All this is from a report from a .pdf report from an economic analysis consulting company. (I can't reveal the name of the consultant)

 

This data is from 2003-2006

I did something like this for Montgomery County using census numbers, and got similar rsults, with Florida and NC being popular destinations, as shown in this poll.

 

I guess it should be no suprise that the states with the biggest in & outflow with Ohio are the ones adjacent to it.

 

The exception being Florida, which is at the top of both ists list.

 

And its always funny to see that Kentucky number, where Kentucky is receiving more people from Ohio than it is taking in.  I will be this is due to the northern Kentucky suburbs of Cincinnati.

 

In the case of Dayton, it was interesting that even with the family ties of the Appalachian diaspora with eastern Kentucky, most of the outmigration to Kentucky from Montgomery County was to other parts of the state, not Appalachia.

 

I find the relatively low median incomes here interesting as well.  Does this mean poorer people are the ones moving more?  It would be really interesting to see the median ages here, too.

 

Interesting article from NYT about how the percentage of the population that moves each year has been steadily decreasing and is at the lowest point ever over 70 years.

 

 

"The United States has long been one of the most mobile countries in the developed world. In the 1950s, about one-fifth of the American population moved each year. When factories would close, workers would move to other parts of the country to find jobs in new ones......These days, rents in many larger cities have exploded, making it much harder for a young person seeking better opportunities to afford to move. And low-wage jobs, after adjusting for the local cost of living, pay about the same everywhere.The result is a nation where people move far less than they used to: Just 9.8 percent of Americans moved in the year ending in March, according to the newly released data. That was the smallest share since the Census Bureau started tracking it in 1947, and the first time it had fallen below 10 percent, said William Frey, senior demographer at the Brookings Institution....."

 

Interesting the article includes anecdotes of three individuals--and two are Ohio stories. The other example is from West Virginia. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/us/american-workers-moving-states-.html

I wounder how much of this is due to banks not lending for speculative subdivision development? All that stopped by 2009 and hasn't returned. It used to be very fashionable to buy new houses every few years, like Buzz the Overpaid Boomer and family's first house would be a '70s split level in 1980, but then they'd go to Parade of Homes '88 and have to buy something new, then in 1996 another new one they finally the last new one in 2003 where they're parked now.

2 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

I wounder how much of this is due to banks not lending for speculative subdivision development? All that stopped by 2009 and hasn't returned. It used to be very fashionable to buy new houses every few years, like Buzz the Overpaid Boomer and family's first house would be a '70s split level in 1980, but then they'd go to Parade of Homes '88 and have to buy something new, then in 1996 another new one they finally the last new one in 2003 where they're parked now.

I can't remember where I watched it but I did see something about many people not being able to buy homes now(not really anything new of course). And yeah supply has a big thing to do with that...also with younger people HUGE student loan debt that was unheard of back in the day really.

 

And so much of the new housing that is built seems to be upper income level housing.  Hell we are not even getting the apartments built in the number we need them at least in Central Ohio. 

Edited November 23, 20195 yr by Toddguy

A new home built in 1965 would be hugely different from one built in 1975 or 1985, but since the 90's till now they haven't really changed much.  Can you really tell if a house was built 10 years ago, or 20 or 30?  There's been a pretty consistently bland "subdivision" architecture in place for more than a generation now.

On 11/23/2019 at 7:41 PM, X said:

A new home built in 1965 would be hugely different from one built in 1975 or 1985, but since the 90's till now they haven't really changed much.  Can you really tell if a house was built 10 years ago, or 20 or 30?  There's been a pretty consistently bland "subdivision" architecture in place for more than a generation now.

Yea, I believe that call it Neoeclectic architecture, homes built from 1990 through today. I wonder why the styles haven't changed that much. At least those in new "luxury" subdivisions. 

 

The newer urban homes not in apartment buildings seem to be boxier than they were a generation ago when it seemed the trend was to build new infill homes that blended in with the ones that had been there for decades.

Architecture is moving forward in urban neighborhoods, I was just referring to GCrites post about people shuffling around in suburban subdivisions.

16 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said:

Yea, I believe that call it Neoeclectic architecture, homes built from 1990 through today. I wonder why the styles haven't changed that much. At least those in new "luxury" subdivisions. 

 

The newer urban homes not in apartment buildings seem to be boxier than they were a generation ago when it seemed the trend was to build new infill homes that blended in with the ones that had been there for decades.

 

Hmm, Neoeclectic. Each McMansion was such a jumble of styles from 1990-2009 that I guess they had to come up with a more flattering term. I too have noticed that now the new suburban-style houses have those razor sharp lines that previous ones didn't.