5 ms·
Their criteria unintentionally selected for metros with a restricted housing supply, by including "only those that saw population or real GDP growth slower than
by alexhutcheson 7y ago
Their criteria unintentionally selected for metros with a restricted housing supply, by including "only those that saw population or real GDP growth slower than the nation as a whole". That can indicate a slow-growing economy, but can also indicate that you're not building enough new housing for population to grow at or above the national rate. Portland and Nashville are obvious examples here - nobody who has been there recently believes that they are struggling, but they've been adding population slowly because they're not building enough housing to meet demand.
- Apocryphon 7y agoYou're not wrong, but my overall point is that it seems like a lot of people in this thread are arguing against the prospect of moving to intolerant backwater villages, whereas most of the ones that Brookings listed are already hot secondary destinations. And many of them aren't even located in the Midwest! Guess IEEE was referring to basically everywhere not on the coast when they say "the Heartland".