For anyone resistant to converting to “Windows Vista” from “Windows XP,” there is still an alternative. Dell continues to sell new computers, desktops and laptops, loaded with Windows XP (www.dell.com). Reportedly, some other manufacturers are doing the same. The Dell prices are competitive with prices at major retailers, where only Windows Vista loaded machines are for sale.
There are also reports that “downgrades” to Windows XP can be obtained for some Windows Vista machines, however the process as described on the internet may not be as simple as some might like.
There are two good reasons for postponing the switch from Windows XP to Windows Vista.
1. There are continuing complaints about Vista. They are so intense that competitor Apple has run television advertisements about Vista.
2. Many older programs will simply not work on Windows Vista. In the longer run, people using such programs will need to migrate to the new operating systems (or to alternatives, such as Linux or Apple). However, the new 2007 Microsoft Office product, which features Word, Power Point and Excel runs on both Windows XP and Windows Vista, so that additional time can be taken to adjust to the emerging Windows environment without having to make a complete break with Windows XP and the many years of PC compatibility that Microsoft appears to value so little.
A final, less compelling reason for resisting the change is to “vote” against Microsoft’s recurrent practice of unveiling new operating systems “before their time.” Planned or forced obsolescence is in no-one’s best interests except that of a firm seeking to maximize its revenues by undermining the interests of its customers. This is why, in the longer run, Microsoft, will face market share losses that are likely to be swift and significant, if serious competition ever emerges. So far, Apple is not even a threat (regrettably).
Thus, this is no advertisement for Apple, to which I attempted to switch a few years ago in an expensive experiment. One afternoon about a month after switching, I realized that I was more productive on a French language keyboard (with its extra letters, requirements to hold down more than one key for some letters and default special character set rather than numbers on the top row) than on an Apple US-English keyboard. That realization resulted in the Apple being boxed up within minutes (as soon as I could copy the nwere files to my older PC), and I have never looked back. My sister in Alaska, who had long wanted an Apple, was well pleased.
2008/05/24
2008/05/03
Paris Light Rail (Tram) Increases Greenhouse Gas Emissions
According to University of Paris researchers, the new (2007) Paris tramway (light rail or streetcar) along the south boulevards des Maréchaux has attracted, at most, 3 percent of its ridership from cars. This finding is made in a paper entitled Paris: un tramway nommé désir (Paris: A Streetcar Named Desire), published in August 2007 by Rémy Prud’homme, Martin Koenig, Pierre Kopp. The authors note that this small modal shift “once again shows the limits of modal shift strategies” (our liberal interpretation of the French).
While traffic along the boulevard has been reduced, this has been accomplished by narrowing the capacity and forcing traffic to parallel roadways. The result has been to increase traffic congestion and, as occurs when traffic becomes slower and more erratic, increase fuel consumption, which of course leads to higher greenhouse gas emissions. It is estimated the tramway has resulted in a net increase of nearly 40,000 tonnes of CO2 annually.
Finally, the social costs of the project are estimated to have exceeded the benefits.
While traffic along the boulevard has been reduced, this has been accomplished by narrowing the capacity and forcing traffic to parallel roadways. The result has been to increase traffic congestion and, as occurs when traffic becomes slower and more erratic, increase fuel consumption, which of course leads to higher greenhouse gas emissions. It is estimated the tramway has resulted in a net increase of nearly 40,000 tonnes of CO2 annually.
Finally, the social costs of the project are estimated to have exceeded the benefits.
2008/05/02
Ken's Loss is London's Gain
Paris (20080502): The Evening Standard reports that Ken Livingstone is history as mayor of London. Boris Johnson, the Conservative (Tory) candidate is reported to have won the election convincingly .
This is an important victory for rational transport policy. Johnson is a “somewhat” critic of Livingstone’s radical congestion charging plan (implemented in 2003), which requires a payment of ₤8.00 ($16.00) for each car entry to central London between 07:00 and 18:00 on work days. Livingstone had announced plans for much higher tolls to be levied later in the year based upon the pollution rating of car models.
The congestion charging zone was expanded to the west in 2007 and has proven relatively ineffective. Johnson has promised to dismantle the expansion, returning the congestion charging zone to its original, smaller geographical definition. He would also reduce the charge, cancel the planned increases and charge based upon time of day and length of stay. No longer would it cost $16 to “pop” across the cordon to buy Al Gore’s proverbial quart of milk.
Remy Prud’homme and colleagues from the University of Paris have shown than the social cost of operating London’s congestion charge system exceeds the benefits.
The Daily Telegraph published my commentary expressing concerns about the congestion charge scheme the morning it was implemented. Those concerns remain and it would appear that a Johnson mayoralty will begin to round the rough edges of what has to be one of the most arbitrary transport policies in history (Commentary 2003.02.16.
Finally, Johnson would phase out the “bendy-buses” (articulated buses) that Livingstone had used to replace double deck buses. One problem with the bendy-buses is that their length makes boarding difficult at bus stops where many buses often line up. Of course, this also increases traffic congestion.
This is an important victory for rational transport policy. Johnson is a “somewhat” critic of Livingstone’s radical congestion charging plan (implemented in 2003), which requires a payment of ₤8.00 ($16.00) for each car entry to central London between 07:00 and 18:00 on work days. Livingstone had announced plans for much higher tolls to be levied later in the year based upon the pollution rating of car models.
The congestion charging zone was expanded to the west in 2007 and has proven relatively ineffective. Johnson has promised to dismantle the expansion, returning the congestion charging zone to its original, smaller geographical definition. He would also reduce the charge, cancel the planned increases and charge based upon time of day and length of stay. No longer would it cost $16 to “pop” across the cordon to buy Al Gore’s proverbial quart of milk.
Remy Prud’homme and colleagues from the University of Paris have shown than the social cost of operating London’s congestion charge system exceeds the benefits.
The Daily Telegraph published my commentary expressing concerns about the congestion charge scheme the morning it was implemented. Those concerns remain and it would appear that a Johnson mayoralty will begin to round the rough edges of what has to be one of the most arbitrary transport policies in history (Commentary 2003.02.16.
Finally, Johnson would phase out the “bendy-buses” (articulated buses) that Livingstone had used to replace double deck buses. One problem with the bendy-buses is that their length makes boarding difficult at bus stops where many buses often line up. Of course, this also increases traffic congestion.
2008/04/11
FHWA Overstates Houston Driving by 50 Percent --- Again
New (2006) Federal Highway Administration data for urban area highway use has just been released. As usual, the Houston area is wrongly shown as having the highest daily vehicle miles traveled per person among the nation’s urbanized areas of more than 1,000,000.
