One prediction that Dallas/Fort Worth-Houston-Austin will replace New York-Los Angeles-Chicago by 2100

moveBuddha has a prediction about which three US cities will have the most people by the end of this century:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com
  • The future belongs to Texas.  America’s three biggest cities by 2100 will be #1 Dallas, #2 Houston, and #3 Austin. Fast-growing San Antonio also ranks at #11.
  • The Sunbelt keeps rising. Phoenix is projected to be the 4th-biggest U.S. city by population in 2100. Other Sunbelt cities in the top 10 are #6 Atlanta, #9 Orlando, and #10 Miami.
  • NYC and L.A. are currently the top two biggest U.S. cities, but they’re projected to fall to #5 and #7, respectively, by the year 2100.

The methodology to arrive at this?

We wanted to know at moveBuddha what U.S. metropolitan areas would see the biggest population growth by 2100. We did this by using the compound annual population growth rate of the biggest U.S. metro areas (250,000 residents or more) between the 2010 and 2020 U.S. Census estimates and extrapolating it over 80 years.

This was an inexact science, and growth rates are bound to change. But it gave us a rough idea of which American cities may rise to the top by the dawning of the 22nd century. Climate change effects, migration patterns from climate change, and other unforeseen events could change things.

Two parts of this projection seem implausible to me. First, extrapolating the current rates of growth to last for more than seven decades. Growth rates will likely rise or fall across different metropolitan regions. It is hard to imagine many places will be able to keep up high rates of growth for that long. Second, the size of these regions. There is no US region currently near the predicted populations in 2100. Would this come from significant increases in density in the central areas or even more sprawling regions? It would be interesting to see where all those people would live and work.

Of course, at this point it is hard to bet against the ongoing population growth of the Sunbelt.

And what would this do to the status of New York City and Los Angeles? Chicago has some experience with this but could NYC handle this well?

Gen Z headed South looking for cheaper and bigger houses?

Sunbelt populations are growing. One reason is because Gen Z is moving to the South for housing:

Photo by Curtis Adams on Pexels.com

Traditionally, younger generations have flocked to cities to start their careers and enjoy the hustle and bustle of urban life. However, Gen Z is proving to be a little different, with more and more moving to the South in favor of large outdoor spaces, low cost of living and a slower pace of life…

The Southern region boasts more affordable housing and living space, which is becoming increasingly attractive to Gen Z as well as some Millennials and older adults who are fed up with cramped city life.

According to Storage Cafe, the average floor area of single-family homes sold in the South increased by 60 square feet between 2019 and 2022, meaning the average is now 2,608 square feet…

And since Gen Z is more likely to rent rather than own a home currently, it makes sense that more of the younger generation would be seeking out spaces where housing costs are cheaper.

I would be interested in seeing more numbers here. Are Gen Z movers doing so at similar rates as other Americans?

Is one of the side effects of all this movement a point where housing and opportunities in the South are no longer as attractive?

The final part of the article hints at the possible political ramifications of these moves. I would want to hear more about how younger adults might transform communities and day-to-day life in other ways. Is this a continuation of the American suburban dream with more liberal politics thrown on top?

Dallas-Fort Worth metro area predicted to pass Chicago area in population in roughly a decade

Which American metropolitan areas are poised for large population gains in the coming years? One prediction says Dallas-Fort Worth will soon be the third largest metro area:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Dallas-Fort Worth is one of the country’s fastest growing metropolitan areas…

Business expansion and relocations are fueling the Dallas region’s growth, putting it on track to overtake the Chicago area and become the third-most-populous metro within the decade…

Dallas-Fort Worth is on track to be the only U.S. metropolitan area to house two cities with populations over 1 million in the next five years, as people and companies seek profit, opportunity and room to grow.

The population shift to the Sunbelt continues.

As for Chicago, it was passed by Toronto in population, Houston might pass it soon, and Dallas-Fort Worth pass the metropolitan area population. How far will the city and metropolitan area be down lists in a few decades?

Cities and metropolitan areas rise and fall in population over time. Chicago was once smaller than St. Louis than shot past it with the latter losing a lot of population in the 1900s. Where will the new boom cities be?

Capping the population of suburbs

What if each of the thousands of American suburban communities had a maximum population? I had the idea after rereading David Macaulay’s City:

What could the benefits be for American suburbs? As described here, the problems that come with more residents than resources would not occur. Suburbs could be a similar size. Each suburb could have facilities for residents to access and infrastructure they need.

This would go against the American ideal that growth – including population growth in suburbs, cities, and communities – is good. Some suburbs are bigger than others. Americans might often assume because those communities are more successful and desirable. They have competed well. But, that might not be the full story. Are some communities small for particular reasons? Is growth always good?

