Chicago’s population is down about 25% from its 1950 peak. When you hear this word, images of vacant buildings like those found in Detroit may come to mind. In fact, Chicago is still pretty crowded. I couldn’t find the article, but I remember reading that Chicago has more households than ever before. The average household size has shrunk dramatically since 1950 due to factors such as fewer children and more independent living among young people and older people.
of OC register reports some seemingly strange data about California. Since 2020, housing prices have soared despite the fact that the housing stock has increased and the population has decreased. This has given rise to dark conspiracy theories that California is full of vacant properties owned by speculators, driving up prices. it’s not.
If California’s population is well off its peak and developers continue to build more housing, why is the cost of living still so high in the Golden State? . .
Let’s start with the basics. Last year, California had 38.2 million people living together in households, a decrease of 375,800 people, or 0.9%, compared to 2020. During the same period, California’s housing stock increased to 14.8 million units. This is an increase of 432,700 homes from 2020, or an increase of 3%.
This puzzle can be solved when you consider that the average household size has declined by nearly 4%.
Last year, the average number of Californians living in occupied housing units was 2.75, down from 2.86 in 2020. This is not a significant change for her 39 million residents.
Why did that happen? Due to the pandemic, people want more living space and often avoid roommates. Some people took out historically cheap mortgages in 2021 and 2022 and will not move, no matter how large their home is to fit their needs.
Part of this trend may be due to adult children leaving their parents’ homes and ending up within or outside the state. Young families also frequently left for other states. Or an elderly resident who has lost a spouse.
Whatever the cause, small households are eating into the housing supply.
Furthermore, the birthrate is declining.
Kevin Erdman argues that economic booms in housing-constrained markets (such as Los Angeles) lead to population declines as working-class families migrate to cheaper states and are replaced by childless young professionals. I think he was the first person to record this fact. Selfish burglars like me live in houses that are too big for our needs. (I recall driving a Chinese visitor through one of the nicer neighborhoods in Newton, Massachusetts, in the 1990s. A woman in awe wondered how many families lived in each house. I gave my wife a look that said, “Who’s going to tell her?”
PS. Chicago remains relatively “packed” despite a 25% decrease in population. There are even more rusty industrial cities. Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Louis have seen their populations decline by 60% to 70%, leaving vast areas vacant.
