Oklahoma City ranks #2 in private job growth!

[okclee]

Oklahoma City ranks second in private job growth
OKCBiz Staff
11.16.2010


Oklahoma City boasted the second-highest percentage gain in private job growth among the nation’s 100 largest metros in 2010, according to The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the US Department of Labor.

read more....http://www.okc.biz/article/11-16-201...ob_growth.aspx

[Spartan]

I think we are starting to see the transformation that's taken place start to manifest in growth statistics, FINALLY. Truthfully, OKC hasn't even grown as much during the 2000s as it did in the 1990s, so much for the benefits of MAPS. But if it's true that last year OKC ranked in the top 5 for population growth and now this, I think we are starting to see the quality growth that would be the bottom line for all of this, the big pay off so to speak.

[semisimple]

But if it's true that last year OKC ranked in the top 5 for population growth

That's not true. Just considering growth from 2008 to 2009 (most recent Census Bureau data), the top five major (>1 million) metro areas by percent growth were:

1) Austin (3.1%)
2) Raleigh-Durham (2.8%)
3) Houston (2.5%)
4) Dallas-Ft. Worth (2.3%)
5) Charlotte (2.3%)

The OKC CSA had 1.6% growth from 2008-2009 (somewhere around 15th place for metros over 1 million).

By total numerical growth (2008 to 2009):

1) Dallas-Ft. Worth (147,000)
2) Houston (141,000)
3) Los Angeles (106,400)
4) New York (102,000)
5) Washington, DC (99,000)

The OKC CSA gained roughly 20,600 from 2008 to 2009 according to Census estimates. Similarly-sized Raleigh-Durham and Charlotte both gained roughly 46,000 and Austin gained over 51,000.

By domestic migration (2008 to 2009):

1) Houston (49,700)
2) Dallas-Ft. Worth (45,000)
3) Austin (25,700)
4) Raleigh-Durham (24,400)
5) Denver (19,800)

OKC had domestic migration of 8,800 from 2008 to 2009--its highest of the decade, but still 15th among metros with > 1 million population.

When you consider growth since 2000, in all these categories OKC falls even farther away from the top five as OKC's growth has accelerated somewhat recently, while most others have slowed. In any case, there seems to be no factual basis for OKC to be labeled as one of the five fastest growing metros in the country in terms of population growth.

[Spartan]

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=23341

Forbes said something different.

[ljbab728]

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=23341

Forbes said something different.

Spartan, as I mentioned in that thread, Forbes wasn't talking about population growth that had been or is currently taking place. It was a projection on what they are expecting for the next 40 years.

[Spartan]

Okay, now I get it. That's the first explanation I've seen of that ranking myself. Maybe I should read more.

edit: Ok, now I see where semisimple discussed it was about future growth patterns. Thread title and ranking title was misleading.

[Spartan]

If they're projecting 9.8% growth over the next decade then that's a negative change in growth, actually.