jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:What evidence do you have that the migrants stayed in DC? Most of the reports I saw said that many, if not most, quickly moved on to places in which they had relatives.

I would think you’d need to provide evidence for this. Or is your belief that DC refused to accept this responsibility and was able to move the migrants on to MD through contracts with MD NGOs and service providers?

Hah, I asked you for evidence and you turned around and asked me for evidence. Here's mine:

"A vast majority of migrants move on to final destinations outside of Washington, DC."

https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-establishes-office-migrant-services

Let's see yours.

““One of the biggest falsehoods that the mayor and her office is spreading is that people are just coming here as a stop,” said Ashley Tjhung, an organizer with the Mutual Aid Network.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/07/migrants-dc-buses-texas/

Thanks. Or do you have anything else?

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about. Is your point that it’s bad for DC to have migrant immigrants and you’re happy that they have not stayed? Is that your point? I’d love to hear an explanation.

You are arguing that the Texas migrant busses are responsible for 100% of DC's population increase. But, if the vast majority of those migrants didn't stay here, they could not have made that contribution. I am simply asking you to demonstrate that they stayed in sufficient numbers since you haven't shown that. If you cannot provide this data, you cannot prove your point.

I get what’s going on here. The issue is that you cannot agree that having these migrants come to DC has been good. Maybe it’s because Bowser clearly doesn’t want them? I don’t know.

LOL. Typical conservative. Unable to prove your argument, you try to change the subject.

Whether migrants are good or bad for DC is a separate argument and not one that you have been making. It is also one on which I have not expressed an opinion. But, let me be clear. I think the migrants are a net positive to DC and I welcome them. However, I am not convinced that your argument that the Texas bus migrants account for 100% of DC's population growth is true. So, far you haven't provided evidence that it is.

I don’t have an argument. You seem to have an argument. I just have data which you refuse to accept. DCs population growth is only attributed to international migration and over 100% of the international migration can be attributed to the migrants.

You can only show that a certain number of migrants were dropped off by busses, not that they stayed and became residents. Therefore, you haven't proven your argument. You even provided data showing that DC has international migration every year. That strongly suggests that the migrants would not have made up 100% of it last year. The title of your thread is not supported by the data you have provided and is likely wrong.

Whatever dude. I understand that Bowser says that the migrants have “moved on” and that you support Bowser and therefore that’s your position too. However the people that work with them say the opposite.

The weird thing I just don’t understand is why they his is such an important fight for you. Why is it important for you to argue to the death that a substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration is not the TX migrants.

LOL. You are really incredible. You are the one that started this thread. Your claim was that the Texas bus migrants were responsible for "100% of the DC population increase". That's in your original message. Go back an read it. Now you are revising things to say that the migrants might be responsible for a "substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration". That's an entirely different argument. Moreover, since what amounts to "substantial" is entirely subjective, you might even be correct with this revised claim.

BTW, if you don't want anyone to reply to your threads, don't start threads. All I have done is ask you to provide data to support your claim. You have been unable to do that. For some reason, you think I am the one behaving strangely.

I’m honestly not sure what point you are making anymore and clearly you don’t either.

I'm sorry that your reading and understanding skills are weak. That probably accounts for your failure to adequately support your argument. The bottom line is that you made a statement which you could not support with facts. Then, you attempted to revise your statement, but continued not to support it. Now you are pleading ignorance which is the most believable position you have taken so far.

You seem to have an issue with making personal insults. I don’t care because it’s weird and childish, but fascinating nonetheless.

I'm not insulting you. You are the one saying that you don't know or don't understand things.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:What evidence do you have that the migrants stayed in DC? Most of the reports I saw said that many, if not most, quickly moved on to places in which they had relatives.

I would think you’d need to provide evidence for this. Or is your belief that DC refused to accept this responsibility and was able to move the migrants on to MD through contracts with MD NGOs and service providers?

