures and the top three metro areas in the United States for foreclosures

Posted on by

Where do American homeowners face the highest numbers of foreclosures?

Photo by Tiemy Pixel on Pexels.com

Indianapolis – the state’s largest city – has been particularly hard hit. The metro recorded one foreclosure filing for every 1,249 homes in February, giving it the third-highest foreclosure rate in the nation.

Only Lakeland and Punta Gorda in Florida reported worse figures for metros. Both of which have faced persistently high foreclosure levels…

Experts say a combination of rising property taxes, higher insurance premiums and the cost of maintaining aging homes is putting pressure on many Indiana homeowners…

In February, foreclosure activity across the country reached 38,840 properties – a 20 percent increase compared with the same month last year.

After the housing crisis of the late 2000s, keeping track of foreclosures is an interesting business. Is the United States on the verge of sharp rise in foreclosures? Did the country address the issues that contributed to the crisis nearly two decades ago?

One way to look at foreclosures is to consider them from the role of borrowers. How do people and households make hard choices about their budgets when resources are lacking? What is the role of personal responsibility? If more individual households are not able to pay their mortgage, this can lead to large effects.

But this article considers foreclosures by states and metro areas. What if foreclosures are the result of systems and local conditions? (I do not find states as a particularly helpful geography; housing situations can vary across a state even though state policies or conditions could exert similar effects across a state.) What is it about these metro areas that they have higher rates of foreclosures? What are the factors influencing this across owners, lenders, officials, and local conditions in a region? And what could be done on a regional level to lower the number of foreclosures as compared to tackling this at a state and national level? What might help in Lakeland might not be what helps in Indianapolis.

More data centers means more power plants coming

Posted on by

Where will the power come from for all the data centers recently built, under construction, and in the works?

Photo by Miguel u00c1. Padriu00f1u00e1n on Pexels.com

xAI’s rivals are all building similarly large data centers to develop their most powerful generative-AI models; a metropolis’s worth of electricity will surge through facilities that occupy a few city blocks. These companies have primarily made their chatbots “smarter” not by writing niftier code but by making them bigger: ramming more data through more powerful computer chips that use more electricity. OpenAI has announced plans for facilities requiring more than 30 gigawatts of power in total—more than the largest recorded demand for all of New England. Since ChatGPT’s launch, in November 2022, the capital expenditures of Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, and Google have exceeded $600 billion, and much of that spending has gone toward data centers—more, even after adjusting for inflation, than the government spent to build the entire interstate-highway system. “These are the largest single points of consumption of electricity in history,” Jesse Jenkins, a climate modeler at Princeton, told me.

Even conservative analyses forecast that the tech industry will drop the equivalent of roughly 40 Seattles onto America’s grid within a decade; aggressive scenarios predict more than 60 in half that time. According to Siddharth Singh, an energy-investment analyst at the International Energy Agency, by 2030, U.S. data centers will consume more electricity than all of the country’s heavy industries—more than the cement, steel, chemical, car, and other industrial facilities put together. Roughly half of that demand will come from data centers equipped for the particular needs of generative AI—programs, such as ChatGPT, that can produce text and images, solve complex math problems, and perhaps one day inform scientific discoveries…

The optimist’s case is that, by then, advanced nuclear reactors will have obviated many of the new fossil-fuel plants, and AI tools will have invented technologies that can solve the climate crisis. That may well happen. But today, “the market has converged on Add gas now, and then add nuclear later,” Jenkins said. In other words, if natural-gas turbines seem to offer the most expedient path to an AI-enhanced future, then clean air may have to wait…

Northern Virginia offers a glimpse into what the AI rush may bring to the rest of the nation. Loudoun is running out of space, but new data-center hubs are popping up in Phoenix, Atlanta, and Dallas. Amazon and Meta are building AI data centers in Indiana and Louisiana, respectively, that will each require more than two gigawatts of electricity, dozens of times more than standard facilities. OpenAI has proposed that the U.S. establish “AI Economic Zones”: little Loudouns everywhere.

Infrastructure is necessary to keep the modern world going but does not always get much attention until there are big changes (good or bad). We expect, electricity, water, the Internet, roads, and more to just be there and work just fine. Each of these required large-scale efforts to build and require a lot to maintain. AI may appear through the air but it is based by a massive infrastructure that includes land, servers, water, and electricity. Putting this all together is no easy task as it takes years, if not longer, to plan, find funding, get building approval, and complete construction.

Not noted as much in this article is how opposition to data centers has often focused on these infrastructure aspects. Who will pay for the water and electricity needed? What happens if there is air and noise pollution? Residents tend not to want to live near power plants, waste transfer facilities, and sewage treatment plants. How many people want to live near data centers?

Given the resources needed for data centers, how much are utility companies supporting these plans? Development, particularly intensive development, can generate new business. Growth machines, coalitions of local leaders and organizations, benefit from new development.

Funding local services via property taxes or state funds

Posted on by

What should be the formula by which local governments and the state of Illinois contribute monies for local services? There might be change coming:

Photo by KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA on Pexels.com

The concern centers on the Local Government Distributive Fund, the long-standing revenue-sharing mechanism that sends a portion of state income tax collections to cities and towns across Illinois.

Illinois mayors are warning that Pritzker’s proposed fiscal year 2027 budget plan reduces the share of state income-tax revenue distributed to local governments, a shift that would force many municipalities to make tough choices.

The proposal would lower the municipal share of income tax revenue distributed through the fund from 6.47% to 6.23%, meaning cities and villages would receive about $60 million less than they would under the current formula. Lawmakers have reduced that share significantly over the years, starting with a substantial cut from the 10% level that persisted prior to 2011 when lawmakers significantly increased the income tax.

While the change would send more money to the state, it would squeeze local governments that rely heavily on property taxes to fund services. Pulling additional dollars from the LGDF risks shifting the burden onto Illinois homeowners, who already face some of the highest property tax bills in the country. Property taxes are set locally, but state decisions about revenue sharing inevitably shape how much local governments must rely on them. 

Several matters appear to be at play:

  1. Local residents and leaders tend to like more local oversight of government and funds. But they are not necessarily opposed to getting funds from elsewhere – like the state – to then spend locally.
  2. Who should be making “tough choices”? Let’s say the formula is reconfigured; what local services are at risk for Illinois communities? Or where is that extra money the state is keeping then being spent? Would that money be spent in ways that helps lot of people?
  3. Property taxes are a hot button issue in many places. People like their property values going up but they do not like their property taxes going up along with that. And property taxes pay for the local services that help support their property values (schools, local amenities, etc.). If people don’t want property taxes to keep going up, what would local communities actually cut or scale back?

Percentage-wise, the formula change seems small but this gets at a fundamental issue in the American political and social system: there are multiple layers of government that provide for residents. Americans tend to like local control but townships, counties, states, and the federal government also provide services. The optimal distribution of funding and services is up for negotiation and the debate grows stronger when there is less money to go around.