The erroneous 36.0 miles per capita is the result of a reported urbanized area (urban footprint) population of 2.8 million and a daily travel figure of 101 million miles. This 2.8 million population is reported to live in 1,476 square miles.
In 2000, FHWA reported Houston’s urbanized area population to be 2.5 million in an area of 1,537 square miles. The same year, the US Bureau of the Census found the Houston urbanized area to cover 1,295 square miles and to have a population of 3.8 million --- a full 1.3 million above the FHWA number. It is, of course, impossible for the FHWA’s larger urbanized area to have 1.3 million fewer people than that of the census. The result was then, and is today, a huge over-estimation of the daily vehicle miles traveled per capita.
Some years ago I brought this issue to the attention of the United States Department of Transportation. A bureaucrat condescendingly wrote me that Census urbanized areas and FHWA urbanized areas were different things, not comprehending the irreconcilable and irrational differences I had pointed out. There used to be similar problems with the Atlanta data, but it has since been fixed. In 2003, FHWA reported Atlanta at 34 miles per capita daily and, now, having adjusted its population estimate to a more rational figure. Daily travel is now reported at 29 miles per capita.
While the Bureau of the Census does not update urbanized area populations and land areas between decennial censuses, Houston’s metropolitan population growth would indicate an increase to in the neighborhood of 4.4 million in 2006. On that assumption, Houston’s daily vehicle miles traveled per capita would be 22.7, 20 percent below San Antonio, 10 percent below Dallas-Fort Worth, lower than Los Angeles and only 10 percent higher than Portland.
Note: The American Community Survey of the United States Census Bureau publishes yearly estimates of the population within urbanized areas as delineated in the 2000 census, but does not update the land area or include population that is added to the urbanized area in land area not included in the 2000 land area definition.
The erroneous 36.0 miles per capita is the result of a reported urbanized area (urban footprint) population of 2.8 million and a daily travel figure of 101 million miles. This 2.8 million population is reported to live in 1,476 square miles.
In 2000, FHWA reported Houston’s urbanized area population to be 2.5 million in an area of 1,537 square miles. The same year, the US Bureau of the Census found the Houston urbanized area to cover 1,295 square miles and to have a population of 3.8 million --- a full 1.3 million above the FHWA number. It is, of course, impossible for the FHWA’s larger urbanized area to have 1.3 million fewer people than that of the census. The result was then, and is today, a huge over-estimation of the daily vehicle miles traveled per capita.
Some years ago I brought this issue to the attention of the United States Department of Transportation. A bureaucrat condescendingly wrote me that Census urbanized areas and FHWA urbanized areas were different things, not comprehending the irreconcilable and irrational differences I had pointed out. There used to be similar problems with the Atlanta data, but it has since been fixed. In 2003, FHWA reported Atlanta at 34 miles per capita daily and, now, having adjusted its population estimate to a more rational figure. Daily travel is now reported at 29 miles per capita.
While the Bureau of the Census does not update urbanized area populations and land areas between decennial censuses, Houston’s metropolitan population growth would indicate an increase to in the neighborhood of 4.4 million in 2006. On that assumption, Houston’s daily vehicle miles traveled per capita would be 22.7, 20 percent below San Antonio, 10 percent below Dallas-Fort Worth, lower than Los Angeles and only 10 percent higher than Portland.
Note: The American Community Survey of the United States Census Bureau publishes yearly estimates of the population within urbanized areas as delineated in the 2000 census, but does not update the land area or include population that is added to the urbanized area in land area not included in the 2000 land area definition.
2008/04/07
Portland CBD Losing Employment Share
The latest information from the Portland (Oregon) Business Alliance shows that downtown Portland has lost approximately 5 percent of its employment share relative to the metropolitan area since 2001. This is exactly the opposite effect that would be claimed as a result of Portland's restrictive (smart growth) policies.
Data
Data
2008/04/06
More than 90% of Metropolitan Growth in Suburbs
A Demographia analysis of city and suburban population trends shows that the move to the suburbs continues. Between 2000 and 2006, more than 90 percent of large metropolitan growth was in the suburbs. This continues a trend that has been underway for at least 50 years and is considerably at odds with wishful thinking often to be found in the establishment press, which all too often substitutes anecdote for analysis.
Data.
Note: This report defines a single historical core city for each metropolitan area (thus, Norfolk is used in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk metropolitan area).
Data.
Note: This report defines a single historical core city for each metropolitan area (thus, Norfolk is used in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk metropolitan area).
Financial Times Misunderstands & Misleads on US Cities & Poverty
Letter to the Financial Times 2008.04.06
Re: As cities revive, America's poor are forced to the periphery (April 4)
It is hard to remember a more misleading statement than the “It used to be that poor people lived in cities and the rich lived in the suburbs. Now it's the reverse," by Carol Coletta of CEO’s for cities on poverty in American metropolitan areas. The article itself also does much to mislead. Indeed, the Barube Brookings Institution report notes that gross poverty numbers are now greater in the suburbs than in the core cities. Yet, the poverty rate in the suburbs is only one-half the core cities. Moreover, the suburbs have grown at nine times the rate of core cities since 2000 and now have 2.7 times as much population --- so that they have a larger number of people in poverty should not be surprising. As for the demographic reversal cited by Ms. Coletta, perhaps the wishful thinking of the urban elite is getting in the way of looking at the real data. You can do better than this.
Sincerely,
Wendell Cox
Principal, Demographia, St. Louis
Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris
Re: As cities revive, America's poor are forced to the periphery (April 4)
It is hard to remember a more misleading statement than the “It used to be that poor people lived in cities and the rich lived in the suburbs. Now it's the reverse," by Carol Coletta of CEO’s for cities on poverty in American metropolitan areas. The article itself also does much to mislead. Indeed, the Barube Brookings Institution report notes that gross poverty numbers are now greater in the suburbs than in the core cities. Yet, the poverty rate in the suburbs is only one-half the core cities. Moreover, the suburbs have grown at nine times the rate of core cities since 2000 and now have 2.7 times as much population --- so that they have a larger number of people in poverty should not be surprising. As for the demographic reversal cited by Ms. Coletta, perhaps the wishful thinking of the urban elite is getting in the way of looking at the real data. You can do better than this.
