I'm all for not only legalizing marijuanna, but releasing everyone who's incarcerated on non-violent marijuanna related offenses? In jail for growing, using, posessing, or selling marijuanna? You're free!

Stuff like this isn't good. This state is now the prison capital of the world.

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/global/2018.html

Oklahoma needs to get off the top of lists like this.

Really, how high is Oklahoma's true rate of incarceration? Are they also counting the number of prisoners from out of state contracted by private prisons? I don't know. Being no. 1 may also reflect how good the private prison industry has been in Oklahoma.

This is probably not the best place for this, The NY Times has a map today which focuses on population in various metro areas and across the US. Depending on where you live you get a fold out of a specific metro area - we got Dallas. This is the US map which I thought was really interesting. I’m sure this is (or will be) on their website, but have not looked. 14957

2018 population figures are out


The state population crept up by about 10,000 residents in the 12-month period ending July 1, the increase largely due to more births and migrants moving to the state from outside the U.S., according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau population estimates.

Figures recently released by the Census Bureau show Oklahoma with an estimated 3,932,640 residents as of July 1, 2018, an increase of 10,728 residents over the past 12 months.

The 0.3 percent increase in population for the year ranked the state 33rd nationally in growth rate, behind Vermont at 32nd and ahead of Maine at 34th.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/births-prop-up-state-population-increase-as-net-migration-goes/article_4a849e1c-3ef5-5f69-a2ac-761d8653ffed.html

Wow, pretty pathetic. Continues about a 3-4 year run of stigmant growth. Love to hear others thoughts on why, maybe jobs, wages, health, education, drug use, politics.

Wow, pretty pathetic. Continues about a 3-4 year run of stigmant growth. Love to hear others thoughts on why, maybe jobs, wages, health, education, drug use, politics.

Stagnant growth still ranked Oklahoma 33rd in the country. Many states had population losses. In 10 years (maybe sooner) the U.S. as a whole could start to lose population if immigration continues to be restricted and our birth rate continues to fall. This will have dire consequences for our future economic prospects.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4230083-u-s-population-growth-slowing-business-impacts-labor-supply-product-demand

Definitely not great growth, but I'm surprised that only a 0.3 increase was still 33rd.

Definitely not great growth, but I'm surprised that only a 0.3 increase was still 33rd.

Marginal growth in the two metros is nearly offset by losses in the rural parts of the state. OKC/Tulsa metros and places like Okemah, Idabel, Erick, etc are different worlds.

There are two main problems. One, is we're competing with Texas, and the other is we're competing with fad states such as Oregon and Colorado. Oklahoma has a lot to offer, but without marketing, many people won't know about it.

There are two main problems. One, is we're competing with Texas, and the other is we're competing with fad states such as Oregon and Colorado. Oklahoma has a lot to offer, but without marketing, many people won't know about it.

The good thing about low population growth is that it comes with low cost of living. In fast growing Austin the cost of living index is 130. In Portland, OR it's a whopping 148 and Denver 144. Contrast that to Oklahoma City where it's 91.5. In stagnant Lawton it's only 78. National average is 100. The word is getting out what Oklahoma has to offer, such as low COL, and this California family acted upon it earlier this year.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WX7Euyvtv8&feature=share

The good thing about low population growth is that it comes with low cost of living. In fast growing Austin the cost of living index is 130. In Portland, OR it's a whopping 148 and Denver 144. Contrast that to Oklahoma City where it's 91.5. In stagnant Lawton it's only 78. National average is 100. The word is getting out what Oklahoma has to offer, such as low COL, and this California family acted upon it earlier this year.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WX7Euyvtv8&feature=share

I think I remember seeing this video a while back. There are a number of states including Illinois and New York where people are moving out of. California would probably be one if it weren't for illegal immigration from Mexico. I saw where Florida has gained 4 million residents since 2010. It amazes me that the cost of living hasn't exploded to California levels there. So yeah, I do like the slow growth has kept our cost of living in check. I would like it to accelerate a bit though.

You'll see some job growth in OKC in the next five years that will attract out-of-state professionals and retain young professionals and graduates.

OKC is in a position to capitalize on the growth you saw in 2010-15. Most of Oklahoma's growth was probably the result of the OKC core.

