SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Discussions (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Sunbelt battle for #2? (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=240851)

craigs Nov 14, 2019 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 8748369)
It didn't turn out great for Illinois, Louisiana West Virginia, Michigan, Upstate NY etc.

But hey maybe California will buck that track record because "reasons" ? I hope im wrong.

Okay, so let's get this straight: we are supposed to accept the truth of your claim "Domestic out-migration is not a good sign for Californians future" because West Virginia.

Meanwhile, in reality, California would not be better off, or better able to solve our growth-related problems, if we were saddled with hundreds of thousands of additional residents right now, further crowding the roads, increasing pollution, housing costs and demand for services and resources. And we won't be better off with accelerating population growth via domestic in-migration next year or further into the future, either, until and unless we are able to better address our growth-related problems. Your claim is ridiculous.

LA21st Nov 14, 2019 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8748814)
Seniors are the wealthiest group of Americans. Not a bad group to attract.

That maybe so, but they're mostly retired and not looking to boost economies.
It's why Florida's major cities aren't powerhouses.

If you think it's cool, great. I don't think its a group California NEEDS to retain, really.

spoonman Nov 14, 2019 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA21st (Post 8748593)
It's actually more than that. San Diego is another 3 millon, and Sacramento is another 2.5 or so.

How is this any different than any other state, including Texas? How well off are the likes of Amarillo and Wichita Falls?

3.5 million people in SD. Larger than Denver, close in size to Seattle. World’s busiest border crossing.

LA21st Nov 14, 2019 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craigs (Post 8748909)
Okay, so let's get this straight: we are supposed to accept the truth of your claim "Domestic out-migration is not a good sign for Californians future" because West Virginia.

Meanwhile, in reality, California would not be better off, or better able to solve our growth-related problems, if we were saddled with hundreds of thousands of additional residents right now, further crowding the roads, increasing pollution, housing costs and demand for services and resources. And we won't be better off with accelerating population growth via domestic in-migration next year or further into the future, either, until and unless we are able to better address our growth-related problems. Your claim is ridiculous.

That didnt make any sense either. California has little in common with those places.

Those states had horrible economic downturns that made people leave. That's not happening in California.

As stated many times before, if California was as afffordable as Texas or other sunbelt states, there would be millions more people here. That's not a "brag" that's a very, very likely probability, wether California haters want to hear it or not. Is that a good thing? Maybe not. Who the hell knows.

edale Nov 14, 2019 10:35 PM

God, don't you people get tired of typing the same shit over and over? This thread has been painful to read.

Obadno Nov 14, 2019 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craigs (Post 8748909)
Okay, so let's get this straight: we are supposed to accept the truth of your claim "Domestic out-migration is not a good sign for Californians future" because West Virginia.

Meanwhile, in reality, California would not be better off, or better able to solve our growth-related problems, if we were saddled with hundreds of thousands of additional residents right now, further crowding the roads, increasing pollution, housing costs and demand for services and resources. And we won't be better off with accelerating population growth via domestic in-migration next year or further into the future, either, until and unless we are able to better address our growth-related problems. Your claim is ridiculous.

Damn you guys do like to cherry pick

In any example I can think of ongoing precipitous domestic out migration is not a good thing. You can focus on west Virginia if you want to be an ostrich but I would think the NYC- Upstate NY example of the constantly hemorrhaging state of Illinois- Chicago are probably going to be a good indication of whats going to happen to California in coming decades.

The gorilla city (2 cities for Cali) will still bring in population or at least stay stable while the other parts of the state whither away like Upstate NY or like Chicago outside of the Suburbs/Loop and the state of Illinois in general.

Whats causing out migration is clearly not going to stop and based on the block-headed conversations I have with the people on this board, it'll probably get worse.

At some point international immigration wont offset the people leaving. Maybe then some corrective action will take place.

But hey some of you seem to think its fine that millions of people outside of the privileged cities of LA and San Francisco begin to fall apart. I cant understand such an opinion but there ya go.

After all to quote somebody above "California IS San Francisco and LA"

badrunner Nov 14, 2019 11:15 PM

https://lao.ca.gov/Blog/Media/Image/958
https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/265

California is sending its poor to Arizona, Nevada and Texas while gaining wealthy residents from Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey and New York.

