3 ms·

Small/mid size cities in the midwest like Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, and Chicago (though to a lesser extent). Other "cities" are growing in th

by britch 7y ago

Small/mid size cities in the midwest like Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, and Chicago (though to a lesser extent). Other "cities" are growing in the sun-belt. It's complicated because many of the up-and-coming cities are being built with cars in mind and are not very dense. They are "cities" but they are not urban.

adventured 7y ago
Saying those cities are being abandoned, is more than a stretch. Cincinnati's population has expanded since 2010. Pittsburgh and Cleveland have both had stable population numbers the last decade. The declines have been very small over that time. As with Cincinnati they did suffer drops for a couple of decades in the past. They're not being abandoned. Detroit is losing 0.004% per year at this point. There's a reasonable chance the worst is over for Detroit. Chicago is not being abandoned at all, that's particularly incorrect. Their population has been stable for 30 years, it has seen a small 70k decline (less than 3% decline over three decades doesn't get you in the lesser extent abandoned category at all).
- britch 7y ago
  I take your point, abandoned is too far. As I understand it: it's a bad sign if a city is not growing. If a city's population is steady, but the countries population is increasing that means people are leaving the city. It at least indicates a lack of growth which can be a marker of a weak economy. Abandoned is too far, but I think it's true that many of these cities are in some form of decline from their historical peak.
  - aglavine 7y ago
    "it's a bad sign if a city is not growing" is something taken as true by many people, but I think it is absolutely arbitrary. Maybe the opposite is true for some cities. Other metrics as land value (San Francisco is the obvious example) and media income must be taken into account. I guess there are people out there that thinks that cities have a healthy population limit and growing beyond that can harm environment around.

by britch 7y ago

adventured 7y ago

Saying those cities are being abandoned, is more than a stretch. Cincinnati's population has expanded since 2010. Pittsburgh and Cleveland have both had stable population numbers the last decade. The declines have been very small over that time. As with Cincinnati they did suffer drops for a couple of decades in the past. They're not being abandoned. Detroit is losing 0.004% per year at this point. There's a reasonable chance the worst is over for Detroit. Chicago is not being abandoned at all, that's particularly incorrect. Their population has been stable for 30 years, it has seen a small 70k decline (less than 3% decline over three decades doesn't get you in the lesser extent abandoned category at all).

britch 7y ago
I take your point, abandoned is too far. As I understand it: it's a bad sign if a city is not growing. If a city's population is steady, but the countries population is increasing that means people are leaving the city. It at least indicates a lack of growth which can be a marker of a weak economy. Abandoned is too far, but I think it's true that many of these cities are in some form of decline from their historical peak.
- aglavine 7y ago
  "it's a bad sign if a city is not growing" is something taken as true by many people, but I think it is absolutely arbitrary. Maybe the opposite is true for some cities. Other metrics as land value (San Francisco is the obvious example) and media income must be taken into account. I guess there are people out there that thinks that cities have a healthy population limit and growing beyond that can harm environment around.