A look at the cost of living per state, third quarter. Only Mississippi is lower than Oklahoma.

https://www.missourieconomy.org/images/indicators/cost_of_living/col3q18_map1.jpg

There are a number of states including Illinois and New York where people are moving out of. California would probably be one if it weren't for illegal immigration from Mexico. I saw where Florida has gained 4 million residents since 2010. It amazes me that the cost of living hasn't exploded to California levels there. So yeah, I do like the slow growth has kept our cost of living in check. I would like it to accelerate a bit though.

I think eliminating all income tax would work better in attracting more people to the state than having a very low cost of living. It would make it easier to compete with the behemoth that is Texas. The big problem with doing that is how to make up for lost revenue? Doing it by putting a sales tax on every service imaginable or raising property taxes both seem to be unacceptable. At any rate, having a very low cost of living index doesn't come with a cool image. Who wants to move to Mississippi or Arkansas?

There are two main problems. One, is we're competing with Texas, and the other is we're competing with fad states such as Oregon and Colorado. Oklahoma has a lot to offer, but without marketing, many people won't know about it.

I was in OKC this last weekend and drove around the Heritage Hills area looking at Christmas lights. We pulled a profile sheet from a home for sale that was selling for less than our nice, but modest home in the Denver burbs. The same HH home in Denver would be $1.5 to 2 million. Being in a "fad" city is nice if you have been here, but if someone wants to move here from anywhere other than CA or Seattle, bring your wallet AND credit cards!

Who wants to move to Mississippi or Arkansas?

I agree with the exception of NW Arkansas which is growing rapidly and is a great area.

The notion that low cost of living is a plus is suspect. Low COL reflects low salaries, which come from low wage Jobs which require low education which results in low tax base which results in low tax receipts (unless you do like OKC ) and add a .05 cent tax.

All those places with high cost of living also generally have higher wages, more educated populations and greater services thus people STILL flock to those places. NY may be losing population but NYC isn't. Same with Seattle, LA, SF, DC other high cost cities. Poor people do struggle in those places but the highly educated thrive due to HIGH wage jobs following

The notion that low cost of living is a plus is suspect. Low COL reflects low salaries, which come from low wage Jobs which require low education which results in low tax base which results in low tax receipts (unless you do like OKC ) and add a .05 cent tax.

All those places with high cost of living also generally have higher wages, more educated populations and greater services thus people STILL flock to those places. NY may be losing population but NYC isn't. Same with Seattle, LA, SF, DC other high cost cities. Poor people do struggle in those places but the highly educated thrive do to HIGH wage jobs following

There are quite a few highly educated homeless people in PDX right now. The salaries are not commiserate with the COL in most areas. Hence why there are so many more homeless people in expensive cities.

There are quite a few highly educated homeless people in PDX right now. The salaries are not commiserate with the COL in most areas. Hence why there are so many more homeless people in expensive cities.
Last I checked PDX and Oregon is growing at a pretty good clip

I agree with the exception of NW Arkansas which is growing rapidly and is a great area.

Yeah, too bad how Wal-Mart and Tyson weren't founded in Oklahoma.

There are quite a few highly educated homeless people in PDX right now. The salaries are not commiserate with the COL in most areas. Hence why there are so many more homeless people in expensive cities.

So they make more money from handouts on the street than they would working at a fast food place, like McDonald's?

I was in OKC this last weekend and drove around the Heritage Hills area looking at Christmas lights. We pulled a profile sheet from a home for sale that was selling for less than our nice, but modest home in the Denver burbs. The same HH home in Denver would be $1.5 to 2 million. Being in a "fad" city is nice if you have been here, but if someone wants to move here from anywhere other than CA or Seattle, bring your wallet AND credit cards!

To be fair though, Denver has more going for it other than just being a fad city. It has breathtaking natural beauty/scenery right at its doorstep and is in a state that has a much more progressive, functional state government. Denver is also much larger than OKC and is a truly major metro area in a way OKC isn't. To top it off, salaries are higher in Denver than OKC, though probably not high enough to make the cost of living comparable. You pay more to live in Denver because you value the amenities that living somewhere like that offers.

So they make more money from handouts on the street than they would working at a fast food place, like McDonald's?

