Quote Originally Posted by NorthEnder View Post
I don't think Bham man understands what "net" means. The core of Metro Detroit hasn't had net in-migration from the rest of the country in years.
Growth is growth. It doesn't matter if the folks are from Detroit or Timbuktu.

Why does growth not count if there is negative net domestic in-migration?

Using your standard, I guess NYC, LA, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Boston and DC are all in trouble, because their metros all have negative domestic in-migration.

Heck some of these places have had negative domestic in-migration since basically these cities were founded. Immigrants have always been their lifeblood.

If Oakland and Macomb counties start declining, then there may be cause for concern. Until that happens, you're just twisting yourself in knots, trying to find some negative angle to the population growth, IMO.