Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday October 13 2017, @04:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the had-better-stop-driving-when-you-reach-the-ocean dept.

Three cities in Colorado — a state whose fortunes have been tied to the boom and bust of oil, gas and other commodities — are among the top 10 leading destinations for the nation's best and brightest as old cow and mining towns morph into technology hubs, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Boulder, the small college town located just north of Colorado's capital, is ranked No. 1 nationally in the Bloomberg Brain Concentration Index, which tracks business formation as well as employment and education in the sciences, technology, engineering and mathematics. Fort Collins and Denver follow at No. 4 and No. 10, respectively.

Are the best and brightest taking up skiing, or seeking higher ground amid rising sea levels?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by NewNic on Friday October 13 2017, @06:53PM (7 children)

    by NewNic (6420) on Friday October 13 2017, @06:53PM (#581941) Journal

    Like most of your "understanding", you are wrong.

    House prices are still rising in the SF Bay Area. Do you think that happens because there is a net migration away?

    You really represent the typical "low information voter", don't you.

    --
    lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 13 2017, @07:53PM (4 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday October 13 2017, @07:53PM (#581977) Journal

    House prices are still rising in the SF Bay Area. Do you think that happens because there is a net migration away?

    Net migration away != no migration away. I don't know what the current emigration rate is, but it was around a million a year last decade.

    • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Friday October 13 2017, @08:05PM (2 children)

      by NewNic (6420) on Friday October 13 2017, @08:05PM (#581986) Journal

      Net migration away != no migration away.

      Net migration is the only measure that matters.

      People retire and move away and are replaced by younger people. So what?

      --
      lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 13 2017, @08:52PM (1 child)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday October 13 2017, @08:52PM (#582004) Journal

        Net migration is the only measure that matters.

        Ok. That has nothing to do with the fact that people leave California for other places, including Colorado.

        People retire and move away and are replaced by younger people. So what?

        So net migration is not the only measure that matters. Now, you've introduced some supposed age thing which is just as irrelevant since age wasn't one of the factors studied.

        My experience has been that in some parts of California, people don't last till retirement age. I worked in California near San Jose for a couple of years and then ended up in Washington state near Portland - little over 30 years old at the time). I returned to go back to graduate school at Davis, CA and left again when I was 40 years old for Denver (though I currently spend most of my time in Yellowstone National Park). Did I "retire" from California?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 13 2017, @11:25PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 13 2017, @11:25PM (#582072)

          Ahem no.2 and 3 on the list?

    • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday October 13 2017, @10:17PM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Friday October 13 2017, @10:17PM (#582044) Journal

      I don't know what the current emigration rate is, but it was around a million a year last decade.

      I don't know what the current emigration rate is, either, but it was -100,000 per week in 2005.

  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday October 13 2017, @08:35PM

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday October 13 2017, @08:35PM (#581997)

    He never said that there was a net migration away from California, just that those particular states were receiving a lot of people who had moved out of CA. It's still quite possible for CA to keep increasing its population despite losing so many people, from both internal growth (birth rate > death rate) and immigration (from both inside and outside the US). Remember, many places in "middle America" are steadily losing population as their young people abandon rural areas and small towns, with many of those surely going to California.

  • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday October 14 2017, @01:00AM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday October 14 2017, @01:00AM (#582108) Homepage

    Bay-area home prices are rising due to foreign investment and trust-fund babies. The implosion has already begun, and will reach its totality soon.

    And with all the raging wildfires having razed the immediate north, the doctrine of Disaster Capitalism will dictate that property costs will rise even more high thanks to rebuilding at a higher-level luxury than before.