Hah, I asked you for evidence and you turned around and asked me for evidence. Here's mine:

"A vast majority of migrants move on to final destinations outside of Washington, DC."

https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-establishes-office-migrant-services

Let's see yours.

““One of the biggest falsehoods that the mayor and her office is spreading is that people are just coming here as a stop,” said Ashley Tjhung, an organizer with the Mutual Aid Network.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/07/migrants-dc-buses-texas/

Thanks. Or do you have anything else?

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about. Is your point that it’s bad for DC to have migrant immigrants and you’re happy that they have not stayed? Is that your point? I’d love to hear an explanation.

You are arguing that the Texas migrant busses are responsible for 100% of DC's population increase. But, if the vast majority of those migrants didn't stay here, they could not have made that contribution. I am simply asking you to demonstrate that they stayed in sufficient numbers since you haven't shown that. If you cannot provide this data, you cannot prove your point.

I get what’s going on here. The issue is that you cannot agree that having these migrants come to DC has been good. Maybe it’s because Bowser clearly doesn’t want them? I don’t know.

LOL. Typical conservative. Unable to prove your argument, you try to change the subject.

Whether migrants are good or bad for DC is a separate argument and not one that you have been making. It is also one on which I have not expressed an opinion. But, let me be clear. I think the migrants are a net positive to DC and I welcome them. However, I am not convinced that your argument that the Texas bus migrants account for 100% of DC's population growth is true. So, far you haven't provided evidence that it is.

I don’t have an argument. You seem to have an argument. I just have data which you refuse to accept. DCs population growth is only attributed to international migration and over 100% of the international migration can be attributed to the migrants.

You can only show that a certain number of migrants were dropped off by busses, not that they stayed and became residents. Therefore, you haven't proven your argument. You even provided data showing that DC has international migration every year. That strongly suggests that the migrants would not have made up 100% of it last year. The title of your thread is not supported by the data you have provided and is likely wrong.

Whatever dude. I understand that Bowser says that the migrants have “moved on” and that you support Bowser and therefore that’s your position too. However the people that work with them say the opposite.

The weird thing I just don’t understand is why they his is such an important fight for you. Why is it important for you to argue to the death that a substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration is not the TX migrants.

LOL. You are really incredible. You are the one that started this thread. Your claim was that the Texas bus migrants were responsible for "100% of the DC population increase". That's in your original message. Go back an read it. Now you are revising things to say that the migrants might be responsible for a "substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration". That's an entirely different argument. Moreover, since what amounts to "substantial" is entirely subjective, you might even be correct with this revised claim.

BTW, if you don't want anyone to reply to your threads, don't start threads. All I have done is ask you to provide data to support your claim. You have been unable to do that. For some reason, you think I am the one behaving strangely.

I’m honestly not sure what point you are making anymore and clearly you don’t either.

I'm sorry that your reading and understanding skills are weak. That probably accounts for your failure to adequately support your argument. The bottom line is that you made a statement which you could not support with facts. Then, you attempted to revise your statement, but continued not to support it. Now you are pleading ignorance which is the most believable position you have taken so far.

You seem to have an issue with making personal insults. I don’t care because it’s weird and childish, but fascinating nonetheless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious, OP.

"why so many people are moving away. " -- if people move away because there are so many "migrants", then why is TX the fastest growing state in the country? Why do so many real Americans move to TX even as they are being flooded with "migrants", and there is purportedly open borders there?

There's some dichotomy there.

Population growth is good and it’s good to live somewhere the population is growing. Without these TX migrants, DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID.

Why DC refuses to embrace it, I don’t know but suspect that accepting these migrants runs contrary to their economic development strategy of creating a rich enclave.

Which "blue city" is in trouble, and what kind of trouble, due to population declining?

Bay Area housing prices is still leagues above anywhere in TX, FL or DC.

