Great NYT article about the resilient Pittsburgh economy and about how it can be a model for what Detroit is going through right now. Great that Pittsburgh is finally starting to get national recognition for performing better than the rest of the country in this downturn.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/business/economy/08collapse.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
Showing posts with label population loss. Show all posts
Showing posts with label population loss. Show all posts
Monday, January 12, 2009
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Are Bad Economic Times Good for Pittsburgh?
Interesting premise in this P-G article. Could the stability of the local job and real estate markets bring some talent back to town?
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08361/937758-294.stm
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08361/937758-294.stm
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Pittsburgh workforce getting younger
If you've been following the real demographic trends locally and not buying into inaccurate, negative media hype, then this should come as no surprise.
The Trib reports that the median age of working Pittsburghers dropped from 40.5 in 2005 to 39.3 in 2007, according to figures released today by the Census Bureau. Here is a link to the article.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/mostread/s_589592.html
The Trib reports that the median age of working Pittsburghers dropped from 40.5 in 2005 to 39.3 in 2007, according to figures released today by the Census Bureau. Here is a link to the article.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/mostread/s_589592.html
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Population Loss to Subside- Then What Will You Find to Bitch About?
I apologize that this news is a couple days old, but I didn't start this blog until today, and I had to get in some comments on this because it's my biggest pet peeve.
I will actually give the two major local dailies a little credit for reporting on this (but not much because anyone with a little bit of motivation and investigative skills could have been reporting on this for years like I have...but I digress).
Anyway, both the P-G and the Trib have articles about predictions by Pitt economic and demographic researcher Christopher Briem (he has a great blog) that the ongoing population loss in the region has almost run its course and that we are poised for slight population growth in the relatively near future.
You mean it's no going to go on forever?!? Well, you would never know that from the incessant coverage the issue gets. And as the title of this post asks, "What negative item will the local media and the Yinzers find to obsess about now?"
I have written for several years in various local publications that the common perceptions about the region's population loss are incorrect. And that's because of misguided focus and lazy reporting by local media.
The thing that local media focus on the most is the loss of young people. But that has almost nothing whatsoever to do with our population loss. As Mr. Briem pointed out as far back as 2002 in a Post-Gazette article, Pittsburgh retains young adults at a batter rate than Cleveland, Philadelphia, Detroit and even Miami, to name a few. A year later in 2003, a Pittsburgh Trib article pointed out that the city retains its young professionals at a higher rate than Columbus, Seattle, Raleigh, Atlanta and Washington, D.C. So why don't the Pittsburgh media report on the REAL reasons for the population loss? Answer: Because they want to feed on Pittsburghers' low self image of the city by accentuating the negative.
So what are the real reasons for the population loss? Two things: more deaths than births, and not enough international in-migration. More deaths than births is a result of a higher than average senior population, which has actually been declining rapidly due to the fact that they are dying off. Essentially, here is what is happening right now: old white people are dying, the black population is steady, the local Asian community is seeing growth (about 4,000 people in the last six years) and the local Hispanic community is seeing growth (about 1,000 people added in the last six years). But despite the gains in international in-migration, there is not enough to offset the "natural" population decline. The states of California and New York actually have extremely high out-migration rates but they have population gains because of a high number of immigrants coming in from other countries.
Anyway, as is the point of this whole blog, I'm trying to uncover the positive nuggets of information that local media (both print and broadcast) leave unsaid, and correct misguided assumptions and misperceptions among Yinzers, media and politicians.
I will actually give the two major local dailies a little credit for reporting on this (but not much because anyone with a little bit of motivation and investigative skills could have been reporting on this for years like I have...but I digress).
Anyway, both the P-G and the Trib have articles about predictions by Pitt economic and demographic researcher Christopher Briem (he has a great blog) that the ongoing population loss in the region has almost run its course and that we are poised for slight population growth in the relatively near future.
You mean it's no going to go on forever?!? Well, you would never know that from the incessant coverage the issue gets. And as the title of this post asks, "What negative item will the local media and the Yinzers find to obsess about now?"
I have written for several years in various local publications that the common perceptions about the region's population loss are incorrect. And that's because of misguided focus and lazy reporting by local media.
The thing that local media focus on the most is the loss of young people. But that has almost nothing whatsoever to do with our population loss. As Mr. Briem pointed out as far back as 2002 in a Post-Gazette article, Pittsburgh retains young adults at a batter rate than Cleveland, Philadelphia, Detroit and even Miami, to name a few. A year later in 2003, a Pittsburgh Trib article pointed out that the city retains its young professionals at a higher rate than Columbus, Seattle, Raleigh, Atlanta and Washington, D.C. So why don't the Pittsburgh media report on the REAL reasons for the population loss? Answer: Because they want to feed on Pittsburghers' low self image of the city by accentuating the negative.
So what are the real reasons for the population loss? Two things: more deaths than births, and not enough international in-migration. More deaths than births is a result of a higher than average senior population, which has actually been declining rapidly due to the fact that they are dying off. Essentially, here is what is happening right now: old white people are dying, the black population is steady, the local Asian community is seeing growth (about 4,000 people in the last six years) and the local Hispanic community is seeing growth (about 1,000 people added in the last six years). But despite the gains in international in-migration, there is not enough to offset the "natural" population decline. The states of California and New York actually have extremely high out-migration rates but they have population gains because of a high number of immigrants coming in from other countries.
Anyway, as is the point of this whole blog, I'm trying to uncover the positive nuggets of information that local media (both print and broadcast) leave unsaid, and correct misguided assumptions and misperceptions among Yinzers, media and politicians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
