Population Growth for OKC

[progressiveboy]

In addition, TESLA moved from California to Austin, Oracle announced back in December it will move corporate headquarters from Silicon Valley to Austin. Boston area tech company (publicly traded) Ribbon Communications relocated from the Boston area to Plano. I would love for OKC to land companies like this, however, it is going to have to completely change its business model and have more educated residents especially in STEM related areas.

[PoliSciGuy]

Yeah Oklahoma, and especially OKC, is frustrating because the potential is absolutely there to turn a corner and really boom into a more modern, developed and thriving metro. It's already a great place to raise a family, land is cheap, the metro has all the trappings most folks expect out of a city, lots of area to grow...just need the people and investment, especially in education and a concerted effort to find numerous other industries to draw in other than oil and gas (the growing aerospace industry is a good trend in this area for example).

[Bunty]

^^^ many of those like Hot Rod and DC Sooner are spot on there are just a lot of Oklahoma fanboys who cry and whine every time something negative is pointed out about Oklahoma whether it is true or not. Criticism is not a bad thing. Oklahoma needs to be criticized as it is painful watching all of these other states land these major relocations which would completely transform the state and be the biggest thing to happen in decades here. Yet it happens seemingly monthly in Texas.

Tennessee is eyed for a major tech company expansion, Oracle IIRC.

I doubt big companies that do business globally would want to come to Oklahoma, due to no airports offering non-stop travel to Europe and elsewhere, so they go to Texas.

[Pete]

Yeah Oklahoma, and especially OKC, is frustrating because the potential is absolutely there to turn a corner and really boom into a more modern, developed and thriving metro. It's already a great place to raise a family, land is cheap, the metro has all the trappings most folks expect out of a city, lots of area to grow...just need the people and investment, especially in education and a concerted effort to find numerous other industries to draw in other than oil and gas (the growing aerospace industry is a good trend in this area for example).

I often point out that first it was Seattle, then Portland, then Charlotte, Austin, Las Vegas... And before that was Dallas, Houston, Denver and Atlanta.

So the big question is: what will be the next American boomtown?

You can make a very strong case for OKC but despite respectable growth, we have never really taken off. And I hate to say, if it hasn't happened by now it probably won't and we'll just have to be content.

[Plutonic Panda]

I often point out that first it was Seattle, then Portland, then Charlotte, Austin, Las Vegas... And before that was Dallas, Houston, Denver and Atlanta.

So the big question is: what will be the next American boomtown?

You can make a very strong case for OKC but despite respectable growth, we have never really taken off. And I hate to say, if it hasn't happened by now it probably won't and we'll just have to be content.

Pete, why do you say if it hasn’t happened by now it probably won’t?

[Pete]

Pete, why do you say if it hasn’t happened by now it probably won’t?

Because there are no significant changes on the horizon.

Something big needs to happen with education and not to beat a dead horse, but there are plenty of moves by our politicians that are repellent to the types of people who drive big change and growth.

Also, the most influential people in this state may say they want growth but most are deeply and categorically opposed to meaningful change.

[Bowser214]

100 percent Agree Pete!!

[PoliSciGuy]

On the plus side, our unemployment rate is pretty darned low https://twitter.com/davidfholt/statu...5922424938505:

The new unemployment data was just released for large cities, and Oklahoma City’s unemployment rate has dropped to 4 percent. OKC now has the 4th-lowest unemployment rate of all large cities.

[Pete]

^

But wait, I thought legions of lazy freeloaders were choosing to stay on unemployment because it's so lucrative.

How can that be when we have just about the lowest unemployment rate in the country?

[Bunty]

Because there are no significant changes on the horizon.

Something big needs to happen with education and not to beat a dead horse, but there are plenty of moves by our politicians that are repellent to the types of people who drive big change and growth.

Also, the most influential people in this state may say they want growth but most are deeply and categorically opposed to meaningful change.

Oklahoma isn't doing bad after all the backward political stuff. While far from a top 10 state for population growth, it's been adding on population faster than all its neighboring states for the last 10 years, except for Colorado and Texas.

[Architect2010]

I'd say OKC is doing just fine considering that it alone contributed to a significant amount of Oklahoma's entire population increase. I wouldn't mind us growing a good clip faster, but it looks like we'll see moderate growth for the foreseeable future.

[Pete]

Oklahoma isn't doing bad after all the backward political stuff. While far from a top 10 state for population growth, it's been adding on population faster than all its neighboring states for the last 10 years, except for Colorado and Texas.

We are 26th in growth, below such dynamic forces as Nebraska and Delaware.