But, as stated earlier, most of those migrants have friends/relatives elsewhere. That's where they are headed. Some will stay in DC. But TX still has way more illegal immigrant population per capita than DC, and yet, real Americans still seem to be flocking to TX. So, it appears that TX is still doing well with all them illegals and an open border.

What does housing prices have to do with anything?

Population growth is good. Population decline is bad.

Agree or disagree?

agree?

But you stated...

"DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID."

I asked, what "blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID" you are referring to? And what kind of "trouble" do you mean?

Through July 2022, largest state population losses are:

NY: -200k
CA: -120k
IL: -100k

These are on top of population declines for all 3 states in 2020 and 2021.

We don’t have the 2022 MSA estimates yet, but through 2021 most large cities in these states lost population from a pre-COVID baseline. That would include Chicago, NYC, SF and LA.

Over the last 2 decades, population and economic growth centered on these “superstar cities” has driven growth in those states and the country. Declining population in those cities reversed this trend. It weakens their economies and it means that if their economies are to grow they will need marginal productivity gains that will outpace the economic losses from population decline. Very few places in the world in history have been able to pull this off.

A change is certainly afoot, but how much no one knows. It could signify just economic stagnation in these states/cities or even actual economic decline. That will depend on specific circumstances.

I don't know about IL and NY but CA is the 4th largest economy *in the world*.

I mentioned housing prices because, generally, dying cities don't have astronomical housing prices. CA still has sky high housing prices, so even with the population decline, it's still more expensive than TX.

Sure, who knows what it will look like in 50 years. But, I do find it curious that TX has seen the largest population growth due to net migration into this state from other states even as it has porous borders and an influx of illegal immigrants. TX GDP is growing. So, it doesn't appear that the border problem is making TX not great again.

Your entire world view and understanding of economics is tied to housing costs, which is so bizarre. Luanda, Angola has some of the highest housing costs, do you think that is tied the strength of the Angola economy?

ok, you're an idiot.

Do you think SF Bay Area prices are sky high because there is so much poverty, and it's coming out of a protracted civil war? FFS

No, dummy. It's high because there are a lot of high paying jobs there, and lots of people, which causes prices to go up, and yes, high housing costs can be tied to the strength of the economy.

Example, housing in WV is dirt cheap. Why? Weak economy, and no one wants to live there.

CA economy is strong, and lots of people want to live there. Hence, high housing costs.

It's not that complicated. You're the one trying to make it more complicated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious, OP.

"why so many people are moving away. " -- if people move away because there are so many "migrants", then why is TX the fastest growing state in the country? Why do so many real Americans move to TX even as they are being flooded with "migrants", and there is purportedly open borders there?

There's some dichotomy there.

Population growth is good and it’s good to live somewhere the population is growing. Without these TX migrants, DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID.

Why DC refuses to embrace it, I don’t know but suspect that accepting these migrants runs contrary to their economic development strategy of creating a rich enclave.

Which "blue city" is in trouble, and what kind of trouble, due to population declining?

Bay Area housing prices is still leagues above anywhere in TX, FL or DC.

But, as stated earlier, most of those migrants have friends/relatives elsewhere. That's where they are headed. Some will stay in DC. But TX still has way more illegal immigrant population per capita than DC, and yet, real Americans still seem to be flocking to TX. So, it appears that TX is still doing well with all them illegals and an open border.

What does housing prices have to do with anything?

Population growth is good. Population decline is bad.

Agree or disagree?

agree?

But you stated...

"DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID."

I asked, what "blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID" you are referring to? And what kind of "trouble" do you mean?

Through July 2022, largest state population losses are:

NY: -200k
CA: -120k
IL: -100k

These are on top of population declines for all 3 states in 2020 and 2021.

We don’t have the 2022 MSA estimates yet, but through 2021 most large cities in these states lost population from a pre-COVID baseline. That would include Chicago, NYC, SF and LA.