Sincerely,
Wendell Cox
Principal, Demographia, St. Louis
Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris
2008/03/03
Melbourne to Release Land to Improve Housing Affordability
The Age reports today that the Victoria state government, led by Premier John Brumby intends to release considerable amounts of land for housing development to improve affordability. The announcement comes as demographers predict that Melbourne is poised to retake its 19th century position as the nation’s largest urban area. Sydney, which has been the largest urban area since the early 1900s has been reeling under some of the world’s most radical smart growth policies, which have pushed housing prices up substantially relative to incomes. Moreover, recent New South Wales governments have demonstrated an ideological opposition to the automobile that has produced some of the worst traffic congestion in the Anglosphere. A recent survey indicated that one in five Sydney residents were considering leaving, and out-migration from has been substantial.
It is to be hoped that other Australian states will follow Victoria’s lead by breaking the shackles of overly zealous land regulation that have done so much to destroy the Great Australian Dream.
Demographia is pleased to have been among the first to bring Australia’s untenable housing affordability situation to public attention and its regulation related causes. The Fourth Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey was published in January.
(The Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey is co-authored by Wendell Cox and Hugh Pavletich.)
It is to be hoped that other Australian states will follow Victoria’s lead by breaking the shackles of overly zealous land regulation that have done so much to destroy the Great Australian Dream.
Demographia is pleased to have been among the first to bring Australia’s untenable housing affordability situation to public attention and its regulation related causes. The Fourth Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey was published in January.
(The Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey is co-authored by Wendell Cox and Hugh Pavletich.)
2008/02/29
WSJ on Cars and Japan: Myth and Reality
The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect. By this time, everyone knows that these are the words of US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton mocking the rhetoric of her rival, Senator Barack Obama.
But the words might as well have been in this morning’s Wall Street Journal article on the demise of the car in Japan Japan’s Young Won’t Rally Round the Car. Doubtless the smart growth, anti-automobile and anti-mobility choirs are already in rehearsal. We will soon hear that, if Japan can travel less by car, only a simple attitude change will be required to end the fabled “love affair” with the automobile in the United States (and Western Europe, where the love is even greater, given the cost of using cars there).
The Journal reports that car sales are down in Japan and implies that more people are riding public transport. The article makes the all-too-frequent mistake of using a couple of facts and combining them with out of context ad hoc cases to develop a story line. The result is a fairy tale.
Let’s look at the facts. From 1990 to 2004, according to data published by the Japan Statistics Bureau, per capita car travel in Japan rose 26 percent, almost as much as the 29 percent gain in the United States. By no means has there been an abandonment of the car in Japan. The overall car travel market share rose 22 percent from 1990 to 2004. At the same time, the public transport modes of rail and bus both loss approximately one-quarter of their market share. One public transport mode did very well --- the airlines increased their market share by nearly half. This data is posted on the Demographia website.
Choir practice has been cancelled.
But the words might as well have been in this morning’s Wall Street Journal article on the demise of the car in Japan Japan’s Young Won’t Rally Round the Car. Doubtless the smart growth, anti-automobile and anti-mobility choirs are already in rehearsal. We will soon hear that, if Japan can travel less by car, only a simple attitude change will be required to end the fabled “love affair” with the automobile in the United States (and Western Europe, where the love is even greater, given the cost of using cars there).
The Journal reports that car sales are down in Japan and implies that more people are riding public transport. The article makes the all-too-frequent mistake of using a couple of facts and combining them with out of context ad hoc cases to develop a story line. The result is a fairy tale.
Let’s look at the facts. From 1990 to 2004, according to data published by the Japan Statistics Bureau, per capita car travel in Japan rose 26 percent, almost as much as the 29 percent gain in the United States. By no means has there been an abandonment of the car in Japan. The overall car travel market share rose 22 percent from 1990 to 2004. At the same time, the public transport modes of rail and bus both loss approximately one-quarter of their market share. One public transport mode did very well --- the airlines increased their market share by nearly half. This data is posted on the Demographia website.
Choir practice has been cancelled.
2008/02/27
New Study: Virtually all Housing Price Escalation Associated With Regulation
Dr. Theo Eicher of the University of Washington has produced the most comprehensive econometric analysis yet of regulation and its association with housing prices. The conclusion will not surprise those familiar with the law of supply and demand. His analysis of approximately United States 250 municipalities indicates that, on average ALL of the increase in average house prices between 1989 and 2006 was associated with regulation. On average 110 percent of the increase in housing prices is attributed to regulation. Other examined factors had a generally negative impact on house price increases.
One of the inescapable conclusions from this work is that regulation associated house price increases are pervasive. In both the most affordable and least affordable markets, the cost increases associated with regulation virtually equal or exceed the overall price increases. The big difference, however, is that in more affordable markets, regulation has taken a far smaller toll (by virtue of smaller price increases). Today, there is an unprecedented gap between the most affordable and least affordable markets, with purchase and financing differences exceeding $1,000,000 (and not surprisingly, strong outward migration from more expensive metropolitan areas).
Eicher uses the Wharton School database, which is by far the most comprehensive in the nation. The Eicher data is produced in real terms (inflation adjusted). Other variables include change in household income, population change, population density and general market conditions.
It is important to understand what the Eicher study does and what it does not do. The most important point is that the study does not examine housing at the market level --- the metropolitan area. Instead, Eicher reviews sub-markets, at the municipal (local authority). This is a useful methodology, since, in the final analysis, regulation tends to be applied at the municipal level. Even where state or regional bodies regulate land use, their dictates are normally executed at the municipal level.
It is possible that the cost of regulation is even higher, since the Eicher study does not appear to take into consideration strong regulation in urban fringe municipalities, which could have the effect of increasing prices in municipalities that are not on the fringe. For example, it seems plausible that the strong agricultural preserve regulation in Ventura County, on the Los Angeles fringe, could be a factor in increasing housing prices in other municipalities in the Los Angeles area.
The market versus sub-market distinction, however, does not take anything away from this groundbreaking analysis. It is to be hoped that Dr. Eicher’s will soon find a way to take his analysis to metropolitan markets.
One of the inescapable conclusions from this work is that regulation associated house price increases are pervasive. In both the most affordable and least affordable markets, the cost increases associated with regulation virtually equal or exceed the overall price increases. The big difference, however, is that in more affordable markets, regulation has taken a far smaller toll (by virtue of smaller price increases). Today, there is an unprecedented gap between the most affordable and least affordable markets, with purchase and financing differences exceeding $1,000,000 (and not surprisingly, strong outward migration from more expensive metropolitan areas).
Eicher uses the Wharton School database, which is by far the most comprehensive in the nation. The Eicher data is produced in real terms (inflation adjusted). Other variables include change in household income, population change, population density and general market conditions.