Haha, very possible. I was in downtown Portland this summer, and EVERYWHERE I looked, there were tons of homeless people. It was almost epidemic level, when I was there. When COL rises well beyond salary levels, this happens quickly. Not saying OKC is perfect or way better off. But there is a dark side to high COL cities.

Haha, very possible. I was in downtown Portland this summer, and EVERYWHERE I looked, there were tons of homeless people. It was almost epidemic level, when I was there. When COL rises well beyond salary levels, this happens quickly. Not saying OKC is perfect or way better off. But there is a dark side to high COL cities.

Bet it doesn’t have anything on LA!

Some people are homeless because they're mentally ill. If you've got schizophrenia and no family to take care of you, congratulations, you're homeless now.

On the other end of the spectrum, some people are homeless because they're young and directionless, and they'd rather be homeless in a cool place than get a job is a boring place. Chris Pratt was homeless in Hawaii for several years, and apparently just smoked pot on the beach all day.

Then there are all kinds of people in between. The trendier your city, the higher your cost of living, the more you're going to have a problem with "voluntary homeless" people. Most of them aren't going to become famous actors, and many of them are going to have some degree of drug addiction or mental illness. But there are plenty of people who would rather sleep on somebody's couch, or in a van, especially in a city that has a lot of services to cater to them, and weather that won't kill you (not many homeless people in Barrow, Alaska).

As far as cost of living goes, too far one way or the other can be a real problem. Ultra high cost means that normal people have a hard time getting by. Ultra low cost means that there's very little demand to live there. People would rather not live there, even though it's cheap. Neither one is a good thing.

If Oklahoma can get its education system out of the bottom 10 and cut down on its incarceration rate (criminal justice reform has some real momentum lately), we could see much better growth in the next 10 years.

To be fair though, Denver has more going for it other than just being a fad city. It has breathtaking natural beauty/scenery right at its doorstep and is in a state that has a much more progressive, functional state government. Denver is also much larger than OKC and is a truly major metro area in a way OKC isn't. To top it off, salaries are higher in Denver than OKC, though probably not high enough to make the cost of living comparable. You pay more to live in Denver because you value the amenities that living somewhere like that offers.

That is my point. I was lucky enough to have moved here quite a few years ago when it was just pricey. Now it's nearing the point where out of the reach of most - other than people from the east or west coasts.

I was pointing out that one can like nearly like a king in nice, but quickly improving OKC, for what one can live modestly for in Denver.

All those things you love about progressive cities, progressive politics and lots of high paying jobs are simply inflationary. Would you rather have a far lower COL with money to spend or live in a high COL city and be a slave to your house or have 4 roommates because you can't afford more?

2018 population figures are out



https://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/births-prop-up-state-population-increase-as-net-migration-goes/article_4a849e1c-3ef5-5f69-a2ac-761d8653ffed.html

I saw this article when it came out. I noted it did NOT have any pop figures for OKC. Remember, in 2017, Tulsa did not gain any people, and OKC gained about 12,000. So my theory is that the Tulsa World didn't note OKC numbers for some reason.

Frankly a lot of small towns in Oklahoma are dying, losing their hospitals, turning to four-day schools, etc. And they don't seem to care based on their voting numbers. So I could see OKC gaining while Tulsa stays flat and the rest of the state loses population.

Why are posters reluctant to acknowledge that people are in reality leaving Oklahoma. Many posters on this board who criticize me as negative, do not themselves live in the State. Stop skewing the truth, the State is losing people to other places. Oklahoma has dismal rankings in so many areas and its political leadership is weak. OKC is growing slightly but will soon (2020) be surpassed by cities on a higher growth trajectory

I saw this article when it came out. I noted it did NOT have any pop figures for OKC. Remember, in 2017, Tulsa did not gain any people, and OKC gained about 12,000. So my theory is that the Tulsa World didn't note OKC numbers for some reason.

Frankly a lot of small towns in Oklahoma are dying, losing their hospitals, turning to four-day schools, etc. And they don't seem to care based on their voting numbers. So I could see OKC gaining while Tulsa stays flat and the rest of the state loses population.

That’s ridiculous, it’s STATE population figures, which includes OKC and Tulsa and every other small town. Why would they leave out OKC? It’s from the Census.