Over the last 2 decades, population and economic growth centered on these “superstar cities” has driven growth in those states and the country. Declining population in those cities reversed this trend. It weakens their economies and it means that if their economies are to grow they will need marginal productivity gains that will outpace the economic losses from population decline. Very few places in the world in history have been able to pull this off.

A change is certainly afoot, but how much no one knows. It could signify just economic stagnation in these states/cities or even actual economic decline. That will depend on specific circumstances.

I don't know about IL and NY but CA is the 4th largest economy *in the world*.

I mentioned housing prices because, generally, dying cities don't have astronomical housing prices. CA still has sky high housing prices, so even with the population decline, it's still more expensive than TX.

Sure, who knows what it will look like in 50 years. But, I do find it curious that TX has seen the largest population growth due to net migration into this state from other states even as it has porous borders and an influx of illegal immigrants. TX GDP is growing. So, it doesn't appear that the border problem is making TX not great again.

Your entire world view and understanding of economics is tied to housing costs, which is so bizarre. Luanda, Angola has some of the highest housing costs, do you think that is tied the strength of the Angola economy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But, don't want a population decline so that housing prices might come down a bit?

Why would you want housing prices to come down? Are you daft? You want people losing money and bring underwater on their homes? WTH?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:What evidence do you have that the migrants stayed in DC? Most of the reports I saw said that many, if not most, quickly moved on to places in which they had relatives.

I would think you’d need to provide evidence for this. Or is your belief that DC refused to accept this responsibility and was able to move the migrants on to MD through contracts with MD NGOs and service providers?

Hah, I asked you for evidence and you turned around and asked me for evidence. Here's mine:

"A vast majority of migrants move on to final destinations outside of Washington, DC."

https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-establishes-office-migrant-services

Let's see yours.

““One of the biggest falsehoods that the mayor and her office is spreading is that people are just coming here as a stop,” said Ashley Tjhung, an organizer with the Mutual Aid Network.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/07/migrants-dc-buses-texas/

Thanks. Or do you have anything else?

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about. Is your point that it’s bad for DC to have migrant immigrants and you’re happy that they have not stayed? Is that your point? I’d love to hear an explanation.

You are arguing that the Texas migrant busses are responsible for 100% of DC's population increase. But, if the vast majority of those migrants didn't stay here, they could not have made that contribution. I am simply asking you to demonstrate that they stayed in sufficient numbers since you haven't shown that. If you cannot provide this data, you cannot prove your point.

I get what’s going on here. The issue is that you cannot agree that having these migrants come to DC has been good. Maybe it’s because Bowser clearly doesn’t want them? I don’t know.

LOL. Typical conservative. Unable to prove your argument, you try to change the subject.

Whether migrants are good or bad for DC is a separate argument and not one that you have been making. It is also one on which I have not expressed an opinion. But, let me be clear. I think the migrants are a net positive to DC and I welcome them. However, I am not convinced that your argument that the Texas bus migrants account for 100% of DC's population growth is true. So, far you haven't provided evidence that it is.

I don’t have an argument. You seem to have an argument. I just have data which you refuse to accept. DCs population growth is only attributed to international migration and over 100% of the international migration can be attributed to the migrants.

You can only show that a certain number of migrants were dropped off by busses, not that they stayed and became residents. Therefore, you haven't proven your argument. You even provided data showing that DC has international migration every year. That strongly suggests that the migrants would not have made up 100% of it last year. The title of your thread is not supported by the data you have provided and is likely wrong.

Whatever dude. I understand that Bowser says that the migrants have “moved on” and that you support Bowser and therefore that’s your position too. However the people that work with them say the opposite.

The weird thing I just don’t understand is why they his is such an important fight for you. Why is it important for you to argue to the death that a substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration is not the TX migrants.

LOL. You are really incredible. You are the one that started this thread. Your claim was that the Texas bus migrants were responsible for "100% of the DC population increase". That's in your original message. Go back an read it. Now you are revising things to say that the migrants might be responsible for a "substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration". That's an entirely different argument. Moreover, since what amounts to "substantial" is entirely subjective, you might even be correct with this revised claim.