It is important to understand what the Eicher study does and what it does not do. The most important point is that the study does not examine housing at the market level --- the metropolitan area. Instead, Eicher reviews sub-markets, at the municipal (local authority). This is a useful methodology, since, in the final analysis, regulation tends to be applied at the municipal level. Even where state or regional bodies regulate land use, their dictates are normally executed at the municipal level.
It is possible that the cost of regulation is even higher, since the Eicher study does not appear to take into consideration strong regulation in urban fringe municipalities, which could have the effect of increasing prices in municipalities that are not on the fringe. For example, it seems plausible that the strong agricultural preserve regulation in Ventura County, on the Los Angeles fringe, could be a factor in increasing housing prices in other municipalities in the Los Angeles area.
The market versus sub-market distinction, however, does not take anything away from this groundbreaking analysis. It is to be hoped that Dr. Eicher’s will soon find a way to take his analysis to metropolitan markets.
2008/01/28
Housing Unaffordability and Regulation in California
The following is from a reply to correspondence from a California reader of the 4th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey
Thank you for your email. You ask all manner of questions that probably deserve a good bit of discussion, and to which there are not easy answers.
It is important, I believe, to understand that the house cost inflation that has occurred in prescriptive (smart growth) markets… many of them on the coasts… is new. A decade ago there was nothing like the differences in housing prices between the prescriptive markets and what we refer to as the "responsive markets," where there is more traditional regulation. California had been perhaps 25 percent more costly than average, relative to incomes for some time (it is now more than double). I would argue that this was not so much the life style as it was the much stronger regulatory environment that arose in the 1970s (William Fischel of Dartmouth has published on this).
As for the pent up demand for coastal property, I would argue that this is a micro-issue. It does not explain why, for example, housing prices have exploded in the I-680 corridor or the Inland Empire. They have exploded there due to the regulations. There is plenty of land that can be developed in those areas, but it is largely forbidden or made so expensive with fees and regualtions that it is unaffordable.
There is no doubt that housing has become more attractive as an investment (shall we say, speculation, as all investment is to a degree). However, anyone speculating on housing in Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth or Indianapolis (or a host of other metropolitan areas) would have little, if anything to show for it. Those markets, where the restrictions are not so severe, have managed to avoid the cost escalation.
In my California presentations I frequently hear the attitude you indicate, that places like, for example, Dallas-Fort Worth are not at all attractive for one living in California. This is an understandable view, though mine is the opposite, having left Los Angeles for the Midwest 20 years ago.
I believe, however, this "California resident" view needs some perspective. In fact, since 2000, the Dallas-Fort Worth area has grown at a rate 8 times that of the SF Bay area (including the SJ area)… If current rates hold, DFW would exceed SFSJ in population before 2020. SD is losing domestic migrants at more than double the rate of Pittsburgh. The demand "equation" has shifted markedly. Kansas City and Indianapolis are growing at 3-4 times the rate of SFSJ. All of this is to say that your view is quite understandable and appropriate, but that the tide of demographics, at least at the moment, is nearly the opposite. There seems to be broad agreement that housing affordability is the issue.
The commuting issue is also important. While some people commute to the city centers (like downtown SF or LA), it is by no means the majority. In the SFSJ area, downtown SF represents little more than 10 percent of jobs (http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-cprof-sf.htm). Downtown LA has a far smaller share. This is not unusual. Manhattan south of 59 Street has only 20 percent of metropolitan employment, central London about 20 percent of metropolitan employment and central Paris under 20 and dropping rapidly.
From a commuting perspective, this is not bad. Overall, commute times have generally stayed the same or even improved (though in some places where highway investment has been avoided, like SFSJ, times have gotten worse). One way commutes average 25 minutes in the US and the median is closer to 20. All of this is because the jobs follow the residents (some might argue the other way around), with employment spread throughout the urban area. The largest business centre in SFSJ is Silicon Valley. You are right on with respect to the problem of transit and employment corridors. In fact, transit is able to effectively serve only concentrated downtown areas, which is indicated by the strong share to SF, the strong, but weaker share to downtown Oakland and the nearly non-existent share to the "sprawling" Silicon Valley employment center. It is no different in Europe. As cities have expanded, suburb to suburb commuting has expanded, nearly all of it is by car, and it is generally faster than cars or transit to the city.
Meanwhile, in jest, I wonder where there is a $500,000 beach house in Calif. It can be difficult to find a 1500 square foot GI in the San Fernando Valley for that. Median price in SFSJ is far higher.
My sense is that California (and some other places) prices have risen to an unsustainable level, at least at historic economic growth rates. It would take a drop of 50 percent from peak to bring everything back into alignment with historic California norms. Failing something like that (the necessary drop might be higher or lower), historic economic growth could be difficult to sustain.
It is probably fair to say that all things being equal, people would rather live in California that what has been called "flyover country" --- the non-coastal Midwest, South and Mountain states. However all things are not equal (and, indeed, more people live in "flyover country").
Best regards,
Wendell Cox
Co-author,
4th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey
Thank you for your email. You ask all manner of questions that probably deserve a good bit of discussion, and to which there are not easy answers.
It is important, I believe, to understand that the house cost inflation that has occurred in prescriptive (smart growth) markets… many of them on the coasts… is new. A decade ago there was nothing like the differences in housing prices between the prescriptive markets and what we refer to as the "responsive markets," where there is more traditional regulation. California had been perhaps 25 percent more costly than average, relative to incomes for some time (it is now more than double). I would argue that this was not so much the life style as it was the much stronger regulatory environment that arose in the 1970s (William Fischel of Dartmouth has published on this).
As for the pent up demand for coastal property, I would argue that this is a micro-issue. It does not explain why, for example, housing prices have exploded in the I-680 corridor or the Inland Empire. They have exploded there due to the regulations. There is plenty of land that can be developed in those areas, but it is largely forbidden or made so expensive with fees and regualtions that it is unaffordable.
There is no doubt that housing has become more attractive as an investment (shall we say, speculation, as all investment is to a degree). However, anyone speculating on housing in Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth or Indianapolis (or a host of other metropolitan areas) would have little, if anything to show for it. Those markets, where the restrictions are not so severe, have managed to avoid the cost escalation.
In my California presentations I frequently hear the attitude you indicate, that places like, for example, Dallas-Fort Worth are not at all attractive for one living in California. This is an understandable view, though mine is the opposite, having left Los Angeles for the Midwest 20 years ago.