Why are posters reluctant to acknowledge that people are in reality leaving Oklahoma. Many posters on this board who criticize me as negative, do not themselves live in the State. Stop skewing the truth, the State is losing people to other places. Oklahoma has dismal rankings in so many areas and its political leadership is weak. OKC is growing slightly but will soon (2020) be surpassed by cities on a higher growth trajectory

I don't see that happening - denying the population slowdown. OKs population grows and slows with the oil and gas industry and that industry is hurting at the moment. Dallas is exploding with new HQs and large corporate installations so it's no wonder people are flocking there - not to mention Austin. When the O & G industry turns back up, the population in OKC will start to expand again. It's just the normal cycle.

Edit: The US Census dept. shows OKCs population is 643,648 as of last year. Its probably around 650,000 now.

People leave and move to every state. Oklahoma isn't in the top 10 for states that people are moving to, but we aren't in the top 10 that people are leaving either. As for small towns losing population, that's something going on nationwide. Not just Oklahoma. And there are small towns that are actually gaining in population such as Elk City, Clinton, Ardmore, Durant, Woodward, and Enid.

I saw this article when it came out. I noted it did NOT have any pop figures for OKC. Remember, in 2017, Tulsa did not gain any people, and OKC gained about 12,000. So my theory is that the Tulsa World didn't note OKC numbers for some reason.

Frankly a lot of small towns in Oklahoma are dying, losing their hospitals, turning to four-day schools, etc. And they don't seem to care based on their voting numbers. So I could see OKC gaining while Tulsa stays flat and the rest of the state loses population.

July 2018 population estimates for cities aren't released until May 2019.

I don't see that happening - denying the population slowdown. OKs population grows and slows with the oil and gas industry and that industry is hurting at the moment. Dallas is exploding with new HQs and large corporate installations so it's no wonder people are flocking there - not to mention Austin. When the O & G industry turns back up, the population in OKC will start to expand again. It's just the normal cycle.

Edit: The US Census dept. shows OKCs population is 643,648 as of last year. Its probably around 650,000 now.

The Dallas metroplex will always be our biggest & worst enemy. Many recent college grads & young professionals still flock to the Dallas area for better jobs/lifestyle as they did 20 years ago. Many high school grads from north Texas flock to OU for college, but when they graduate, take their degrees & move right back to Dallas. Our biggest downfall is not being able to retain those students, who will get a decent job & start families & stay put for a while.

As long as Dallas ecomony stay strongs, it will forever suck people & dollars from Oklahoma. As we only live a couple hours away from one the fastest growing metro areas in the nation.

That’s ridiculous, it’s STATE population figures, which includes OKC and Tulsa and every other small town. Why would they leave out OKC? It’s from the Census.

Relax man.

1. I said it's a THEORY.

2. You're a Tulsan; you should understand. Tulsa World ultimately is just as cheerleady for Tulsa as the Oklahoman is at times for OKC.

3. Are you suggesting that the population trends from 2017 radically shifted in 2018? If so, why? I see no reason to indicate that they would.

To repeat, in 2017, OKC population increased (somewhat marginally). Tulsa's held pat (no increase in migration but a tiny net gain based on births and deaths). And the rural areas of Oklahoma continued to depopulate.

So, if you notice, the subject of this multiyear thread is OKC Population Growth. Not Oklahoma population growth. Most of us here would be running for the exits if we were not in one of the two metro areas. The state of the state is as bad as it has been in my lifetime.

As most people on this forum, I want OKC population growth figures. The Tulsa World provided no detail in that area for whatever reason. I think you would agree that it's likely OKC continued its marginal population growth while Tulsa held even and the rest of the state lost people. I'm basing this on recent history not the whims of a Tulsa World editor.

Relax man.

1. I said it's a THEORY.

2. You're a Tulsan; you should understand. Tulsa World ultimately is just as cheerleady for Tulsa as the Oklahoman is at times for OKC.

3. Are you suggesting that the population trends from 2017 radically shifted in 2018? If so, why? I see no reason to indicate that they would.

To repeat, in 2017, OKC population increased (somewhat marginally). Tulsa's held pat (no increase in migration but a tiny net gain based on births and deaths). And the rural areas of Oklahoma continued to depopulate.