And I don't think anyone sees Kansas and Arkansas as desired benchmarks.

[Laramie]

Population and population change in the United States by state Rank

Oklahoma 2020 - 3,963,516 - increase - 212,165

State Population as of 2010 census[79] Population as of 2020 census[80] Change Percent change

27 Oregon 3,831,074 4,241,500 410,426 Increase 10.71% Increase
28 Oklahoma 3,751,351 3,963,516 212,165 Increase 5.66% Increase
29 Connecticut 3,574,097 3,608,298 34,201 Increase 0.96% Increase
30 Utah 2,763,885 3,275,252 511,367 Increase 18.50% Increase
31 Iowa 3,046,355 3,192,406 146,051 Increase 4.79%

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_census

[SouthOfTheVillage]

The City is doing alright for the most part. You can find your Returns if you know what you’re doing.

[Thomas Vu]

^

But wait, I thought legions of lazy freeloaders were choosing to stay on unemployment because it's so lucrative.

How can that be when we have just about the lowest unemployment rate in the country?

Heh, gottem.

[Midtowner]

^

But wait, I thought legions of lazy freeloaders were choosing to stay on unemployment because it's so lucrative.

How can that be when we have just about the lowest unemployment rate in the country?

Lazy freeloaders who are choosing to stay on unemployment are not counted towards unemployment statistics. Only the unemployed who are searching for work count.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...ial%20position.

[ChrisHayes]

Lazy freeloaders who are choosing to stay on unemployment are not counted towards unemployment statistics. Only the unemployed who are searching for work count.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...ial%20position.

Yep. After the 2008/2009 recession the unemployment rate began to drop, but the labor force participation rate remained historically low. It began rising again and then the government forced recession hit last year. Now, it's at a new historical low after bouncing back a bit. Just like with the Federal Reserve balance sheet. The Fed was finally able to start shrinking the balance sheet a couple years ago. Now, it's exploded upwards by trillions of dollars. It's totally ridiculous.

[Pete]

Lazy freeloaders who are choosing to stay on unemployment are not counted towards unemployment statistics. Only the unemployed who are searching for work count.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...ial%20position.

Freeloaders implies they are receiving government benefits which also means they would be counted in the unemployment number.

[OkiePoke]

Low unemployment isn't necessarily a good thing.

https://www.investopedia.com/insight...k%2C%20happens.

[T. Jamison]

From the Investopedia Article:

Bureau of Labor Statistics Survey
Despite what many people believe, the unemployment rate is not measured by calculating the number of people collecting unemployment insurance. In fact, the government comes up with this much-anticipated number each month by following a process that more closely resembles the U.S. Census. The unemployment rate is measured by a division of the Department of Labor known as the Bureau of Labor Statistics or BLS. This government agency conducts a monthly survey called the Current Population Survey that involves 60,000 households. These households are selected using random sampling methods designed to generate as close an approximation as possible to the larger population.

[HOT ROD]

I often point out that first it was Seattle, then Portland, then Charlotte, Austin, Las Vegas... And before that was Dallas, Houston, Denver and Atlanta.

So the big question is: what will be the next American boomtown?

You can make a very strong case for OKC but despite respectable growth, we have never really taken off. And I hate to say, if it hasn't happened by now it probably won't and we'll just have to be content.

this is why I think we as a city as a state should study those cities and make them our benchmark. They obviuosly studied boom cities before them and implemented what they could successfully execute. This is why I always bring up examples that Seattle is doing or Denver because I know these two cities (lived/worked in Denver in the 1990s, OKC-expat in Seattle since 1991) so I've seen these cities then and the growth they have achieved since (and most of the steps they took, esp Seattle).

In all honesty, OKC isn't that far off from where Seattle was in the 1990s or Denver in the later 1990s (as I was returning back to Sea). So OKC is in a good spot, we just need to fix education and go after ANY and ALL business with more than the same old lame (cheap housing, cheap cost of living, blah blah).

We need to come up with something unique to OKC that can't be found or done elsewhere and pitch that. Let me give you a great example: Seattle pitched itself as the gateway to Alaska a few years ago despite Vancouver Canada already having this title with MILLIONS on cruise ships every year vs our few thousand for us at the start. So we built a new cruise terminal (not even as big as Vancouver's) and pitched the city as part of the vacation experience and viola - Seattle has assumed the #1 position regarding Alaska cruises DESPITE Vancouver having obviuosly much more international connections and infrustructure. We've even eat into Vancouver's historical totals because now Americans don't need to go there. And we're now thought of as a tourist city because of the cruise ships Seattle and the rest is more or less history (including many more international flight launches).

