Demographic dynamism and metropolitan change: Comparing Los Angeles,New York,Chicago, and Washington,DC

Abstract

The fluid dimensions of demographic status—age, career progression over time, geographic redistribution, and growing duration of residence—have not been sufficiently recognized in urban theory and policy. Demographic dynamism deserves special attention because it is through the presumed consequences for people that we judge the desirability of economic, political, and physical changes in a city. To explore the magnitude and significance of these issues, population dynamics and associated poverty and homeownership trends in four major metropolitan regions are compared.

Los Angeles may be changing more rapidly, but its dynamics only accentuate trends under way elsewhere. Rising proportions of the population that are neither in the white “majority” nor black “minority,” the low proportion of longtime residents, and the new challenge of immigration call into question fundamental assumptions about links between people and urban policy. The meaning of both poverty trends and homeownership attainments must be reassessed.     

Where Chicago meets London: James M. Buchanan,Virginia Political Economy,and cost theory

Public Choice - The state must expend resources to credibly threaten the use of force, and the actual use of force is more costly than just exercising the threat. A population that views itself as...