So, if you notice, the subject of this multiyear thread is OKC Population Growth. Not Oklahoma population growth. Most of us here would be running for the exits if we were not in one of the two metro areas. The state of the state is as bad as it has been in my lifetime.

As most people on this forum, I want OKC population growth figures. The Tulsa World provided no detail in that area for whatever reason. I think you would agree that it's likely OKC continued its marginal population growth while Tulsa held even and the rest of the state lost people. I'm basing this on recent history not the whims of a Tulsa World editor.

In 2017, OKC grew by 11,000 (https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/population/#!/msa/Oklahoma_City%2C_OK). Tulsa grew by 3,000. (https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/population/#!/msa/Tulsa%2C_OK)

Both OKC and Tulsa have seen recent yearly decreases in yearly population.

OKC growth in 2015: 20,382 (+ 3,478)
OKC growth in 2016: 16,345 (- 4,037)
OKC growth in 2017: 11,274 (-5,071)

Tulsa growth in 2015: 10,974 (+ 4,115)
Tulsa growth in 2016: 7,257 (- 3,717)
Tulsa growth in 2017: 3,241 (- 4,016)

If those trends continued than OKC grew by 6,000 and Tulsa saw no growth or negative growth.

But if I had to guess, I’d say OKC grew by 7,000 and Tulsa grew by 2,000.

But if I had to guess, I’d say OKC grew by 7,000 and Tulsa grew by 2,000.

Yes marginal growth in the two metros nearly offset by losses in the rural counties.

Interesting map I found showing projected growth over the next 40 years. As you can see the OKC and Tulsa metro counties have 5-10% population gains (Canadian County the only one projected to be +10%) and generally surrounding the metros there are 0-5% gains and everywhere else has losses.

http://proximityone.com/outlook/uscty_2010_2060_pctchgb.gif

Like any population trends you have to take it with a grain of salt. This shows oil & gas activity driving high growth in areas like West Texas and Western North Dakota which as we've seen is very cyclical. Same for growth in Oklahoma counties like Woods, Alfalfa, and Major. Any oil downturn will halt growth in those areas.

People leave and move to every state. Oklahoma isn't in the top 10 for states that people are moving to, but we aren't in the top 10 that people are leaving either. As for small towns losing population, that's something going on nationwide. Not just Oklahoma. And there are small towns that are actually gaining in population such as Elk City, Clinton, Ardmore, Durant, Woodward, and Enid.

Elk City, Clinton and Woodward are growing? I don't question Ardmore and Durant, but in my business travel, I've noted that population gains in those communities are transient and are based on drilling activity. A lot of those migrants are temporary residents, many living in hotels. The book is out on Enid, but in the year or so I spent there visiting on business, it did not appear to be a growing community.

Elk City, Clinton and Woodward are growing? I don't question Ardmore and Durant, but in my business travel, I've noted that population gains in those communities are transient and are based on drilling activity. A lot of those migrants are temporary residents, many living in hotels. The book is out on Enid, but in the year or so I spent there visiting on business, it did not appear to be a growing community.

I looked at the census data for those cities and compared them with the 2017 estimates. All of them showed growth.

I looked at the census data for those cities and compared them with the 2017 estimates. All of them showed growth.

I looked at the 2017 and 2016 population estimates for towns mentioned, and all had small losses except for Durant. I don't know what your source is, but someone else said that July 2018 population estimates for cities from the Census aren't released until May 2019. Hopefully, higher oil prices in 2018 helped those and other Oklahoma towns. Besides Durant, college towns Tahlequah and Stillwater have slowly been growing since 2010 and that's about it outside the metros.

The Dallas metroplex will always be our biggest & worst enemy. Many recent college grads & young professionals still flock to the Dallas area for better jobs/lifestyle as they did 20 years ago. Many high school grads from north Texas flock to OU for college, but when they graduate, take their degrees & move right back to Dallas. Our biggest downfall is not being able to retain those students, who will get a decent job & start families & stay put for a while.

As long as Dallas ecomony stay strongs, it will forever suck people & dollars from Oklahoma. As we only live a couple hours away from one the fastest growing metro areas in the nation.

I don’t see the problem?