I believe, however, this "California resident" view needs some perspective. In fact, since 2000, the Dallas-Fort Worth area has grown at a rate 8 times that of the SF Bay area (including the SJ area)… If current rates hold, DFW would exceed SFSJ in population before 2020. SD is losing domestic migrants at more than double the rate of Pittsburgh. The demand "equation" has shifted markedly. Kansas City and Indianapolis are growing at 3-4 times the rate of SFSJ. All of this is to say that your view is quite understandable and appropriate, but that the tide of demographics, at least at the moment, is nearly the opposite. There seems to be broad agreement that housing affordability is the issue.
The commuting issue is also important. While some people commute to the city centers (like downtown SF or LA), it is by no means the majority. In the SFSJ area, downtown SF represents little more than 10 percent of jobs (http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-cprof-sf.htm). Downtown LA has a far smaller share. This is not unusual. Manhattan south of 59 Street has only 20 percent of metropolitan employment, central London about 20 percent of metropolitan employment and central Paris under 20 and dropping rapidly.
From a commuting perspective, this is not bad. Overall, commute times have generally stayed the same or even improved (though in some places where highway investment has been avoided, like SFSJ, times have gotten worse). One way commutes average 25 minutes in the US and the median is closer to 20. All of this is because the jobs follow the residents (some might argue the other way around), with employment spread throughout the urban area. The largest business centre in SFSJ is Silicon Valley. You are right on with respect to the problem of transit and employment corridors. In fact, transit is able to effectively serve only concentrated downtown areas, which is indicated by the strong share to SF, the strong, but weaker share to downtown Oakland and the nearly non-existent share to the "sprawling" Silicon Valley employment center. It is no different in Europe. As cities have expanded, suburb to suburb commuting has expanded, nearly all of it is by car, and it is generally faster than cars or transit to the city.
Meanwhile, in jest, I wonder where there is a $500,000 beach house in Calif. It can be difficult to find a 1500 square foot GI in the San Fernando Valley for that. Median price in SFSJ is far higher.
My sense is that California (and some other places) prices have risen to an unsustainable level, at least at historic economic growth rates. It would take a drop of 50 percent from peak to bring everything back into alignment with historic California norms. Failing something like that (the necessary drop might be higher or lower), historic economic growth could be difficult to sustain.
It is probably fair to say that all things being equal, people would rather live in California that what has been called "flyover country" --- the non-coastal Midwest, South and Mountain states. However all things are not equal (and, indeed, more people live in "flyover country").
Best regards,
Wendell Cox
Co-author,
4th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey
2008/01/27
Unaffordable Housing In Belfast
The Belfast Telegraph covered the 4th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey on January 25, noting that Belfast was rated the 10th least affordable market in the six surveyed nations (United Kingdom, Ireland, United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia). The Telegraph quoted co-author Wendell Cox as saying
What it really comes down to is the prescriptive planning policies of the UK. After the war it took 10 years for the UK to be able to feed itself, right now it can't even house itself.
But the point is not demand, the issue is land use policies. The only way its going to improve is by a relaxing of the land use regulations.
Belfast tenth worst city in housing affordability table
Unaffordable Housing in Townsville, Queensland
To: Mr. Chris Quagliata
Townsville Bulletin
Townsville, Queensland
Dear Mr. Quagliata:
Re: Your 23 January Column
There is nothing inconsistent about our housing affordability survey, which ranks the Townsville urban centre as one of the least affordable markets in six nations and the Collier study, which finds Townsville to be among the most affordable in Australia. Both are true. Indeed, our housing affordability calculator shows that the purchasing and paying the mortgage on the median priced house in Townsville costs $500,000 less than in Sydney (http://www.demographia.com/dhi-aus.XLS). This is the equivalent of 8.5 years of median household income in Sydney. It is not surprising, therefore that many Sydneysiders are moving to Queensland.
However, Townsville should take no more than modest satisfaction in this. House prices across Australia have generally doubled relative to incomes and even tripled in some markets in the last decade. This means that future home owners will pay much larger mortgage payments and will have less discretionary income than they would have if housing prices had not exploded. This is neither good for Townsville, nor for Australia.
The tragedy is that all of this was unnecessary. The excessive house price inflation resulted from the naïve "urban consolidation" land use regulations of state and local governments. Too little land has been released for new housing and not surprisingly, land prices have exploded. Excessive infrastructure levies have raised the price of housing even further.
It will be important for governments to begin to dismantle these destructive policies and to implement programs that permit people to buy inexpensive housing on the urban fringe. The Great Australian Dream of a owning a home on quarter acre is not yet dead, though it is, at best, on "life support." It needs to be fully restored.
Best regards,
Wendell Cox
Principal, Demographia
Metropolitan St. Louis (USA)
Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris
Co-author, Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey
Townsville Bulletin
Townsville, Queensland
Dear Mr. Quagliata:
Re: Your 23 January Column
There is nothing inconsistent about our housing affordability survey, which ranks the Townsville urban centre as one of the least affordable markets in six nations and the Collier study, which finds Townsville to be among the most affordable in Australia. Both are true. Indeed, our housing affordability calculator shows that the purchasing and paying the mortgage on the median priced house in Townsville costs $500,000 less than in Sydney (http://www.demographia.com/dhi-aus.XLS). This is the equivalent of 8.5 years of median household income in Sydney. It is not surprising, therefore that many Sydneysiders are moving to Queensland.
However, Townsville should take no more than modest satisfaction in this. House prices across Australia have generally doubled relative to incomes and even tripled in some markets in the last decade. This means that future home owners will pay much larger mortgage payments and will have less discretionary income than they would have if housing prices had not exploded. This is neither good for Townsville, nor for Australia.
The tragedy is that all of this was unnecessary. The excessive house price inflation resulted from the naïve "urban consolidation" land use regulations of state and local governments. Too little land has been released for new housing and not surprisingly, land prices have exploded. Excessive infrastructure levies have raised the price of housing even further.
It will be important for governments to begin to dismantle these destructive policies and to implement programs that permit people to buy inexpensive housing on the urban fringe. The Great Australian Dream of a owning a home on quarter acre is not yet dead, though it is, at best, on "life support." It needs to be fully restored.
Best regards,
Wendell Cox
Principal, Demographia
Metropolitan St. Louis (USA)
Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris
Co-author, Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey
2008/01/10
Lowering the Toll on the Road to Prosperity
Congratulations to Tata of India and its chairman Ratan Tata on the unveiling of their new $2,500 Nano, a small car aimed at reducing the poverty of India and elsewhere by expanding personal mobility. Their important step forward has brought competitive responses from other auto makers, which intend to develop lower cost vehicles.
The connection between affluence and personal mobility is well established. Those who would stand in the way of Indians getting cars (or Chinese, Indonesians or Nigerians) may as well take to the streets to demonstrate for expanding poverty.
