Did you even follow the link at the top of the page? The one that has OKC’s population growth as of 2017 at 18th among large metro areas? That’s right between the SLC and DC metros, not terrible company to be keeping.
The idea that OKC isn’t growing just fine is just horribly transparent fear-mongering by people who hate the political status quo.
Case in point: “We need something to change this November”. Folks, this is how you know people are trying to sell you a political ideology rather than engaging in rational discussion. At least he’s up front about it though.
I have a friend in Louisville that complains about the Kentucky government just like many do in OK. Apparently they have a similar urban vs rural divide with rural interests often overshadowing the efforts of the urban metros of Louisville and Lexington. And he says people there often talk up Tennessee and nearby Nashville just like people in Oklahoma talk up Texas and DFW.
By the way if you have never been to Louisville it’s worth a trip. The bourbon distilleries outside of town are also fun to check out.
From anecdotal evidence I have read, heard, seen it seems like for every 1 person/family leaving for greener pastures it seems like 1.5 persons/families are coming here for...well, greener pastures.
Not taking one side or the other, just want to provide some information. The OKC metro population is seeing a downward trend when it comes to population growth. For both overall net growth to net migration growth.
Here are the census numbers for the OKC metro. 2017 numbers are missing but I believe OKC only few by 11,000 or so, continuing the downward trend.
lol, and probably very true actually.
Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!
The Real Estate center at Texas A&M finally updated their census population figures for the metro areas across the country to include 2017.
Here is Oklahoma City’s page, as posted before.
2017 Population Numbers:
Overall growth was 11,274, down from 16,345, for a one year growth rate of 0.821. Domestic in-migration dropped from 5,296 to 248. Births, deaths and international migration all stayed about the same from 2016.
I mean, I don't know him personally, and he didn't tell me goodbye, but we fit that description (sorta). It's why we're both supporting the walkout on social media from 700 miles away.
Rover and HOT ROD that's easy to say until you're faced with the consequences of status quo.
Easy to be snide about someone you haven't met? That's exactly what you're doing. We didn't leave for political reasons, we left for the sake of our kid. Trust me, wasn't our first choice to take a loss on a 2 year old home but we wanted her in a better situation. Some things just come up that throw a wrench in your plans. We were champions for OKC our entire 8 years there, and still are. We just had a unique case.
To put these numbers in perspective, this is the lowest growth rate since 2003-04, that's not good.
I actually expected the growth, if you can call it that, to be even lower based on the fact that there was an oil bust so bad, it has its own Wikipedia article.
Having growth at all surprised me.
When there’s no negative net loss with either domestic in-migration and international migration, but both are low, the growth comes from a higher birth rate than death rate. The 2017 growth for OKC mainly came from having more births than deaths. Migration to OKC (both domestic and international) was less than 4,000. Meaning the other 7,000 plus came from new births.
A few years ago, the state passed a law making it illegal to hire non USA residents. I have a builder friend who said that since then he's had a hard time finding construction laborers. Not sure if that has changed but it could be a part of this out bound migration ?
No, international migration went basically unchanged for OKC. It was domestic in-migration that took a loss. Domestic in-migration is when other people leaving in the US move to other US location. When there’s a positive net gain, that means more moves to an area than left it. When it’s a negative net loss, more people left the area than moved to it.
Mick Cornett was correct; our economy is not as dependent on the energy sector as it was in the 80s. OKC's corporate portfolio is more diversified; less dependent & vulnerable where one sector's down slide misguides everything off course.
Lost jobs in the energy sector did impact our economy.
I don't expect there to be significant oil and gas industry employment growth with the price of oil going up. The industry has been focusing on optimizing operations to do more with lower headcount. They'll have to employ more workers for rigs, but I don't think we will see a return of the white collar jobs located in the HQs in the city.
I agree with you about companies getting really big, but I think as oil continues to stay steady, we'll just see more and more small companies created (as we are seeing currently) so we might see an increase in headcount, just decentralized across a bigger number of smaller, more focused shops.
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Bookmarks