BTW, if you don't want anyone to reply to your threads, don't start threads. All I have done is ask you to provide data to support your claim. You have been unable to do that. For some reason, you think I am the one behaving strangely.

I’m honestly not sure what point you are making anymore and clearly you don’t either.

I'm sorry that your reading and understanding skills are weak. That probably accounts for your failure to adequately support your argument. The bottom line is that you made a statement which you could not support with facts. Then, you attempted to revise your statement, but continued not to support it. Now you are pleading ignorance which is the most believable position you have taken so far.

Anonymous wrote:But, don't want a population decline so that housing prices might come down a bit?

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:What evidence do you have that the migrants stayed in DC? Most of the reports I saw said that many, if not most, quickly moved on to places in which they had relatives.

I would think you’d need to provide evidence for this. Or is your belief that DC refused to accept this responsibility and was able to move the migrants on to MD through contracts with MD NGOs and service providers?

Hah, I asked you for evidence and you turned around and asked me for evidence. Here's mine:

"A vast majority of migrants move on to final destinations outside of Washington, DC."

https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-establishes-office-migrant-services

Let's see yours.

““One of the biggest falsehoods that the mayor and her office is spreading is that people are just coming here as a stop,” said Ashley Tjhung, an organizer with the Mutual Aid Network.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/07/migrants-dc-buses-texas/

Thanks. Or do you have anything else?

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about. Is your point that it’s bad for DC to have migrant immigrants and you’re happy that they have not stayed? Is that your point? I’d love to hear an explanation.

You are arguing that the Texas migrant busses are responsible for 100% of DC's population increase. But, if the vast majority of those migrants didn't stay here, they could not have made that contribution. I am simply asking you to demonstrate that they stayed in sufficient numbers since you haven't shown that. If you cannot provide this data, you cannot prove your point.

I get what’s going on here. The issue is that you cannot agree that having these migrants come to DC has been good. Maybe it’s because Bowser clearly doesn’t want them? I don’t know.

LOL. Typical conservative. Unable to prove your argument, you try to change the subject.

Whether migrants are good or bad for DC is a separate argument and not one that you have been making. It is also one on which I have not expressed an opinion. But, let me be clear. I think the migrants are a net positive to DC and I welcome them. However, I am not convinced that your argument that the Texas bus migrants account for 100% of DC's population growth is true. So, far you haven't provided evidence that it is.

I don’t have an argument. You seem to have an argument. I just have data which you refuse to accept. DCs population growth is only attributed to international migration and over 100% of the international migration can be attributed to the migrants.

You can only show that a certain number of migrants were dropped off by busses, not that they stayed and became residents. Therefore, you haven't proven your argument. You even provided data showing that DC has international migration every year. That strongly suggests that the migrants would not have made up 100% of it last year. The title of your thread is not supported by the data you have provided and is likely wrong.

Whatever dude. I understand that Bowser says that the migrants have “moved on” and that you support Bowser and therefore that’s your position too. However the people that work with them say the opposite.

The weird thing I just don’t understand is why they his is such an important fight for you. Why is it important for you to argue to the death that a substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration is not the TX migrants.

LOL. You are really incredible. You are the one that started this thread. Your claim was that the Texas bus migrants were responsible for "100% of the DC population increase". That's in your original message. Go back an read it. Now you are revising things to say that the migrants might be responsible for a "substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration". That's an entirely different argument. Moreover, since what amounts to "substantial" is entirely subjective, you might even be correct with this revised claim.

BTW, if you don't want anyone to reply to your threads, don't start threads. All I have done is ask you to provide data to support your claim. You have been unable to do that. For some reason, you think I am the one behaving strangely.

I’m honestly not sure what point you are making anymore and clearly you don’t either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious, OP.

"why so many people are moving away. " -- if people move away because there are so many "migrants", then why is TX the fastest growing state in the country? Why do so many real Americans move to TX even as they are being flooded with "migrants", and there is purportedly open borders there?