The Nano will get 50 miles to the gallon, meaning that it will produce lower greenhouse gas emissions than public transport (transit) per passenger mile in the United States.
U.N. climate scientist Rajendra Pachauri, who shared last year's Nobel Peace Prize, indicated that he was “having nightmares" about the car. One wonders if his nightmares might be different if he lived in Mumbai’s Dharavi slum or one of the many other slums or substandard residential areas that are all too numerous in the developing world.
There is a good reason that it is called the ROAD to prosperity.
The connection between affluence and personal mobility is well established. Those who would stand in the way of Indians getting cars (or Chinese, Indonesians or Nigerians) may as well take to the streets to demonstrate for expanding poverty.
The Nano will get 50 miles to the gallon, meaning that it will produce lower greenhouse gas emissions than public transport (transit) per passenger mile in the United States.
U.N. climate scientist Rajendra Pachauri, who shared last year's Nobel Peace Prize, indicated that he was “having nightmares" about the car. One wonders if his nightmares might be different if he lived in Mumbai’s Dharavi slum or one of the many other slums or substandard residential areas that are all too numerous in the developing world.
There is a good reason that it is called the ROAD to prosperity.
College Football: A Championship of the Willing?
Diverting for a moment to popular culture….
This has been a particularly frustrating season for US college football fans, except for followers of LSU or Ohio State. The current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) pits two teams, selected by votes and computers out of more than 100, to play in the national championship game. Even more than in previous years, there has been wide agreement that a number of deserving teams were left out.
The problem, of course, is that any selection of two teams out of the three to five or ten that are most deserving is unnecessarily subjective. But no year has been worse than this. A Chicago WBBM news radio station commentary put it something like this. USC (University of Southern California) and Georgia were eliminated by a formula. In a proper playoff system they would have had to be beaten on the field, which WBBM opined, would not have happened. Comforting words for a USC fan (and Georgia fans as well).
WBBM went on to criticize the disingenuous argument that a playoff would make it impossible for athletes to conduct their studies, noting that the college basketball games continue throughout the period and that much of the time that playoffs would be held is already university vacation time.
Half of the problem is the very conference that USC plays in. The Pacific-10, with its co-conspirator the Big-10 oppose any playoff system because of its potential to diminish the importance of the Rose Bowl, where the two conferences have played one-another since long before there was a two-point touchdown conversion. The horse is out of the barn, however, The Rose Bowl has already been diminished and this year saw television ratings drop 20 percent from last year. This year’s USC-Illinois match up is generally considered to have been a joke, with Illinois being greatly improved, but far below the caliber that would make a Rose Bowl viable.
Before the BCS, USC would have played Ohio State, which was losing for the second time in a row in the national championship game against LSU. Again, the Rose Bowl as it was known in 1949 or 1999 is a thing of the past.
It may be time for a college football championship of the willing. The rest of college football should proceed with a genuine bowl playoff system and let the Pacific-10 and Big-10 sit on the sidelines and play in their once great but diminished Rose Bowl to smaller and smaller television audiences.
At a minimum, an eight team playoff should be established. WBBM suggested that a 16-team playoff would be feasible. However, care needs to be taken not to follow the example of college basketball, where my impression is that all teams are included in the playoffs, plus a smattering of high school teams. That’s why I stopped following college basketball some years ago. It would be useful to limit any playoff to conference championships. There is no logic in allowing a national champion to be crowned that was incapable of winning its own conference.
The Pacific-10 and Big-10 are not likely to be left out in the cold too long. They would soon find it preferable to be a part of the solution rather than trying to put Humpty Dumpty together again.
This has been a particularly frustrating season for US college football fans, except for followers of LSU or Ohio State. The current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) pits two teams, selected by votes and computers out of more than 100, to play in the national championship game. Even more than in previous years, there has been wide agreement that a number of deserving teams were left out.
The problem, of course, is that any selection of two teams out of the three to five or ten that are most deserving is unnecessarily subjective. But no year has been worse than this. A Chicago WBBM news radio station commentary put it something like this. USC (University of Southern California) and Georgia were eliminated by a formula. In a proper playoff system they would have had to be beaten on the field, which WBBM opined, would not have happened. Comforting words for a USC fan (and Georgia fans as well).
WBBM went on to criticize the disingenuous argument that a playoff would make it impossible for athletes to conduct their studies, noting that the college basketball games continue throughout the period and that much of the time that playoffs would be held is already university vacation time.
Half of the problem is the very conference that USC plays in. The Pacific-10, with its co-conspirator the Big-10 oppose any playoff system because of its potential to diminish the importance of the Rose Bowl, where the two conferences have played one-another since long before there was a two-point touchdown conversion. The horse is out of the barn, however, The Rose Bowl has already been diminished and this year saw television ratings drop 20 percent from last year. This year’s USC-Illinois match up is generally considered to have been a joke, with Illinois being greatly improved, but far below the caliber that would make a Rose Bowl viable.
Before the BCS, USC would have played Ohio State, which was losing for the second time in a row in the national championship game against LSU. Again, the Rose Bowl as it was known in 1949 or 1999 is a thing of the past.
It may be time for a college football championship of the willing. The rest of college football should proceed with a genuine bowl playoff system and let the Pacific-10 and Big-10 sit on the sidelines and play in their once great but diminished Rose Bowl to smaller and smaller television audiences.
At a minimum, an eight team playoff should be established. WBBM suggested that a 16-team playoff would be feasible. However, care needs to be taken not to follow the example of college basketball, where my impression is that all teams are included in the playoffs, plus a smattering of high school teams. That’s why I stopped following college basketball some years ago. It would be useful to limit any playoff to conference championships. There is no logic in allowing a national champion to be crowned that was incapable of winning its own conference.
The Pacific-10 and Big-10 are not likely to be left out in the cold too long. They would soon find it preferable to be a part of the solution rather than trying to put Humpty Dumpty together again.
2008/01/06
Lagos Urban Area Population Estimate
Lagos Urban Area Population Estimate
The current Demographia estimate (2006) of the population of the Lagos urban area (urban agglomeration) is 8,100,000, covering an area of approximately 775 square kilometers (300 square miles) for a density of 10,400 per square km or 27,000 per square mile.
This estimate is based upon data from the 2006 Nigerian census, which is disputed by many, including the state of Lagos. Right or wrong, however, the census has become the international authority for population in Nigeria.