See how a simple idea blossomed with Seattle taking advantage of a potential asset along with a tremendous business case despite a huge monster, long established, barrier to entry 100 miles northwest. We didn't tout Seattle being cheaper, we said that we can be PART of the vacation experience that it begins once you arrive and we delivered on that for the most part.

Now, what could work for OKC. I have no idea why OKC doesn't run with the idea of being the crossroads of america. OKC truly is, with I-35 and I-40 converging as the ONLY spot in the center of the nation where you can go coast to coast and country to country. why dont we run with that and be the home to logistics, transportation, and shipping? That could be just one more sector that OKC could have - in fact, didn't OKC used to be a trucking hub back in the day?

Also, why don't we just go ahead and expand our airport all the way. That way we can be ready for the next airline or expansion. I know many on here will say, oh there's so many other airports that could be selected or already have the infrastructure. But if OKC doesn't take a leap then it will NEVER even be considered.

Look at what OKC did with the original MAPS I arena. Yes there were other arenas in more popular cities than OKC. But we took a chance, built it and voila - we were ready to host the New Orleans Hornets which was a huge success and catalyst to the 10+ years of NBA ownership OKC has enjoyed. Look at Austin, now WHY should they have an International Airport with DFW, IAH, and (to a lesser degree) San Antonio so close by? It's because they had a vision for their city/region that they could build an IT base but needed international flights - so they built the terminal anyway and convinced British Airways to give them a shot - HUGE success and now they're expanding.

These are just a few examples of what needs to change MOST in OKC - perception. We need to think BIG and have a cohesive vision beyond JUST cost of living or family friendly. We need a Mission statement, OKC is to become the next --- and this is what we're doing to get there. .. Airport MUST be in the equation, we don't need a hub we need a nice point-to-point airport with international gates (ala Austin) that way we could test the market and/or be ready for expansion or a new airline - they don't HAVE to go to Cincinatti or Memphis IF OKC already has a modern facility waiting. .. Think of it as the ultimate TIF for OKC, we need a world class airport (again, not a HUB but a medium facility with nice amenities that we can add jetways as necessary).

Look at the aformentioned cities and they all have nice airport service. Let's benchmark what they did (and have) and take a chance. The next MAPS (or evenwhile this current one is going) should focus on transit and major infrastructure since this is what OKC is lacking compared to those benchmark cities. We also need to develop a vision beyond cost of living that prioritizes OKC's strengths and perhaps we can also market ourselves against Dallas. It'd be nice if the state could also cooperate but you don't necessarily through in the towel, we can (and have) work around 23rd and Lincoln and I believe if we continue then that equation will change towards OKCs favor anyway (as OKC already gained house and senate seats).

Sorry for the long posts but I really believe in OKC and want to share as many ideas as I can from what I've seen/experienced here as they CAN work despite Dallas, despite not having ocean or mountains. There's good already in OKC otherwise we wouldn't be a 675,000+ city/1.5M (very likely) 2020 census metro. So let's figure it out and capitalize on it.

[Midtowner]

Freeloaders implies they are receiving government benefits which also means they would be counted in the unemployment number.

No. The unemployment rate is determined by a survey of 60,000 American households with an attempt to make the sample reflective of the population as a whole. It is not that we have x number of people and y are on unemployment. And if a worker decides to drop out of the work force and not seek work, they are not counted as unemployed in that survey. If you retire at 55, you are not counted as unemployed. If you are receiving a government check while staying home and eating bonbons, you are not counted as unemployed.

[Pete]

No. The unemployment rate is determined by a survey of 60,000 American households with an attempt to make the sample reflective of the population as a whole. It is not that we have x number of people and y are on unemployment. And if a worker decides to drop out of the work force and not seek work, they are not counted as unemployed in that survey. If you retire at 55, you are not counted as unemployed. If you are receiving a government check while staying home and eating bonbons, you are not counted as unemployed.

It's ridiculous to argue that there tons of people drawing unemployment that aren't being counted as unemployed.

[T. Jamison]

It is ridiculous, but that is the way the survey works unfortunately. Unemployment numbers don't really mean anything.

[Pete]

It is ridiculous, but that is the way the survey works unfortunately. Unemployment numbers don't really mean anything.

I understand it is a survey but anyone drawing unemployment would be counted as unemployed by that survey.

Why would they be undercounted? Are they also liars as well as freeloaders?

And do people in Oklahoma and OKC lie at a greater than average rate, thus resulting in our low numbers?