There's some dichotomy there.

Population growth is good and it’s good to live somewhere the population is growing. Without these TX migrants, DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID.

Why DC refuses to embrace it, I don’t know but suspect that accepting these migrants runs contrary to their economic development strategy of creating a rich enclave.

Which "blue city" is in trouble, and what kind of trouble, due to population declining?

Bay Area housing prices is still leagues above anywhere in TX, FL or DC.

But, as stated earlier, most of those migrants have friends/relatives elsewhere. That's where they are headed. Some will stay in DC. But TX still has way more illegal immigrant population per capita than DC, and yet, real Americans still seem to be flocking to TX. So, it appears that TX is still doing well with all them illegals and an open border.

What does housing prices have to do with anything?

Population growth is good. Population decline is bad.

Agree or disagree?

agree?

But you stated...

"DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID."

I asked, what "blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID" you are referring to? And what kind of "trouble" do you mean?

Through July 2022, largest state population losses are:

NY: -200k
CA: -120k
IL: -100k

These are on top of population declines for all 3 states in 2020 and 2021.

We don’t have the 2022 MSA estimates yet, but through 2021 most large cities in these states lost population from a pre-COVID baseline. That would include Chicago, NYC, SF and LA.

Over the last 2 decades, population and economic growth centered on these “superstar cities” has driven growth in those states and the country. Declining population in those cities reversed this trend. It weakens their economies and it means that if their economies are to grow they will need marginal productivity gains that will outpace the economic losses from population decline. Very few places in the world in history have been able to pull this off.

A change is certainly afoot, but how much no one knows. It could signify just economic stagnation in these states/cities or even actual economic decline. That will depend on specific circumstances.

I don't know about IL and NY but CA is the 4th largest economy *in the world*.

I mentioned housing prices because, generally, dying cities don't have astronomical housing prices. CA still has sky high housing prices, so even with the population decline, it's still more expensive than TX.

Sure, who knows what it will look like in 50 years. But, I do find it curious that TX has seen the largest population growth due to net migration into this state from other states even as it has porous borders and an influx of illegal immigrants. TX GDP is growing. So, it doesn't appear that the border problem is making TX not great again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The low birthrates are the crisis OP.

If we can't figure out how to make the world work with low birthrates, our entire planet is doomed.

Anonymous wrote:The biggest reason places like NY, Chicago, etc. are so pro flood the gates is because foreigners generally are used to significantly worse conditions than anywhere in the US. As citizens get fed up and leave, those coming in are like wow, this is a lot better than where I came from. So for them to grow their populations, they need lots of people to come in virgin like.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious, OP.

"why so many people are moving away. " -- if people move away because there are so many "migrants", then why is TX the fastest growing state in the country? Why do so many real Americans move to TX even as they are being flooded with "migrants", and there is purportedly open borders there?

There's some dichotomy there.

Population growth is good and it’s good to live somewhere the population is growing. Without these TX migrants, DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID.

Why DC refuses to embrace it, I don’t know but suspect that accepting these migrants runs contrary to their economic development strategy of creating a rich enclave.

Which "blue city" is in trouble, and what kind of trouble, due to population declining?

Bay Area housing prices is still leagues above anywhere in TX, FL or DC.

But, as stated earlier, most of those migrants have friends/relatives elsewhere. That's where they are headed. Some will stay in DC. But TX still has way more illegal immigrant population per capita than DC, and yet, real Americans still seem to be flocking to TX. So, it appears that TX is still doing well with all them illegals and an open border.

What does housing prices have to do with anything?

Population growth is good. Population decline is bad.

Agree or disagree?

agree?

But you stated...

"DC would be in real trouble like other blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID."

I asked, what "blue states and particularly “superstar cities” that have seem population declines starting a few years ago that accelerated with COVID" you are referring to? And what kind of "trouble" do you mean?

