Minnesota population growth slowing in the 2020s

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
36,668
Reaction score
10,145
Points
113

"
Minnesota’s location has long created a population challenge. Since the start of the 20th century, Minnesota’s population grew at a faster rate than the nation’s in only one decade — the 1930s. Long winters dampen the state’s appeal to people from elsewhere in the U.S. Its distance from the coasts has meant relatively fewer immigrants.

In the 2020s and beyond, the accumulated effects of previous growth rates will widen the gap between slow growers like Minnesota and fast ones like Texas and California.

“We have this mind-set that there’s eternal growth, it’s ever expanding, and now we’re coming to a period where it’s not,” said Susan Brower, the Minnesota state demographer.

“What does that mean, not just to public budgets, but to economic growth in general?” Brower asked. “The only place I can head with this is there’s stuff we don’t need to be making or doing anymore. How do we shift people into more productive jobs?”

Economic growth is shaped by additions of people, resources and productivity. Fast growth is an elixir in society, creating wealth that makes it easier to get over mistakes.

“It lubricates things. When you start to get low growth, you start to get friction, just like in an engine,” Johnston said.

When growth slows, people tend to preserve wealth rather than taking risks to create more of it.

"

The overall growth of the world's economy always comes down to growth in population. Every job you can think of, ultimately comes down to existing because people need to live and want things. Thus, as the world's population inevitably stops growing, there will no longer be any intrinsic reason for the world's economy to grow overall. There's no reason to produce more of anything than the amount we were already producing, if there will be no increase in the consumption for it. (Unless you're just making more in order to burn it or bury it in a hole)

Population growth then will be limited to local growths. Attracting more people to move into some locality, for some reasons, from elsewhere.
 








Good. I hope people leave. The traffic sucks.
I know tongue in cheek .... but I'm glad that world population growth is slowing and will eventually stop altogether.

There are plenty enough humans living on the world. No need in the slightest for us to be growing our numbers.


I've read that as women obtain more education and wealth, their desire to have many children declines. This is a good thing, in my opinion
 

The D's really know how to sell gloom and doom.

And the R's really know how to ignore facts that don't suit their right wing extremist ideology. Ask the Japanese how slow growth has worked out for them during the last several decades.

Japan's demographic time bomb is getting more dire, and it's a bad omen for the country

An aging population like Japan's poses numerous problems. The government will have to spend more on healthcare, and that, coupled with a shrinking workforce and tax base, is a recipe for economic stagnation.

"An aging population will mean higher costs for the government, a shortage of pension and social-security-type funds, a shortage of people to care for the very aged, slow economic growth, and a shortage of young workers," Mary Brinton, a Harvard sociologist, told Business Insider last year.

https://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-is-shrinking-demographic-time-bomb-2018-6
 
Last edited:



I'm all for negative growth in MN and USA. It's the only way to preserve and protect our natural resources inc. air/water. Virtually all manufacturing and service jobs are becoming more mechanized; less and less employees will be needed.
 

I'm all for negative growth in MN and USA. It's the only way to preserve and protect our natural resources inc. air/water. Virtually all manufacturing and service jobs are becoming more mechanized; less and less employees will be needed.

Please tell us negative growth on the Iron Range protecting Minnesota's natural resourses including air and water?

Trump administration opens up Minnesota wilderness area to copper

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ilderness-area-to-copper-mining-idUSKCN1SL2C5

Science Desk: How Sulfide-Ore Copper Mines Pollute

https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/updates/science-desk-how-sulfide-ore-copper-mines-pollute
 

And the R's really know how to ignore facts that don't suit their right wing extremist ideology. Ask the Japanese how slow growth has worked out for them during the last several decades.

Japan's demographic time bomb is getting more dire, and it's a bad omen for the country

An aging population like Japan's poses numerous problems. The government will have to spend more on healthcare, and that, coupled with a shrinking workforce and tax base, is a recipe for economic stagnation.

"An aging population will mean higher costs for the government, a shortage of pension and social-security-type funds, a shortage of people to care for the very aged, slow economic growth, and a shortage of young workers," Mary Brinton, a Harvard sociologist, told Business Insider last year.

https://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-is-shrinking-demographic-time-bomb-2018-6

The left wants us to live in fear of our jobs being automated & that our natural resources dwindling, and then also wants us to live in fear of a dwindling population? The truth is we have the highest population in Minneapolis since 1970 & Saint Paul is at it's highest population ever.
 

The left wants us to live in fear of our jobs being automated & that our natural resources dwindling, and then also wants us to live in fear of a dwindling population?
The only side using fear to motivate its base is the right.


The truth is we have the highest population in Minneapolis since 1970 & Saint Paul is at it's highest population ever.
Therefore Minnesota's population growth must be the highest it has ever been.

Nevermind that it isn't.
 



The only side using fear to motivate its base is the right.



Therefore Minnesota's population growth must be the highest it has ever been.

Nevermind that it isn't.

So what's the problem? Better yet, what's the goal?
 

I didn’t say anything about any problems.
 

Please tell us negative growth on the Iron Range protecting Minnesota's natural resourses including air and water?

Trump administration opens up Minnesota wilderness area to copper

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ilderness-area-to-copper-mining-idUSKCN1SL2C5

Science Desk: How Sulfide-Ore Copper Mines Pollute

https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/updates/science-desk-how-sulfide-ore-copper-mines-pollute
I'm with you on this. The Right just doesn't care about the environment, clean water regulations, etc. Don't worry about it seems to be the logic then and now. With that said...I still want less people in Mpls St. Paul.
 


Right!? Mpls & MN often get rated in these "Best of" lists. And I'm always like, "Shh...don't tell everyone."
People who didn't grow up with cold, dark winters, just can't deal with it. So we're safe there.
 


"
New U.S. Census Bureau estimates show that Minnesota’s growth slowed slightly in 2019, deepening fears that the state may lose a congressional seat after the 2020 Census.

The data released Monday offered the last glimpse at state populations before the census this spring that will determine how the country’s 435 congressional seats are divvied up. Minnesota barely hung onto its eight seats after the last census in 2010, but its growth hasn’t kept pace with states like Florida and Texas that are poised to gain seats.

“I’m less confident that we will be able to keep [the seat], just because the estimate that we have is not showing as strong of growth that we saw in 2016, ’17, and ’18,” said state demographer Susan Brower. “But it’s still within reach. It still doesn’t look impossible to me.”

"
 

If we do lose a seat, the absolute correct thing to do would be to fold the 3rd district into the 6th.
 

Stauber and Emmer are going to have to fight for a job. Maybe Emmer gets lucky and he has to fight with Colin Peterson who would just retire. Hagedorn is set to be the big loser. He'll absorb more of the Twin Cities and lose. We'll end up with 4 or 5 DFL seats and 2 or 3 GOP seats. If the DFL gets the Senate it'll be 5-2 DFL, if not, then it could be 5-2 or 4-3 DFL. The DFL has controlled the courts for 10 years now, and owns the state Supreme Court. The courts will write the new district maps if the DFL doesn't get the state Senate. Our courts aren't very partisan, so they'd probably write a fairer map for the GOP, but it's not out of the question.
 




Top Bottom