In Dallas metroplex they have so many people wanting a piece of the tax pie its growing their cost of living. OKC doesn’t have nearly that. For every 1 of our problem they have 100. Before long you can drive to Dallas from OKC in the same time as from Fort Worth to Dallas. Its crowded down there and infrastructure costs are growing.

I don’t want OKC to become Dallas, I like it smaller. If one likes Dallas then I say go live in Dallas!

My son in 20’s lives there. Nice condo off DNT and 121. Live in girlfriend. But they are already talking about buying a house out in the burbs due to how much the cost is even close to work. So they will have to commute to their jobs in that crap traffic. He told me he is already wondering if he shouldn’t move back to OKC. But since not married he’ll stay for now.

I think you will start to see real numbers leaving Dallas even as they add more (more will arrive than leave). Dallas metro will still have a huge net gain but a lot of folks are tired of the crowds.

What good is all the fun stuff when its a nightmare to even get to it. So yes Dallas has way more than OKC but that does not alone make for a better quality of life. If you spend 7.5 extea hours commuting to work and fun per week compared to OKC thats a lot of fun time wasted.

I don’t know why people want us to be Dallas. Dallas is fine to travel to for a weekend getaway but the day to day grind is not what some think.

Just my opinion on the matter

I looked at the 2017 and 2016 population estimates for towns mentioned, and all had small losses except for Durant. I don't know what your source is, but someone else said that July 2018 population estimates for cities from the Census aren't released until May 2019. Hopefully, higher oil prices in 2018 helped those and other Oklahoma towns. Besides Durant, college towns Tahlequah and Stillwater have slowly been growing since 2010 and that's about it outside the metros.

Look up those towns on Wikipedia and look at the 2010 census data compared to the 2017 estimates.

Look up those towns on Wikipedia and look at the 2010 census data compared to the 2017 estimates.

I simply go here to spot trends and blips. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk

The Dallas metroplex will always be our biggest & worst enemy. Many recent college grads & young professionals still flock to the Dallas area for better jobs/lifestyle as they did 20 years ago. Many high school grads from north Texas flock to OU for college, but when they graduate, take their degrees & move right back to Dallas. Our biggest downfall is not being able to retain those students, who will get a decent job & start families & stay put for a while.

As long as Dallas ecomony stay strongs, it will forever suck people & dollars from Oklahoma. As we only live a couple hours away from one the fastest growing metro areas in the nation.
I think the very same thing can be said for OSU and helps explain why American Eagle jet passenger service from Stillwater to DFW has done better than expected. Maybe OSU would love to see flights added to Denver or Chicago to recruit students from there.

nm

2018 metropolitan census data was released today!

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

Oklahoma City metro area grew from 1,383,249 to 1,396,445 adding 13,196 persons. That's way better than the 2016-2017 growth of 9,000 persons.

This bodes well, as it looks like the population growth should be picking back up, after recent years of tepid growth.

2018 metropolitan census data was released today!

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

Oklahoma City metro area grew from 1,383,249 to 1,396,445 adding 13,196 persons. That's way better than the 2016-2017 growth of 9,000 persons.

This bodes well, as it looks like the population growth should be picking back up, after recent years of tepid growth.
Looks like Tulsa area had an out migration of about 1,000 while OKC had in migration of about 6,650

Wow... Tulsa up less than 2,200 and struggling to top 1 million (now at 993,797).

As goes the O & G industry, so goes growth in OK. Tepid for both.

13,000 isn't bad. I'd like to see at least 20,000 year. I don't understand why Tulsa's growth is so slow. It should appeal to a lot of people.

As goes the O & G industry, so goes growth in OK. Tepid for both.

Tepid??? i think 13,000 in a year is quite good

Heck Boston Metro only saw an increase in 30,793, with Boston itself only increasing 13031... so the entire OKC Metro increased more than the city of Boston... i'll take that

i mean with places like Chicago losing population... what would be your idea of good growth?? yes Tulsa would fall under tepid... but really curious what your expectations for positive growth in OKC is

13,000 isn't bad. I'd like to see at least 20,000 year. I don't understand why Tulsa's growth is so slow. It should appeal to a lot of people.

Tulsa had a large domestic out migration. OKC had a healthy domestic in migration. I think we are seeing the results of OKC's diversification of industries vs. its impact on Tulsa. Oil & gas dragged us both down, but OKC was apparently more resilient. Plus, OKC is more nationally visible now and I would think more attractive to those wanting to move.

