There's a sweet spot, I used to look for it myself, of towns that are growing but only around 100 to 200k population. Best of both worlds, civilization and Nature. When peeps move to those towns they inevitably want to "close the gate" behind them.
I'd argue that what you, or I, or Ocho want isn't what everyone wants. Also, not everyone likes nature. Or civilization. Or...
Partly, but more so on things like school closures - which have many parents really pissed off. And with the ability to work remote being more permanent, they don't have to live in those places anymore and can keep their job.
True. Some people would not dream of leaving the big city (thank God), and others wouldn't dream of leaving the country life. You could say they are the two tails of the preference curve.
Cali real estate is way overpriced....NJ and NY near any body of water is a huge premium. If you want to live inland in NY or NJ and get a nice house you need to be an hour or more away from the city. It is ridiculous because they are so densely populated to get real land and space you need to live far away. Arizona has huge growth in Sedona and Scottsdale and other suburbs of the Phoenix area and Utah is attracting a lot of people in Salt Lake City and surrounding areas. You can live 30 minutes from downtown in a "ansion" for $500k . Same in Utah if you dont mind the mormons. All the oil people I deal with live 20 minutes outside of Houston in huge houses for peanuts. You cannot live 20 minutes outside of LA, NY, Chicago or any major city and get the same thing at all. As for population CA, FLO and TEXAS have all been increasing in population steadily over the past decade. neither state is in desparate need for more population growth except to collect more taxes from a bigger population.
That chart shows you that extreme liberals from California and New York are moving to Texas and Florida. The problem is Californians turn states that they move to, into shitholes soon enough. Look at the states of Washington and Oregon. Like a cancer that is spreading, it destroys the host's body soon enough, given enough time. Maybe, the extreme liberals do not know that Texas has a lot of guns in the hands of its law abiding citizens?
Oh, I don't think its a danger of states "running out of people". But the people who are moving are probably the ones with the tax dollars. Or do you believe its all the homeless leaving?
I dont think 100,00 people shifting has made NY or CA more spacious to live in or made texas more crowded at all.. these are huge states with dense population centers. NYC is a place where people are leaving to flee high rents and huge real estate costs but that is not easily replaced. With 9 million people, the city wont even feel 100,000 people net leaving over 5 boroughs spread out. NYC for example losing 100,000 people still does not change the number of people who come into the cuty daily to work or leisure who pay taxes on everything they buy or sell. I think it is too simplistic to say people are felling the left to move to the right. the whole economics of big cities and improvement in technology means a dem or gop can live anywhere and still work with a major company so why pay $4000 a month for rent in a city when you can live anywhere and pay $4000 a month in mortgage for a million dollar house and an acre.
This is the total change in population. Its not like 100k people leave and the city gets impacted. But the mix of the population is probably changing far more dramatically. Especially in California with immigration. Add 500k of immigrants (as an example) lose 600k of tax payers and this is a problem. Or maybe you think its not and there's no big deal here. Ok. We should take a look at tax receipts, though states like Florida/Texas - that's harder. No state income tax!