Doesn't that graphic look like a right-winger's wet dream? :haha: Maybe that's the real reason they are so upset. They are on the outside looking in.

Shawn Nov 15, 2019 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by badrunner (Post 8748988)
Doesn't that graphic look like a right-winger's wet dream? :haha: Maybe that's the real reason they are so upset. They are on the outside looking in.

Lol I was thinking the exact same thing. Get rid of tax-draining poor people (and get rid of some brownies in the process, amiright?) and replace them with high net worth contributors and job creators. :cheers:

Hey Texas, have fun figuring out how to pay for all those additional social services the Californians you’re so proud of taking will need. Cause I’m skeptical you’re getting the type Californians you imagine you’re getting.

LA21st Nov 15, 2019 12:33 AM

:haha:

Yea, I remember people saying LA's losing residents to Vegas. What people didn't say was a good amount of them were crimnals (gangs) because they got priced out of LA.
To be fair, that's true for San Bernardino as well, but good riddance.

craigs Nov 15, 2019 1:15 AM

You argue California's net negative domestic migration is "a bad sign for California's future," because it must necessarily lead to the same "precipitous" decline experienced over the last few decades in places like Upstate New York, West Virginia, Louisiana, Illinois, etc., but you can't prove that. It's just an idea you want to believe is true.

Look, it's not that California cannot possibly decline in population over the coming decades. I'm not pulling one of these "Prove me wrong or Dallas hits 20 million and overtakes Los Angeles!" homerisms. It's just not likely, because 1) Net domestic out-migration amounted to 0.48% of the state's total population in 2018, which is hardly 'precipitous'; 2) California is expected to continue to grow through natural increase alone, because of our demographics; and 2) California is too dissimilar from those other states in such critical ways that they cannot be analogous, and thus fail to accurately represent this state or reliably predict its future. Your argument just doesn't hold water.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 8748976)
Damn you guys do like to cherry pick

In any example I can think of ongoing precipitous domestic out migration is not a good thing. You can focus on west Virginia if you want to be an ostrich but I would think the NYC- Upstate NY example of the constantly hemorrhaging state of Illinois- Chicago are probably going to be a good indication of whats going to happen to California in coming decades.

The gorilla city (2 cities for Cali) will still bring in population or at least stay stable while the other parts of the state whither away like Upstate NY or like Chicago outside of the Suburbs/Loop and the state of Illinois in general.

Whats causing out migration is clearly not going to stop and based on the block-headed conversations I have with the people on this board, it'll probably get worse.

At some point international immigration wont offset the people leaving. Maybe then some corrective action will take place.

But hey some of you seem to think its fine that millions of people outside of the privileged cities of LA and San Francisco begin to fall apart. I cant understand such an opinion but there ya go.

After all to quote somebody above "California IS San Francisco and LA"


jtown,man Nov 15, 2019 1:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by badrunner (Post 8748988)
https://lao.ca.gov/Blog/Media/Image/958
https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/265

California is sending its poor to Arizona, Nevada and Texas while gaining wealthy residents from Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey and New York.

Doesn't that graphic look like a right-winger's wet dream? :haha: Maybe that's the real reason they are so upset. They are on the outside looking in.

Yeah. We are upset that our states provide a reasonable life for middle-class people. What a bunch of losers!

Shawn Nov 15, 2019 5:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8749104)
Yeah. We are upset that our states provide a reasonable life for middle-class people. What a bunch of losers!

$15-$30 grand a year is middle-class?

jtown,man Nov 15, 2019 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn (Post 8749263)
$15-$30 grand a year is middle-class?

No. They would be completely reliant on welfare in LA and SF and survive but not be happy in places like Mississippi and Arkansas. However, that isn't the only demographic going to Texas and Nevada. There are also plenty of people making more than 15k but less than 75k.