I am under no illusions that most Americans would want a population cap for suburbs or any other community. And simply capping the population does not address all the issues communities and their residents face. But, it is interesting to consider what good might come from planning ahead for meeting needs in communities with a maximum population.

Measuring community success with “fully occupied homes and anchored schools”

How might we know whether a small town is declining or just experiencing change? Here is one suggestion:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The University of Illinois Extension earlier this year held a series of webinars to arm leaders of rural communities with positive data, such as fully occupied homes and anchored schools, while suggesting language those leaders should use to recruit people to move to rural towns, which are often coping with negative stereotypes…

Indeed, residents and leaders in Cullom and Wenona, a town of 1,000 an hour’s drive away and about 25 miles south of the LaSalle-Peru area, say their towns are very much in demand. Cullom Mayor Barbara Hahn said that people — mostly from larger cities around the state — call her “all the time” to see if there are any houses for sale and she mostly has to tell them that the housing stock is at capacity…

But Neste said that the lack of population increase is not because rural life is undesirable…

The circumstances lead to one inescapable, albeit morbid, conclusion, experts say. Prospective rural dwellers are left waiting for seniors occupying single-family homes to die.

What is lurking behind this discussion is an assumption in the United States about communities: they are considered healthiest if they are growing. Communities whose populations are stagnant or declining are often viewed as not doing well. There needs to be construction, population growth, and new businesses in a community for outsiders to suggest that it is doing well. The end of this story above tells of one downstate small town that implemented a TIF district and took on risk in order to build some new housing.

But, not all communities in the United States grow decade after decade. Some are growing now, particularly in the Sunbelt. A number of cities, suburbs, and small towns reached their population peak in the past. Some of these examples are regularly discussed, such as Detroit or Chicago or rural small towns.

The measures suggested above offer some different ways of discussing the vitality of a community. In-demand housing is something Americans understand; if there are few housing units available, this suggests people like the community. Having thriving schools is another aspect Americans like as good schools suggest a community has plenty of children and the community rallies around an institution that can help the next generation succeed.

Other measures that might also be helpful:

-The number of active community groups. This suggests people want to participate.

-The number of local jobs available per resident. Are there economic opportunities in the community?

-The number of local businesses owned by residents or nearby residents. This highlights local business activity compared to national firms (like dollar stores or fast food restaurants).

More broadly, a more open conversation among Americans about what marks a healthy or good or desirable community could provide more measures than just population growth.

The cities college graduates are leaving, the cities college graduates are going to

A new analysis suggests college graduates are leaving some of the costliest metropolitan areas and instead moving to other metropolitan areas:

Looking at these two lists, several things stand out:

  1. Among the most expensive cities, not all have turned negative regarding college graduates moving in or out. What is different in Boston, Honolulu, Miami, San Diego and Seattle? (Some possible factors: different economic activities, the weather, relative prices, their locations within certain regions, they are not the biggest cities.)
  2. Some of the 41 other large metros are clearly more attractive than others for college graduates. This includes Atlanta, Austin, Charlotte, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Jacksonville, Las Vegas, Nashville, Phoenix, Portland, Raleigh, San Antonio, and Tampa. The Sunbelt continues to grow? Will these population changes in these cities change the conditions within these cities? Are these the current hot places to be (subject to change)?
  3. Other large metro areas might have cheaper housing and lower costs of living but they are not necessarily attracting college graduates. This includes Buffalo, Detroit, Hartford, Milwaukee, and Rochester. Is it a coincidence that these are Rust Belt metropolitan regions?

Generally, cities and regions want college graduates who can add to the population and the human capital available. But, the sorting of the college graduates across locations could have profound consequences.

What does it mean that India’s population will pass China’s population?

India will soon have more people than China. What does that mean?

Photo by Still Pixels on Pexels.com

The United Nations has said India’s population is projected to surpass China’s sometime this year. Many demographers estimate it could happen this month, if it hasn’t already. India’s population is expected to reach 1.429 billion by the end of the year, according to the U.N. China will fall to second place, with 1.426 billion people. Both dwarf the U.S. at a projected 340 million.

India’s rising population means it’s likely to keep its economy growing, buy more of the world’s goods and play a bigger role in global affairs, even as it grapples with poverty and a lack of jobs. 

China’s demographic headwinds will make it harder for the country to achieve its economic ambitions, or to supplant the U.S. as the world’s biggest economy, despite its rising wealth and military power…

India’s population is expected to keep growing for the next four decades, peaking at nearly 1.7 billion in 2063. China’s population, which declined last year for the first time since famines in the 1960s, according to government data, is projected to shrink rapidly. By the start of the next century, India’s population is expected to be double that of China’s.    

Numbers are just numbers; we give them significance. Is this just about large numbers and their ability to impress people? Here, two countries have nearly a billion and half people each. That is a lot of people and far ahead of the next most populous countries.