Our estimate includes most of the population of each of the following local government areas:
LAGOS STATE
Agege
Ajeromi-Ifelodun
Alimosho
Amuwo-Odofin
Apapa
Eti-Osa
Ifako-Ijaiye
Ikeja
Kosofe
Lagos Island
Lagos Mainland
Mushin
Oshodi-Isolo
Somolu
Surulere
OGUN STATE
Ifo
Abo-Ota
Note that this is an urban agglomeration or urban area population. The population is for the area of continuous urbanization. It is not a metropolitan area (labor market) population. There is no standardized international definition for metropolitan areas, though if the imprecise approach used in many nations were followed in the case of Lagos, it is likely that the metropolitan area would include the entire states of Lagos and Ogun, for a total population of 12.7 million.
The land area and population data for the urban agglomeration has been developed from inspection of satellite maps and comparison with local government area boundaries.
The current Demographia estimate (2006) of the population of the Lagos urban area (urban agglomeration) is 8,100,000, covering an area of approximately 775 square kilometers (300 square miles) for a density of 10,400 per square km or 27,000 per square mile.
This estimate is based upon data from the 2006 Nigerian census, which is disputed by many, including the state of Lagos. Right or wrong, however, the census has become the international authority for population in Nigeria.
Our estimate includes most of the population of each of the following local government areas:
LAGOS STATE
Agege
Ajeromi-Ifelodun
Alimosho
Amuwo-Odofin
Apapa
Eti-Osa
Ifako-Ijaiye
Ikeja
Kosofe
Lagos Island
Lagos Mainland
Mushin
Oshodi-Isolo
Somolu
Surulere
OGUN STATE
Ifo
Abo-Ota
Note that this is an urban agglomeration or urban area population. The population is for the area of continuous urbanization. It is not a metropolitan area (labor market) population. There is no standardized international definition for metropolitan areas, though if the imprecise approach used in many nations were followed in the case of Lagos, it is likely that the metropolitan area would include the entire states of Lagos and Ogun, for a total population of 12.7 million.
The land area and population data for the urban agglomeration has been developed from inspection of satellite maps and comparison with local government area boundaries.
2008/01/05
On St. Louis, Light Rail & Highway 40 Temporary Closure
Guest Blog by Tom Sullivan
On St. Louis, Light Rail & Highway 40 Temporary Closure
Goooo, Metro . . .
"Metro can play a huge role."
March 9, 2006
"The Highway 40 project offers a golden opportunity for Metro to prove its value. People might even forgive the $126 million cost overrun on the Cross County line if Metro can keep traffic moving."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial
December, 2006
Metro president Larry Salci asks the Missouri Legislature for $20 million, saying the transit agency could be of great help when part of Highway 40 is shut down -- but it needs additional funding to do so. The Legislature did not act on the request.
April, 2007
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments gives Metro $6 million in federal funds to add buses, mostly in west St. Louis County, to help during the Highway 40 project.
October, 2007
MoDOT says it will give Metro up to $3 million for additional riders that use Metro. "This is a key component in getting one third of vehicle trips during peak hours off our highway system during those peak hours," said MoDOT director Pete Rahn.
* * *
Metro launches a new website, www.dontgetstuck.org, devoted to providing tips and avoiding traffic jams during the Highway 40 reconstruction. "We know the I-64 reconstruction project and its ripple effect on other nearby roads and interstates are a major concern for the whole region, and we believe Metro can play a huge role in helping to address those concerns," said Patrick McLean, Metro Vice President of Marketing and Customer Service.
December 29, 2007
"Representatives of the Metro transportation agency will be at the center court of Chesterfield Mall from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. today to provide information on using buses and MetroLink trains when part of Highway 40 closes."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch
January 3, 2008
"EMPTY SEATS: On one early morning bus, only a reporter was aboard."
"MetroLink trains run smoothly as a few passengers file on at the Clayton station on a frigid Wednesday morning. Transit traffic was light amid the closing of Highway 40 for reconstruction." (photo caption)
"But trains departing the Shrewsbury station were one-quarter full and appeared emptier than usual." (Note: A MetroLink train has 144 seats, so a quarter-full train is around 35 passengers.)
"Some Metro buses showed no signs that the shutdown was having an impact. On a 6:05 a.m. bus that left the Chesterfield Mall, going east to the Maplewood Metro station, only one passenger -- a Post-Dispatch reporter -- was on board."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch
(Note: The Shrewsbury MetroLink line will cost taxpayers about $1.1 billion when finance charges are figured in. Larry Salci said the extension "exceeded all expectations" for ridership.)
-- from Tom Sullivan, 1/03/08
On St. Louis, Light Rail & Highway 40 Temporary Closure
Goooo, Metro . . .
"Metro can play a huge role."
March 9, 2006
"The Highway 40 project offers a golden opportunity for Metro to prove its value. People might even forgive the $126 million cost overrun on the Cross County line if Metro can keep traffic moving."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial
December, 2006
Metro president Larry Salci asks the Missouri Legislature for $20 million, saying the transit agency could be of great help when part of Highway 40 is shut down -- but it needs additional funding to do so. The Legislature did not act on the request.
April, 2007
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments gives Metro $6 million in federal funds to add buses, mostly in west St. Louis County, to help during the Highway 40 project.
October, 2007
MoDOT says it will give Metro up to $3 million for additional riders that use Metro. "This is a key component in getting one third of vehicle trips during peak hours off our highway system during those peak hours," said MoDOT director Pete Rahn.
* * *
Metro launches a new website, www.dontgetstuck.org, devoted to providing tips and avoiding traffic jams during the Highway 40 reconstruction. "We know the I-64 reconstruction project and its ripple effect on other nearby roads and interstates are a major concern for the whole region, and we believe Metro can play a huge role in helping to address those concerns," said Patrick McLean, Metro Vice President of Marketing and Customer Service.
December 29, 2007
"Representatives of the Metro transportation agency will be at the center court of Chesterfield Mall from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. today to provide information on using buses and MetroLink trains when part of Highway 40 closes."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch
January 3, 2008
"EMPTY SEATS: On one early morning bus, only a reporter was aboard."
"MetroLink trains run smoothly as a few passengers file on at the Clayton station on a frigid Wednesday morning. Transit traffic was light amid the closing of Highway 40 for reconstruction." (photo caption)
"But trains departing the Shrewsbury station were one-quarter full and appeared emptier than usual." (Note: A MetroLink train has 144 seats, so a quarter-full train is around 35 passengers.)
"Some Metro buses showed no signs that the shutdown was having an impact. On a 6:05 a.m. bus that left the Chesterfield Mall, going east to the Maplewood Metro station, only one passenger -- a Post-Dispatch reporter -- was on board."
