[yypark]

If we look at the actual population growth trends, the suburbs are experiencing plenty of growth, not a decline, even if cities are doing well too (especially compared to the 70s/80s). In the New York City metro area, 29% of the population growth took place in NYC proper, as opposed to the rest in the suburban counties. One demographic of 20-somethings and a few interviewed people does not offset the rest of the population.

There are plenty of people moving into suburbs today and they make up most of the fastest-growing areas of the US. The pattern of growth barely seems to have shifted, and doesn't match the rhetoric of suburbs in decline. http://www.joelkotkin.com/content/00406-cities-and-census-ci...

[specialp]

I think this is a change in the New York area mostly. Back in the 70s-mid 80s NYC was a much more dangerous place and living in the suburbs was cheap. Young people in the city then moved to the suburbs to escape rents and high crime. However now the suburbs like Westchester, Long Island have become very expensive with very high taxes.

Since these suburbs are comparatively wealthy the citizens fight against high density development. So if you are a young person that grew up on Long Island you have the choice of paying $1400 to live in someone's illegal basement apartment, living in one of the few decent complexes for $2000+ or move to NYC. It is easy to see why moving to NYC is very attractive then. When you are single or a couple it is good to live in the city as there are plentiful jobs and entertainment options.

So I think that there is not a massive landslide of people leaving the suburbs I think it is just that people are having children much later, the city is now safe, and there are no cheap options for singles/childless couples in the suburbs in the NYC metro area. People still move from NYC to the suburbs. And in cheaper metro areas the suburbs are growing very fast because they are much like the situation that existed in NYC in the 70s-mid 80s