It could also be about being the country with the most people. This has been China for a while but will soon be India. Does having the most people provide an exalted status?

Or, is it about economic activity and growth. A large and growing population means economic opportunities internally and externally.

Yet, it could be more about growth than absolute numbers. Yes, it is important to be first in population but this is also about expected growth for India and a declining population in China. Not only will India be #1 in residents, it could be far ahead of China in population soon.

What this all adds up to is hard to say. India will be the most populous nation, China will be second. The population arrows will be headed in different directions. Does it mean a significant change in status and economic status? The number of people in each country may just play a role in this.

What will be the first “city of the future”?

Multiple efforts are underway around the globe to construct new kinds of cities. Here is an overview of some of this work:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Telosa is set to be built on 150,000 acres in either Nevada, Utah or Arizona, and 50,000 “diverse” people will call it home by 2030, according to newly released details from Lore — a serial entrepreneur who sold Jet.com to Walmart for $3.3 billion and the parent company of Diapers.com to Amazon for $545 million.

“We’re not just building a new city — this is a new model for society,” Lore said at a Telosa “town hall meeting” in July, adding that he wants his new city to be “sustainable and equitable to all.”

It’ll be governed by a principle he calls “equitism,” which seems to be a mashup of democracy, capitalism and socialism…

Floating City in the Maldives is envisioned as a large cluster of hexagonal structures that rise and fall with the sea, with room for up to 20,000 people. It’s set to be completed in 2027

Toyota Woven City is a company town being built in the foothills of Japan’s Mount Fuji. The proposal calls for a 2,000-person city where Toyota “will test autonomous vehicles, smart technology and robot-assisted living,” per CNN.

Masdar City in Abu Dhabi is a “master-planned eco-complex designed to show off the UAE’s commitment to sustainability,” Bloomberg has reported.

Net City in Shenzhen, China, is another company town being built by tech giant Tencent. It’ll be a Monaco-size metropolis for 80,000 workers, CNN reports.

Several other projects are briefly mentioned in the article. Across all of these proposed communities, there are several patterns:

  1. Created by the ultra-wealthy or corporations.
  2. Incorporating sustainability or new technology.
  3. A limited population.

It strikes me that we now have a good sense of what megacities are around the world: they have a certain population and share common traits regarding land use, economics, and social life. Such cities are relatively new in human history but now they are common. So then what exactly needs to be different for a new community to be a futuristic city? A different aesthetic? No cars or limited cars? Much greener? Smaller in scale? Different social arrangements?

Does a “medium sized suburb” have 20,000 residents?

I recently saw a headline comparing a group of people to the population size of a suburb:

Photo by Ingo Joseph on Pexels.com

Nearly 20,000 Cook County residents holding revoked FOID cards — enough to populate a medium-sized suburb

More population comparisons from later in the story:

Arthur Jackson, first deputy chief of police for the Cook County Sheriff’s Police Department, told legislators over the years, 33,000 Cook County residents’ firearm owner’s identification cards have been revoked because of violent felony convictions, domestic violence charges or serious mental health issues.

That’s more than the entire population of Highland Park in Lake County.

Of that total, “nearly 20,000” have not turned in their cards — more than the population of north suburban Deerfield.

“Medium” is between “small” and “large.” The smallest suburbs can be just a few hundred or a few thousand people while the largest suburbs can have several hundred thousand residents. Is nearly 20,000 in the middle?

The comparisons to specific suburbs might be more helpful, particularly if people know something about Highland Park or Deerfield. They can picture these communities and then make the connection to the number of people with revoked FOID cards.

Other comparisons that might be better: the number of people in a basketball arena, the number of students at a college, the number of people at a concert.

I am not sure that a “medium-sized suburb” is clear enough to help people understand the number at question here.

The US county with the longest life expectancy – and a big error margin

A recent ranking of US counties by life expectancy at birth now found Aleutians East Borough at the top of the list:

This is one of three counties with a life expectancy of “100+.” Out of these three, it is also the one with the largest error margin. If I am interpreting this correctly, the list compilers are 95% confident that the life expectancy of this county is between 67.9 and 100+.

This is most likely due to the relatively small number of people in the county. This is not uncommon in these rankings: of the top 16 counties in life expectancy, the highest population is over 55,000 and several counties have fewer people than the one ranking #1. When there are fewer cases (residents, for this analysis) to consider, it is harder to be confident in the calculated life expectancy. My guess is that this county had the highest expected life expectancy in the statistical model so even with the large confidence interval it ended up at the top of the list.

With fewer people in a number of these counties, the year-to-year predictions could shift more given conditions. Does this mean the rankings should be disregarded? Not necessarily but the confidence interval does provide insight into how the life spans of a small number of residents can change these rankings.