-- St. Louis Post-Dispatch
(Note: The Shrewsbury MetroLink line will cost taxpayers about $1.1 billion when finance charges are figured in. Larry Salci said the extension "exceeded all expectations" for ridership.)
-- from Tom Sullivan, 1/03/08
2007/12/28
Michigan to Fall Under 10 Million Residents?
Michigan could become the first large state to ever exceed 10 million population and then to fall back below 10 million. The latest US Bureau of the Census estimates indicate that Michigan’s population fell from 10,102,000 to 10,072,000 between 2006 and 2007. Should that rate continue, Michigan would fall to under 10,000,000 by the 2010 census.
New York Out-Migration Exceeds Katrina's Louisiana
Data just released by the US Bureau of the Census indicates that New York state lost 1,400,000 million domestic migrants between 2000 and 2007 (people moving from New York to other states). This is nearly equal to the population of the city Philadelphia. Perhaps most stunningly, New York also had the highest rate of domestic migration loss, at -7.4 percent, exceeding even that of Louisiana and its hundreds of thousands of residents driven out in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
State Migration: From More Expensive to Less Expensive Areas
Report
The U.S. Bureau of the Census released annual state population and migration estimates today (27 December 2007). This document provides detailed data and observations on the trends in domestic migration.
Domestic migration occurs when a person moves from one place in the United States to another. In this case, a domestic migrant moves from one state or the District of Columbia to another.
Moving to More Affordable States
There is continued net domestic migration to the more affordable (responsive planning) states from prescriptive planning states. This is evident in comparing the change in annual migration rates in 2007 compared to 2000-2001.
Overall, between 2000 and 2007, there was a strong movement away from the more unaffordable states.
Texas Emerges as the Top Destination
In 2006-7, Texas had the largest domestic migration gain, at 140,000. Texas had emerged as the top destination in 2005-6, principally due to the exodus of Katrina refugees from Louisiana (220,000). However, the Texas net domestic gain remained strong in 200607, at an annual rate more than tripling the 2000-1 migration gain. Texas has gained 580,000 domestic migrants since 2000. Between 2000 and 2005 Florida strongly led Texas in domestic migration gains, with 1,050,000, compared to the Texas figure of 210,000.
The End of Migration to Florida?
Perhaps the most significant news from the new data is that Florida’s domestic migration gains have nearly come to an end. During the first 6 years of the decade, Florida gained an average of more than 200,000 domestic migrants annually. In 2006-7, this figure declined to 35,000. Florida’s overall growth rate has also declined. Until 2006, it looked possible that Florida would grow quickly enough to replace New York as the nation’s third largest state after California and Texas. This would not occur if the growth rate of the last year continues.
Another #1 for California
California became the nation’s largest state in the late 1960s, passing New York, which had been the largest state since 1810. In the last two years, California has also displaced New York as the leader in net domestic migration loss (in 2006 and 2007). Since 2000, California has lost 1,200,000 domestic migrants, a population approximately equal to that of the city of San Diego.
Moving from Florida to North & South Carolina?
There has been much talk of the “half-backs,” Northerners who move to Florida and then move “halfway” back to North Carolina or South Carolina. Since 2000, North Carolina has gained approximately 500,000 domestic migrants and South Carolina has gained 225,000. In each case, the 2006-7 domestic migration gain was approximately three times the 2000-1 gain. The halfbacks have also discovered Tennessee, which has gained more than 200,000 domestic migrants and has had a similar increase in rate since 2000-1.
The U.S. Bureau of the Census released annual state population and migration estimates today (27 December 2007). This document provides detailed data and observations on the trends in domestic migration.
Domestic migration occurs when a person moves from one place in the United States to another. In this case, a domestic migrant moves from one state or the District of Columbia to another.
Moving to More Affordable States
There is continued net domestic migration to the more affordable (responsive planning) states from prescriptive planning states. This is evident in comparing the change in annual migration rates in 2007 compared to 2000-2001.
In 2000-2001, the responsive planning states had a net domestic migration loss of 48,000. By 2006-2007, there was a net domestic migration gain of 452,000.
In 2000-2001, the prescriptive planning states had a net domestic migration gain of 48,000. By 2006-2007, there was a net domestic migration loss of 452,000.
Among the prescriptive planning states, the higher cost states experienced an increase in net domestic migration loss from 246,000 to 677,000 between 2000-1 and 2006-7.
Among the prescriptive planning states, the “safety valve” states experience a reduction in net domestic migration gain from 295,000 in 2000-1 to 225,000 in 2006-7. Net domestic migration gain peaked at 503,000 in 2004-5 (Figure)
Overall, between 2000 and 2007, there was a strong movement away from the more unaffordable states.
The higher cost prescriptive planning states experienced a net domestic migration loss of 3,752,000.
The safety value prescriptive planning states experience a net domestic migration gain of 2,538,000.
The responsive planning states experienced a net domestic migration gain of 1,214,000.
Texas Emerges as the Top Destination
In 2006-7, Texas had the largest domestic migration gain, at 140,000. Texas had emerged as the top destination in 2005-6, principally due to the exodus of Katrina refugees from Louisiana (220,000). However, the Texas net domestic gain remained strong in 200607, at an annual rate more than tripling the 2000-1 migration gain. Texas has gained 580,000 domestic migrants since 2000. Between 2000 and 2005 Florida strongly led Texas in domestic migration gains, with 1,050,000, compared to the Texas figure of 210,000.
The End of Migration to Florida?
Perhaps the most significant news from the new data is that Florida’s domestic migration gains have nearly come to an end. During the first 6 years of the decade, Florida gained an average of more than 200,000 domestic migrants annually. In 2006-7, this figure declined to 35,000. Florida’s overall growth rate has also declined. Until 2006, it looked possible that Florida would grow quickly enough to replace New York as the nation’s third largest state after California and Texas. This would not occur if the growth rate of the last year continues.
Another #1 for California
California became the nation’s largest state in the late 1960s, passing New York, which had been the largest state since 1810. In the last two years, California has also displaced New York as the leader in net domestic migration loss (in 2006 and 2007). Since 2000, California has lost 1,200,000 domestic migrants, a population approximately equal to that of the city of San Diego.
Moving from Florida to North & South Carolina?
There has been much talk of the “half-backs,” Northerners who move to Florida and then move “halfway” back to North Carolina or South Carolina. Since 2000, North Carolina has gained approximately 500,000 domestic migrants and South Carolina has gained 225,000. In each case, the 2006-7 domestic migration gain was approximately three times the 2000-1 gain. The halfbacks have also discovered Tennessee, which has gained more than 200,000 domestic migrants and has had a similar increase in rate since 2000-1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
