Extremely unpopular opinion: The Midwest will explode in population later this century

[thebeloitmoderate]

As The Sun Belt which is basically Nevada/Arizona to Florida/North Carolina continues to explode in population, more and more people are leaving the Northeast and Midwest, and even poorer less developed regions of the South (MS, LA, AL, AR except NWA, Rural parts of GA/NC especially the predominantly African American areas) to the booming metro areas (especially Phoenix, The rapidly growing Texas Triangle, The Atlanta Metro Area, and to a lesser extent Jacksonville FL, and the Charlotte-Raleigh corridor) with the exceptions of Tucson, Killeen, and Fayetteville.

But also however the Sun Belt area is becoming more vulnerable to climate change as we seen in Phoenix and Las Vegas from May to September (but expanding from Late April to Mid October thanks to global warming) pretty much nearly 5 months of 100+F days, as well as Lake Mead, Hoover Dam, and the Grand Canyon the 3 most iconic names associated with both Nevada, and Arizona that is not their main cities, and for AZ's Case the Saguaro Cactus are becoming more impacted by the effects of climate change all minus the latter is suffering from a drought, and the Grand Canyon while not as badly impacted as the former still could look less colorful as well. The rapidly growing Texas cities, even including eco-friendly Austin, suffers from increasingly dramatic weather as we seen with the Texas deep freeze of early 2021, and Houston as we seen from Hurricane Harvey back in 2017. Meanwhile desertification is occurring in the Western regions excluding the Extreme western (El Paso), and southwest Portion (big bend) which is already mountainous/arid, and South Texas including the RGV. The summers anyways in the Texas Triangle is hot, with Houston being very humid as well. Florida is pretty much going to be one of (if not) the worst states being hit hard by climate change. Although the growth in Florida is not as sky high as it was in recent years/decades it is still growing rapidly, and hurricanes alongside having the lowest altitude among US States (345 feet for it's tallest land point), the Everglades, Keys, and barrier manmade islands are pretty much going to be underwater in the next few decades which means that climate refugees from Florida will pretty much have to move to the Midwest, or to the Appalachian mountains, the cities of Miami, Tampa Bay area, Jacksonville will not go underwater themselves but the beach cities to the east of it will possibly go underwater if not taken seriously by the next 5 to 6 decades. Atlanta, Charlotte, The Greenville metro area, and Raleigh/Durham will not be hit as hard by hurricanes, ATL/Greenville SC is anyways higher as both cities lies within the foothills of the nearby mountain ranges, but still climate change could impact the poorer more redlined neighborhoods of both Metra areas even harder. The Coastal cities of Savannah, Wilmington NC, and Charleston SC will once again similar to the aforementioned cities in Florida will not go underwater themselves, but the nearby islands, (Hilton Head/Outer Banks) are at risk completely sinking to the Atlantic ocean if either severe flash flooding, or a Category 5 hurricane hits the area.

Even Upper New England, which is pretty much VT/NH/ME is not completely safe from the effects of Climate Change as NH and Maine have Atlantic coastline, while Vermont while it is landlocked it is not completely safe from storm surge if Hurricanes get more intense.
The Midwest and Center to Northern Appalachians meanwhile it is the safest and less likely to be impacted by prolific natural disasters besides a few tornadoes, thunderstorms, and of course the blizzards/ice storms during the winter. Most of the country's fastest declining cities are located in this region even as the Rust Belt sees signs of improvement and less severe population declines than in previous decades. West Virginia meanwhile despite some high profile floods in the last few years and it's shoddy reputation at times does not experiences deadly tornadoes, blizzards, etc.
The Midwest is likely anyways one of the more cheaper regions of the country as besides Chicago, the Twin cities, etc. Most of the cities especially Rust Belt/not so Rust Beltish are some of the cheapest places to live outside of Texas and as if these Rust Belt Cities start steaming their population losses, the climate refugees of the Sun Belt will carefully need to know what would their former hometown/s population would look. Heck in fact Columbus and Madison are seeing high population growth from both in state, and out of staters that escaped the more rising costs/crime/Poverty of those places. So there you have it! My unpopular but also hypothetical opinion on why the Midwest and Great Lakes (PA, western NY) will grow later this century.   

[ProgressiveModerate]

Idk if it's exploded, but I def think certain parts will rebound and it may eventually overtake the South in population growth for the reasons you've said.

Not only will climate change have the direct impact of more frequent and intense devastating storms in these southern cities, but generally more extreme weather will make them less desirable. A lot of the reason why people started moving out of the Northeast (too cold) may flip on it's head cause people don't want months of 90 or even 100+ degree weather.

Another reason I think northern states may become more popular is because most southern cities are sprawling, and I'm skeptical how much larger a city like Houston, Dallas, or Pheonix can realistically get. Furthermore, I think the extreme level of car dependency and thick highways running all over the place may be a big turnoff for some; northern cities tend to be more walkable. We've already seen that some of the fastest growing parts of the country are in the immediate downtowns of cities such as Philly, NYC, and Chicago, all of which are very walkable.

In a newer city such as Madison, we see it already being built to be far denser than a city of it's size normally would be, with 12 and 15 story residential buildings popping up like crazy in downtown. Right now Madison is a relatively small part of Wisconsin's overall population, but it really singlehandedly keeps Wisconsin somewhat afloat when it comes to population growth.

In addition to the midwest, another region I think will really benefit is the pacific northwest, because it's extremely beautiful, tends to be less developed, and also has walkable cities such as Portland and arguably Seattle. Smaller communities such as Bent and Euguene are also very pleasant and once again despite being small are relatively dense and somewhat walkable.

[Skill and Chance]

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.   

[Skill and Chance]

Idk if it's exploded, but I def think certain parts will rebound and it may eventually overtake the South in population growth for the reasons you've said.

