Top Ten Metros for Growth 2000-2010

[Red Devil]

When you think about all of these things, you start to wonder how cities like LV and Phoenix had such a draw to begin with?

The draw of Vegas was cheap housing, good weather, and no state income tax. Old people from Cali could sell their bungalow, move to LV, and not have to pay state income tax on their California pension check [[if they were state employees, anyhow)

[swingline]

Progressive land use planning that shuns single use zoning and promotes regional planning rarely seems to make much of a difference when it comes to these growth numbers. Most regions are making better land use decisions than us, but they would have grown even if their planning was worse. The top-ten growth regions have just as much "soul-sucking" sprawl as Detroit.

What most of the high-growth metropolitan areas have in common [[other than sunshine) is a diverse non-manufacturing based economy that provides jobs for college graduates and for skilled non-graduates. These places are mostly driven economically by the Big Three of Healthcare, Information Technology and Financial Services. Educated and skilled people will find the jobs. They have choices and are mobile.

The more esoteric question is whether this economic Big Three can sustain a national economy for very long. Can a national economy prosper long term if it doesn't make anything it consumes other than healthcare?

[Ocean2026]

Houdini Austin wasn't hit hard at all. Las Vegas and Arizona had high inflated house prices and yes they got bombed, however if you had bought a house there and in Detroit in say 1995-2000 youd still be better off there.