Others move to different metro areas where the same benefits are more accessible.
Thus this effect exists for Manhattan in relation to its suburbs, but also for the New York metro as a whole in relation to other metro areas.
The movements of those who do not are remarkably predictable, though parts of the cycle may become more or less exaggerated with economic and social changes.
This is actually a very common pattern, visible in almost every urban area in the country that isn’t suffering from chronic economic stagnation.Young adults with no children stand to benefit most from the advantages of denser urban areas while being least susceptible to the downsides of those areas.Its population continues to climb despite an astronomical cost of living that suggests even more people would live there if they could.From 2010 to 2015, the Census Bureau estimates that New York City’s population increased by over 375,000.Deaths account for a certain percentage of the losses in each group, but they don’t become significant enough to overshadow migration until you get into the age groups over 60.
The Circle of Life While many people do live and die in the same place they were born, many do not.International immigrants are no different: they tend to be young adults following economic opportunity and, while immigrant families with children are more tolerant of dense urban areas than native born families, they still follow roughly the same migration cycle.This chart shows the change in population for each age cohort in NYC from 2000 to 2010, broken down by age group.Big cities are gateways for international immigrants, who crowd into apartment blocks in search of economic opportunity before eventually moving elsewhere.This explanation accounts for a little more than half the gap in the Census’ estimates for New York and the other four counties mentioned above.Here is where it becomes important to understand how migration and natural increase are related.