Not only will climate change have the direct impact of more frequent and intense devastating storms in these southern cities, but generally more extreme weather will make them less desirable. A lot of the reason why people started moving out of the Northeast (too cold) may flip on it's head cause people don't want months of 90 or even 100+ degree weather.

Another reason I think northern states may become more popular is because most southern cities are sprawling, and I'm skeptical how much larger a city like Houston, Dallas, or Pheonix can realistically get. Furthermore, I think the extreme level of car dependency and thick highways running all over the place may be a big turnoff for some; northern cities tend to be more walkable. We've already seen that some of the fastest growing parts of the country are in the immediate downtowns of cities such as Philly, NYC, and Chicago, all of which are very walkable.

In a newer city such as Madison, we see it already being built to be far denser than a city of it's size normally would be, with 12 and 15 story residential buildings popping up like crazy in downtown. Right now Madison is a relatively small part of Wisconsin's overall population, but it really singlehandedly keeps Wisconsin somewhat afloat when it comes to population growth.

In addition to the midwest, another region I think will really benefit is the pacific northwest, because it's extremely beautiful, tends to be less developed, and also has walkable cities such as Portland and arguably Seattle. Smaller communities such as Bent and Euguene are also very pleasant and once again despite being small are relatively dense and somewhat walkable.

Phoenix will run into a water problem and Florida will probably run into the opposite kind of water problem, however, Texas is so huge it could easily fit a population of 100M if they were almost all along or east of I-35.  There's no obvious reason everything between Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio can't keep growing to urban NE density.  There's so much undeveloped rural land still out there along the interstates between the cities.   

[Zaybay]

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.   

This argument makes absolutely no sense. Nigeria and India are large and growing because of pure population growth through birth rates. Florida's growth, and every state for that matter, is largely dependent on people moving there through either internal migration (person in Idaho moving to Florida) or external migration (person from Peru moving to Florida). Immigration and birth rates are two completely different modus operandi for growth, and aren't really comparable. Florida gets more people by being an attractive area to move to, so the attractiveness of Florida is extremely important to its future growth.

[It’s so Joever]

100%. I think Michigan will be the best recipient of this, with Kentucky and Ohio after.

[Del Tachi]

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.   

This argument makes absolutely no sense. Nigeria and India are large and growing because of pure population growth through birth rates. Florida's growth, and every state for that matter, is largely dependent on people moving there through either internal migration (person in Idaho moving to Florida) or external migration (person from Peru moving to Florida). Immigration and birth rates are two completely different modus operandi for growth, and aren't really comparable. Florida gets more people by being an attractive area to move to, so the attractiveness of Florida is extremely important to its future growth.

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.   

This argument makes absolutely no sense. Nigeria and India are large and growing because of pure population growth through birth rates. Florida's growth, and every state for that matter, is largely dependent on people moving there through either internal migration (person in Idaho moving to Florida) or external migration (person from Peru moving to Florida). Immigration and birth rates are two completely different modus operandi for growth, and aren't really comparable. Florida gets more people by being an attractive area to move to, so the attractiveness of Florida is extremely important to its future growth.

Amost all of the external in-migration to Florida comes from places with even more extreme weather and potential for climate change disaster (i.e., the Carribbean and Latin America.)  Future climate refugees will still be getting an upgrade when they move to FL.

The idea that the South and Southwest are going to empty out due to "muh climate change" has always seemed like anti-Southern wishcasting to me.  FL already has more extreme weather events than it did 20-30 years ago, but that hasn't slowed their growth any. 

[Skill and Chance]

100%. I think Michigan will be the best recipient of this, with Kentucky and Ohio after.

I could see Kentucky eventually taking off in a mountain resort/country music kind of way, especially if the state income tax eventually goes to zero.  I can't see Michigan and Ohio taking off unless there was so much climate change that it literally doesn't snow near sea level anywhere in the continental US in 2100. 

[Hope For A New Era]

An underrated geographical advantage that the US+Canada have for the future is the Great Lakes. So much water, so much

[If my soul was made of stone]

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.  

This argument makes absolutely no sense. Nigeria and India are large and growing because of pure population growth through birth rates. Florida's growth, and every state for that matter, is largely dependent on people moving there through either internal migration (person in Idaho moving to Florida) or external migration (person from Peru moving to Florida). Immigration and birth rates are two completely different modus operandi for growth, and aren't really comparable. Florida gets more people by being an attractive area to move to, so the attractiveness of Florida is extremely important to its future growth.

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.  

This argument makes absolutely no sense. Nigeria and India are large and growing because of pure population growth through birth rates. Florida's growth, and every state for that matter, is largely dependent on people moving there through either internal migration (person in Idaho moving to Florida) or external migration (person from Peru moving to Florida). Immigration and birth rates are two completely different modus operandi for growth, and aren't really comparable. Florida gets more people by being an attractive area to move to, so the attractiveness of Florida is extremely important to its future growth.

Amost all of the external in-migration to Florida comes from places with even more extreme weather and potential for climate change disaster (i.e., the Carribbean and Latin America.)  Future climate refugees will still be getting an upgrade when they move to FL.

The idea that the South and Southwest are going to empty out due to "muh climate change" has always seemed like anti-Southern wishcasting to me.  FL already has more extreme weather events than it did 20-30 years ago, but that hasn't slowed their growth any.  

[omar04]

The climate change will lead to depopulation of the Sunbelt theory is interesting, but it doesn't really jive with how incredibly densely populated countries like India and Nigeria are today.  They have even warmer climates than the projections for Florida in 2050 or 2100.  Expecting people to just leave seems extreme, other than areas that actually go underwater.   

There's a difference between that and building cities like Cape Coral in Florida.