I was simply making the point that Badrunner thinks that "right-wingers" are pissed or something because we are getting the poor and middle class while California is getting the rich(at least from domestic migration). But thats the thing. Only the rich can afford to make the move to California. Poor immigrants are also willing to do and live in ways long-time citizens aren't willing to do, so they move to California too. So yeah, I am not sad or annoyed that "my states" are taking in poor-middle class families who want to be able to live a decent life.

spoonman Nov 15, 2019 3:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn (Post 8749042)
Lol I was thinking the exact same thing. Get rid of tax-draining poor people (and get rid of some brownies in the process, amiright?) and replace them with high net worth contributors and job creators. :cheers:

Hey Texas, have fun figuring out how to pay for all those additional social services the Californians you’re so proud of taking will need. Cause I’m skeptical you’re getting the type Californians you imagine you’re getting.

Did I just witness a liberal admit that poor people are a drain on the state?

Did I also see a liberal make a racist statement about "brownies"?

I guess it's cool since it was written by a liberal, nobody here has a problem with it.

badrunner Nov 15, 2019 5:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8749322)
I was simply making the point that Badrunner thinks that "right-wingers" are pissed or something because we are getting the poor and middle class while California is getting the rich(at least from domestic migration). But thats the thing. Only the rich can afford to make the move to California.

Yeah I don't think you understood my meaning. I'm not necessarily saying those migration numbers are great for California, but they would be pretty fantastic for an Ayn Randian republican utopia don't you think? It's usually right-wingers with the "grab all the cash, the poor can just fuck off and die" attitude as exemplified by our current first family.

LA21st Nov 15, 2019 5:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 8749435)
Did I just witness a liberal admit that poor people are a drain on the state?

Did I also see a liberal make a racist statement about "brownies"?

I guess it's cool since it was written by a liberal, nobody here has a problem with it.

I think it was written tongue in cheek.

badrunner Nov 15, 2019 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn (Post 8749042)
Lol I was thinking the exact same thing. Get rid of tax-draining poor people (and get rid of some brownies in the process, amiright?) and replace them with high net worth contributors and job creators. :cheers:

Curious that a demographic analysis of domestic migration broke it down by income, age and education, but not by race. I think those numbers would be very interesting, and not at all what one might expect. It may cause a few heads to explode on this forum though.

LA21st Nov 15, 2019 5:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8749322)
No. They would be completely reliant on welfare in LA and SF and survive but not be happy in places like Mississippi and Arkansas. However, that isn't the only demographic going to Texas and Nevada. There are also plenty of people making more than 15k but less than 75k.

I was simply making the point that Badrunner thinks that "right-wingers" are pissed or something because we are getting the poor and middle class while California is getting the rich(at least from domestic migration). But thats the thing. Only the rich can afford to make the move to California. Poor immigrants are also willing to do and live in ways long-time citizens aren't willing to do, so they move to California too. So yeah, I am not sad or annoyed that "my states" are taking in poor-middle class families who want to be able to live a decent life.

Why do people make these general statements that "only the rich can afford to move to California?" It's stuff like this that's so misleading and annoying.
This is not true at all, as people from all classes move here all the time. Because of Hollywood and the like, you meet people from freakin' everywhere. I'm sure it's like this for Silicon Valley.

Has it ever occured to you people like Calfiornia so they deal with the cost of living, like NYers or how people deal with shitty weather?
Not everyone who can't afford it is dying to leave, so stop these false narratives. Are some? Sure. I overhead someone yesteday moving to Denver because it's cheaper.

But there's 40 million people here, so these general statements are just dumb. The perentage of people leaving is incredibly small anyway. Fox News tries to pretend it's much worse than it actually is, and that same stuff leaks into these forums.

LA21st Nov 15, 2019 6:57 PM

I read Tulsa is paying people $10,000 to move there. That all sounds great, but it costs a few thousand to move, and what if you have no job or youre laid off quickly? You're stuck? Then what? The rest of that money won't last more than a few months.

Honestly, who really does this? I can only imagine people who take this offer are struggling, hard.
How is any of this poaching sustainable?

SLO Nov 15, 2019 8:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn (Post 8749042)
Lol I was thinking the exact same thing. Get rid of tax-draining poor people (and get rid of some brownies in the process, amiright?) and replace them with high net worth contributors and job creators. :cheers:

Hey Texas, have fun figuring out how to pay for all those additional social services the Californians you’re so proud of taking will need. Cause I’m skeptical you’re getting the type Californians you imagine you’re getting.

You mean the middle class? That’s who’s moving along with upper middle class conservatives who appreciate the business climate and move their companies.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.