Migration of young, single, college educated in the US

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 2:22 pm

http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/censr-12.pdf

Great report from the census showing where this coveted demographic is migrating to...

The best news? KC is one of the highest rates of inmigration of this demographic. Check page 8 of the report above.

From 95-00...KC had a net inmigration of 6,462 people in this demographic, which figures out to a rate of 184.8...which is #13 best in the United States.

Very good to see the young mobile educated set continue to move to KC...very good sign for the future.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:48 pm

Nice find. Do they have any other research just on KC that shows the main reasons (e.g., jobs, cost of living, arts) why they're moving here?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:55 pm

not that I found specifically on KC....

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:39 am

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch did some digging on their market's appeal, and some the big draws were cost of living and job opportunities.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... the+region

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:48 am

also in the story:

A big finding: "You can have a high-quality urban experience but not have a lot of the hassles of the larger cities,"

STL is trying to put a positive spin on gaining 600 in this demographic but I'd be pretty depressed especially if I looked to the west and saw how many their "little" brother gained

Post by **dangerboy** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:03 pm

Funny, but typical of the P-D to not mention KC when the comparison isn't in their favor. Without us Missouri would have ranked near the bottom vs. other states.

phxcat · Post by **phxcat** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:28 pm

Just read the thread on St. Louis over on SSP- kind of comical- and a little pathetic. They are bragging about being 17th out of the largest 20 metros- and everyone is oohing and ahing about it- they are even talking down on Detroit- maybe some day Detroit wil have it going like St. Louis does. There is no mention of the fact that it is just 600 people!

KCN · Post by **KCN** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 12:39 am

To be fair to St. Louis on this one, JivecitySTL over at SSP does have a point. We need to look at it in context of how STL had been in the decades before, much as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc still are now. Losing young people. The fact that they have started gaining IS significant for them, despite being only a slight gain. It shows that their trend is reversing, which is remarkable for a rust belt city.

Here in KC we are very lucky that we haven't had to deal with the loss of young people like STL has.

As far as the list of net migration...WOW. KC is the only Midwest city on that list. They are almost all sunbelt cities. That is REMARKABLE for our city.

Downtowner · Post by **Downtowner** » Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:36 am

I lived in St Louis from 95-99. Everyone I met not from St Louis was looking for a way to move OUT. My friends and I thought it ironic the entertainment section of the paper was called "GET OUT"....most are trying! I knew one company based downtown that moved 40-50 people from their Denver office. Two years later nearly all had bailed out and moved away. For a city of 2.6 million it is a depressing place to live. The city ranks #1 for population loss every year---beating out Detroit. Even my friends from St Louis admit KC is more progressive/dynamic than provincial Stl. Several years ago the Post-Dispatch talked of how the population loss was even more disturbing as it was mostly young people, 20-35. Stl has made some positive strides but still only has a downtown pop. of 2500, roughly the same as Dayton, Oh. Those kind of numbers would cause panic here yet STL has an odd superiority complex. When they got ranked #1 for crime the paper conveniently didn't report it. All in all, there are many more desirable cities to live in.

Post by **chrizow** » Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:49 am

very true. in terms of utter ruin and vacancy, stl in my opinion ranks right up there with detroit and baltimore. great old classic city + white flight + decay = dead city surrounded by some great suburbs.

STL does have some great urban neighborhoods though, and (i know i will catch flak for this) i appreciate the architecture there a bit more. the soulard, old north stl, central west end - all have a very old, classic, european feel (which makes sense). i also appreciate the fact that, like KC, stl is making some strides in terms of downtown residential development (i.e. WashAve lofts) and the like.

i also really like some of their suburbs better, though the good ones are far more expensive than here. Clayton, Ladue, Kirkwood, parts of Maplewood, far west STL city - the only thing comparable in KC is Meyer Circle, Mission Hills, and maybe fairway and stuff, but the stl inner-ring burbs have the advantage of good school districts (talking about the KCMO side here).

while stl doesn't have a real obvious "crown jewel" type destination area like the Plaza, they DO have several real livable urban/suburban neighborhoods that i think KC could learn something from. Clayton, old Kirkwood, DeMun, U City, Dogtown, St. Louis Hills - they all have a very "real" feeling that only comes with a sense of place, history, pride and preservation....(and sometimes substantial amounts of dollars)....

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:09 am

great story in yesterday's star about this

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 377319.htm

KCK · Post by **KCK** » Mon Dec 15, 2003 4:21 pm

Im young, single, and college educated. I migrated from 24th and State Ave in KCK, to 71st and State Ave. in KCK

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:03 am

How the Post-Dispatch misinterpreted the stats:

http://www.stljr.org/pages/current-mediapolitics.htm