This is from Best Places website. If true, could be why OKC is more attractive now.:

2019 Compare Cities Economy:

Tulsa, OK vs Oklahoma City, OK

Highlights
- Household income in Oklahoma City ($64,273), is 16% more than it is in Tulsa ($55,894) and is 12% below the National Average.
- Tulsa unemployment rate is 3.70%.
- Oklahoma City unemployment rate is 3.40%.

Tepid??? i think 13,000 in a year is quite good

Heck Boston Metro only saw an increase in 30,793, with Boston itself only increasing 13031... so the entire OKC Metro increased more than the city of Boston... i'll take that

i mean with places like Chicago losing population... what would be your idea of good growth?? yes Tulsa would fall under tepid... but really curious what your expectations for positive growth in OKC is
OK, you're right. I just compare that number with the metro area population and it seems the growth number could be just net births/deaths. However, looking at boom cities around the country, though we are behind them, the gap isn't all that huge considering OKC isn't considered a boom city right now - adjusted for population differences.

OKC was netting right around 20k a year from 2010 until the 16-17 dip to 9k.

I'd like to see growth around the 20k mark again but happy to see it moving back in the right direction.

Oklahoma and the city need a big marketing campaign and videos like this would help out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgrrU39SlCo

OKC was netting right around 20k a year from 2010 until the 16-17 dip to 9k.

I'd like to see growth around the 20k mark again but happy to see it moving back in the right direction.

i'm going to keep this as fact based and non political as possible. but with new Executive Orders that significantly added to the red tap requirements for both Student Visas and Work Visas, the country as a whole is seeing slightly slower growth due to the decrease in number of legal immigrants coming to the US since middle of 2017.

so i'm very happy with 13k, and will be very happy if we are able to push that up to 15-17k for 2019, and hopefully be a full 30k higher than we are now for 2020 census

i'm going to keep this as fact based and non political as possible. but with new Executive Orders that significantly added to the red tap requirements for both Student Visas and Work Visas, the country as a whole is seeing slightly slower growth due to the decrease in number of legal immigrants coming to the US since middle of 2017.


Don't know where you get your "facts", but the growth rate in the US has been on a significant and steady decline since 1992.
15245

Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area 2018-2017:

1,396,445 - 1,383,242 increase +13,196

At this rate of increase over the previous 3 years, Oklahoma City MSA should exceed 1,440,000 when the 2020 report comes out in 2021.

How OKC compares to our NBA small market peers:


Memphis 1,350,620 - 1,347,596 increase +3.044
Milwaukee 1,576,113 - 1,575,151 increase +962
New Orleans 1,270,399 - 1,270,465 decrease -66
Oklahoma City 1,396,445 - 1,383,242 increase +13,196
Salt Lake City 1,222,340 - 1,205,238 increase +17,305

We are the core of our state's population increase.

Decent growth.

Being from Tulsa, it hurts to see their population growth stagnate so much. Hope the new mayor and maybe some new policies can kickstart some growth soon. I assume they're trying, but diversifying from O&G would help a lot in that regard.

Don't know where you get your "facts", but the growth rate in the US has been on a significant and steady decline since 1992.
15245

i didn't say it was all immigration... but those "facts" come from the US State department when they were talking just a month or so ago about how new student visa approvals are at a 20 year low, and worker visa approvals have also seen a significant decline... i more was going to the part of 20k was kind of the year to year norm, so 13k, is still really good

i didn't say it was all immigration... but those "facts" come from the US State department when they were talking just a month or so ago about how new student visa approvals are at a 20 year low, and worker visa approvals have also seen a significant decline... i more was going to the part of 20k was kind of the year to year norm, so 13k, is still really good

You said it was due to legal immigration slowdown, but this chart shows that it is an overall trend and a lengthy one and seemingly not influenced that much by legal immigration.

Certainly is understandable that legal immigration is down though, given our new hatred of immigrants.

Oklahoma City doesn’t rely much on immigration but does need migration from domestic locations. We did okay there but really need to do better to grow this economy and become more nationally financially competitive.

Certainly is understandable that legal immigration is down though, given our new hatred of immigrants.


New hatred of immigration! Hahaha holy sh!@