Through July 2022, largest state population losses are:

NY: -200k
CA: -120k
IL: -100k

These are on top of population declines for all 3 states in 2020 and 2021.

We don’t have the 2022 MSA estimates yet, but through 2021 most large cities in these states lost population from a pre-COVID baseline. That would include Chicago, NYC, SF and LA.

Over the last 2 decades, population and economic growth centered on these “superstar cities” has driven growth in those states and the country. Declining population in those cities reversed this trend. It weakens their economies and it means that if their economies are to grow they will need marginal productivity gains that will outpace the economic losses from population decline. Very few places in the world in history have been able to pull this off.

A change is certainly afoot, but how much no one knows. It could signify just economic stagnation in these states/cities or even actual economic decline. That will depend on specific circumstances.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:What evidence do you have that the migrants stayed in DC? Most of the reports I saw said that many, if not most, quickly moved on to places in which they had relatives.

I would think you’d need to provide evidence for this. Or is your belief that DC refused to accept this responsibility and was able to move the migrants on to MD through contracts with MD NGOs and service providers?

Hah, I asked you for evidence and you turned around and asked me for evidence. Here's mine:

"A vast majority of migrants move on to final destinations outside of Washington, DC."

https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-establishes-office-migrant-services

Let's see yours.

““One of the biggest falsehoods that the mayor and her office is spreading is that people are just coming here as a stop,” said Ashley Tjhung, an organizer with the Mutual Aid Network.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/07/migrants-dc-buses-texas/

Thanks. Or do you have anything else?

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about. Is your point that it’s bad for DC to have migrant immigrants and you’re happy that they have not stayed? Is that your point? I’d love to hear an explanation.

You are arguing that the Texas migrant busses are responsible for 100% of DC's population increase. But, if the vast majority of those migrants didn't stay here, they could not have made that contribution. I am simply asking you to demonstrate that they stayed in sufficient numbers since you haven't shown that. If you cannot provide this data, you cannot prove your point.

I get what’s going on here. The issue is that you cannot agree that having these migrants come to DC has been good. Maybe it’s because Bowser clearly doesn’t want them? I don’t know.

LOL. Typical conservative. Unable to prove your argument, you try to change the subject.

Whether migrants are good or bad for DC is a separate argument and not one that you have been making. It is also one on which I have not expressed an opinion. But, let me be clear. I think the migrants are a net positive to DC and I welcome them. However, I am not convinced that your argument that the Texas bus migrants account for 100% of DC's population growth is true. So, far you haven't provided evidence that it is.

I don’t have an argument. You seem to have an argument. I just have data which you refuse to accept. DCs population growth is only attributed to international migration and over 100% of the international migration can be attributed to the migrants.

You can only show that a certain number of migrants were dropped off by busses, not that they stayed and became residents. Therefore, you haven't proven your argument. You even provided data showing that DC has international migration every year. That strongly suggests that the migrants would not have made up 100% of it last year. The title of your thread is not supported by the data you have provided and is likely wrong.

Whatever dude. I understand that Bowser says that the migrants have “moved on” and that you support Bowser and therefore that’s your position too. However the people that work with them say the opposite.

The weird thing I just don’t understand is why they his is such an important fight for you. Why is it important for you to argue to the death that a substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration is not the TX migrants.

LOL. You are really incredible. You are the one that started this thread. Your claim was that the Texas bus migrants were responsible for "100% of the DC population increase". That's in your original message. Go back an read it. Now you are revising things to say that the migrants might be responsible for a "substantial portion of DCs record 2022 international migration". That's an entirely different argument. Moreover, since what amounts to "substantial" is entirely subjective, you might even be correct with this revised claim.

BTW, if you don't want anyone to reply to your threads, don't start threads. All I have done is ask you to provide data to support your claim. You have been unable to do that. For some reason, you think I am the one behaving strangely.

Anonymous wrote:The low birthrates are the crisis OP.