Focusing on the fastest-growing American cities reinforces the idea that growth is good

For American communities, growth is generally good. Growth comes with multiple benefits including the idea that it is an important community to pay attention to. In other words, growth equals a higher status (and population stagnation or decline is bad).

So when USA Today publishes a list of the fastest-growing cities in each state, it helps reinforce the idea that explosive growth is good. Here are a few of the listings with higher rates of growth:

Arizona: Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale
• 2010-2018 pop. growth: 15.6% (state: 11.9%)
• Feb. 2019 unemployment: 4.3% (state: 5.1%)
• 2010-2017 job growth: 20.1% (state: 16.6%)
• Median household income: $61,506 (state: $56,581)…

Colorado: Greeley
• 2010-2018 pop. growth: 23.7% (state: 12.8%)
• Feb. 2019 unemployment: 2.9% (state: 3.7%)
• 2010-2017 job growth: 34.1% (state: 19.9%)
• Median household income: $68,884 (state: $69,117)…

Florida: The Villages
• 2010-2018 pop. growth: 36.6% (state: 13.0%)
• Feb. 2019 unemployment: 5.1% (state: 3.5%)
• 2010-2017 job growth: 42.9% (state: 19.5%)
• Median household income: $54,057 (state: $52,594)…

Oregon: Bend-Redmond
• 2010-2018 pop. growth: 21.7% (state: 9.2%)
• Feb. 2019 unemployment: 4.5% (state: 4.4%)
• 2010-2017 job growth: 36.0% (state: 17.8%)
• Median household income: $66,273 (state: $60,212)

Growth can have additional benefits beyond a higher status. Having more residents  is related to more taxes, more businesses, and more clout in the political realm. Growth can make local politicians who presided over the changes look good. Communities can change their character in significant ways when growth comes.

At the same time, growth can have a number of downsides: strained local services, lots of new residents in the community (which can lead to issues with more longer-term residents), the use of more land and resources, and an accrual of the benefits of growth to only some in the community (usually in the local growth machine) rather than the community as a whole. Furthermore, communities can usually only experience significant growth for a short period.

On the whole, there are many worthwhile American communities that have limited population growth (and the growth could be limited for a variety of reasons). Only paying attention to the fast-growing places and drawing lessons from those communities unnecessarily valorizes big population increases while diminishing the other factors that contribute to what makes a worth community to live in.

30 thoughts on “Focusing on the fastest-growing American cities reinforces the idea that growth is good

  1. Pingback: Trying to crate a bust-proof oil city | Legally Sociable

  2. Pingback: The legacy of Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Chicago as a global city | Legally Sociable

  3. Pingback: Can American residents and leaders be convinced population stagnation or loss is not that bad? | Legally Sociable

  4. Pingback: Leader who does not like “Mayor 1 percent” label joins Wall Street investment firm | Legally Sociable

  5. Pingback: A fight over potential Hasidic residents in a proposed new suburban subdivision outside New York City | Legally Sociable

  6. Pingback: At least 12 reasons Americans have the biggest houses in the world | Legally Sociable

  7. Pingback: Celebrating new development – and recognizing what is lost | Legally Sociable

  8. Pingback: Lamenting small town growth in Idaho | Legally Sociable

  9. Pingback: Aiming for resilient suburbs with long-term thinking about development | Legally Sociable

  10. Pingback: Welcome in Amazon, look for other businesses to follow? | Legally Sociable

  11. Pingback: The American communities paying people to move there | Legally Sociable

  12. Pingback: US with lowest population growth over a decade in its history | Legally Sociable

  13. Pingback: Selling Schaumburg, Illinois | Legally Sociable

  14. Pingback: Chicago slowly losing population and a few suburban counties barely gaining people | Legally Sociable

  15. Pingback: When new residents to an area bring a lot more money to spend on housing | Legally Sociable

  16. Pingback: Rumbling about Bears stadium at Arlington Park – just keep the taxpayers out of it | Legally Sociable

  17. Pingback: The later costs of sprawl | Legally Sociable

  18. Pingback: Declining Mexican immigrant population in Chicagoland | Legally Sociable

  19. Pingback: Cities that rise from the dead | Legally Sociable

  20. Pingback: States that are losing Congressional seats did not necessarily lose population | Legally Sociable

  21. Pingback: Where will the new work from home people in suburbs and other places want to settle and spend their money? | Legally Sociable

  22. Pingback: Illinois lost residents 2010 to 2020; discrepancies in year to year estimates and decennial count | Legally Sociable

  23. Pingback: Trying to keep up with growth in housing and jobs, Dallas edition | Legally Sociable

  24. Pingback: Halting new development out West due to lack of water | Legally Sociable

  25. Pingback: Ghost town, suburban O’Hare industrial property edition | Legally Sociable

  26. Pingback: Chicago’s population grew in the 2010s! | Legally Sociable

  27. Pingback: Slow housing construction in Chicago area, matching slow population growth | Legally Sociable

  28. Pingback: What explosive growth looks like, Austin and New Braunfels edition | Legally Sociable

  29. Pingback: Fighting the 2020 Census population count in Aurora, Illinois | Legally Sociable

  30. Pingback: The ten fastest growing American communities are all suburbs, all in South or West | Legally Sociable

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s