Los Angeles County suffers nation’s worst population outflow

[sopas ej]

But LA County's current population is still bigger than it was during the 2010 Census.

So ¿cuál es el problema?

I actually wouldn't mind if LA County shrank a bit. Too many people here as it is.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Wow, what's going on in [liberal, high-cost, high-tax] Washington? That's a really impressive growth rate!

Washington state is not high cost or high tax. They are lower middle of the pack. One advantage is that their personal and corporate income tax rate is 0%, although it is supplemented by other taxes. They have lower tax burden than Kentucky for example.

[Tiorted9]

The Los Angeles GDP growth is outpacing NYC and Chicago, but a lot:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ces-u-s-cities

The less fortunate are moving out of state or to neighboring counties, while those more fortunate continue to move in

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

But LA County's current population is still bigger than it was during the 2010 Census.

So ¿cuál es el problema?

I actually wouldn't mind if LA County shrank a bit. Too many people here as it is.

That's what I'm thinking too. LA county is just fine at around 10 million people. I don't understand the people who want to see it grow into an endless sea of condo towers.

But I'm not convinced there's even a decline. These numbers are estimates and a 0.1% drop is within the margin of error. The 2020 census will show growth for the decade and I'm willing to bet the same will be true in the 2030 census, unless they drastically change their counting methodology.

[destroycreate]

I live in LA and honestly, this doesn't bother me in the slighest. Fewer people, less traffic lol.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by badrunner

That's what I'm thinking too. LA county is just fine at around 10 million people. I don't understand the people who want to see it grow into an endless sea of condo towers.

But I'm not convinced there's even a decline. These numbers are estimates and a 0.1% drop is within the margin of error. The 2020 census will show growth for the decade and I'm willing to bet the same will be true in the 2030 census, unless they drastically change their counting methodology.

Whoops. It looks like a forgot to factor in another zero. In that case, there’s nothing to see here. Let’s move on, folks.

[Illithid Dude]

I'd really rather not have an LA Country with no middle class. The cheap eats and economic and cultural diversity is what makes LA Country great. San Fransisco on a larger scale would depress me to no end.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Tiorted9

The Los Angeles GDP growth is outpacing NYC and Chicago, but a lot:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ces-u-s-cities

The less fortunate are moving out of state or to neighboring counties, while those more fortunate continue to move in

Los Angeles has lower GDP per capita, so LA has much more room to grow in % terms.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I'd really rather not have an LA Country with no middle class. The cheap eats and economic and cultural diversity is what makes LA Country great. San Fransisco on a larger scale would depress me to no end.

It will be a longgg time before that happens. LA city? Perhaps. But the county still has tons of affordable communities. Palmdale and Lancaster aren't gonna get all bougie anytime soon...

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Gantz

Los Angeles has lower GDP per capita, so LA has much more room to grow in % terms.

Link from the link:
https://www.bea.gov/system/files/201...etro0918_0.pdf

2012 MSA estimates:
https://www.metrojacksonville.com/ar...mates-released

2017 MSA estimates:
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...xhtml?src=bkmk

...

NYC MSA (2012)

GDP: $1,439,233,000,000
Population: 19,831,858
GDP per capita: $72,571

LA MSA (2012)

GDP: $820,863,000,000
Population: 13,052,921
GDP per capita: $62,887

Chicago MSA (2012)

GDP: $578,016,000,000
Population: 9,522,434
GDP per capita: $60,700

...

NYC MSA (2017)

GDP: $1,717,712,000,000
Population: 20,320,876
GDP per capita: $84,549

LA MSA (2017)

GDP: $1,043,735,000,000
Population: 13,353,907
GDP per capita: $78,159

Chicago MSA (2017)

GDP: $679,699,000,000
Population: 9,533,040
GDP per capita: $71,299

...

So LA MSA has always had a higher GDP per capita than Chicago and further distanced itself during the 5-year period in question, while also closing the gap with NYC. But, I will concede that once you lump in the Inland Empire and Ventura County with LA, it drops significantly. NYC's increases with the addition of Fairfield County, CT. Chicago's is only marginally higher than LA's, but then again LA CSA is nearly twice as populous as Chicagoland.

...

LA CSA (2017)

GDP: $1,252,514,000,000
Population: 18,788,800
GDP per capita: $66,662

Chicago CSA, minus Ottawa-Peru (2017)

GDP: $688,224,000,000
Population: 9,752,674
GDP per capita: $70,567 (probably $69,000 or so with the addition of Ottawa-Peru)

...

Okay, that's enough dick measuring for today.

[Sun Belt]

Like New York City, over estimating from prior years?

To tie this into another thread, LA County loses population while Orange, Riverside, Ventura, San Diego grow.

Remember, the 'burbs are dead.

[The North One]

I mean, how much of that GDP is in real estate though.

[PhillyRising]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Wow, what's going on in [liberal, high-cost, high-tax] Washington? That's a really impressive growth rate!

Amazon.

[YSL]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Like New York City, over estimating from prior years?

To tie this into another thread, LA County loses population while Orange, Riverside, Ventura, San Diego grow.

Remember, the 'burbs are dead.

That’s more than likely the case.. people who did or did not exists were counted and now that they’ve recalibrated their counting formula those people magically disappeared which gives the false impression that these locations are shrinking.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

When will California start to reduce taxes, reduce regulatory burdens on businesses, and generally recognize that more conservative government policies are needed if the state is to compete with the likes of Texas, Colorado and others?

The state is enjoying massive budget surpluses in large part because it taxes capital gains as ordinary income, up to 12%. This is a progressive tax -- poor people hardly ever experience a capital gain. Meanwhile, "low-tax" states like Tennessee charge steep sales taxes on food whereas "high-tax" states like Ohio do not charge sales tax on groceries.

Meanwhile, California has NO municipal earnings tax and (very controversially) longtime homeowners pay very, very low property tax.

[the urban politician]

Jeez....

When Chicagoland was starting to see population dips in around 2015 it was all about “Nanner nanner nanner Chicago is dying we knew it!” without any effort to look deeper into the numbers to figure out exactly what was happening.

Now that NYC and LA are seeing such dips, everybody is frantically drawing up charts and pulling out their calculators, trying to find an explanation

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Jeez....

When Chicagoland was starting to see population dips in around 2015 it was all about “Nanner nanner nanner Chicago is dying we knew it!” without any effort to look deeper into the numbers to figure out exactly what was happening.

Now that NYC and LA are seeing such dips, everybody is frantically drawing up charts and pulling out their calculators, trying to find an explanation

Legal immigration fell by about 12% in 2018, and will undoubtedly fall further in 2019. It's a goal of the Trump presidency to restrict all immigration to the U.S. by as much as possible. At the same time, the U.S. birth rate is at an all-time low, with no real hope for recovery.

The established core areas of major metropolitan areas outside of the Sun Belt have a negative outflow via domestic migration. They relied upon natural population growth (more births than deaths) and immigration to make up the difference. It doesn't make up the difference any longer.

[IrishIllini]

^
The same will soon be true of metros in the S/SW. Isn’t Houston already experiencing negative domestic migration?

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

^
The same will soon be true of metros in the S/SW. Isn’t Houston already experiencing negative domestic migration?

Basically, yes. The entire US will lose population without international immigration. Look to Italy and Japan to see the consequences. Declining population and massive debt incurred by the Trump administration is a recipe for disaster.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Basically, yes. The entire US will lose population without international immigration. Look to Italy and Japan to see the consequences. Declining population and massive debt incurred by the Trump administration is a recipe for disaster.

Same is true with many big metros including DC area and Miami. I believe that, of the 10 largest metros, only DFW and Atlanta has positive domestic migration last year - Phoenix is just outside of the 10, below Boston. of the 20, probably only 6 or 7 - those 3 and maybe Denver, Seattle, and Tampa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tistical_areas