We can't take it for granted that a metro area that's growing a lot is growing equitably. Perhaps some so-called slow-growth metros might be showing how it should be done.
I'll have to take a deeper dive into the Brookings study, which still seems to heavily weight growth in its overall rankings. It's curious how Milwaukee is essentially last in growth, and yet that's not the impression that one would get as a visitor or long-time resident. At the same time - it's ranked in the top 10 in all four of the racial inclusion measures (and #1 and 2 in two of these). Racial inclusion is probably the metro area's worst metric, but it appears that growth is not the elixir for addressing this as the metro area is apparently doing exceptionally well in improving these metrics in spite of anemic growth.
I think the essence of what you're noticing is the "growing big vs. growing well" point I was making. Maybe I didn't say it explicitly enough, but there are plenty of Sun Belt metros that are adding thousands of jobs annually in service, hospitality, entertainment - low-to-middle income jobs that boost growth metrics. At the same time there are Rust Belt metros that are adding a smaller number of well-paying manufacturing jobs in addition to some eds and meds, professional services and other jobs. Maybe Sun Belt metros win out in overall growth, but Rust Belt metros are growing in ways that bring wider and stronger prosperity.
I'll have to take a deeper dive into the Brookings study, which still seems to heavily weight growth in its overall rankings. It's curious how Milwaukee is essentially last in growth, and yet that's not the impression that one would get as a visitor or long-time resident. At the same time - it's ranked in the top 10 in all four of the racial inclusion measures (and #1 and 2 in two of these). Racial inclusion is probably the metro area's worst metric, but it appears that growth is not the elixir for addressing this as the metro area is apparently doing exceptionally well in improving these metrics in spite of anemic growth.
I think the essence of what you're noticing is the "growing big vs. growing well" point I was making. Maybe I didn't say it explicitly enough, but there are plenty of Sun Belt metros that are adding thousands of jobs annually in service, hospitality, entertainment - low-to-middle income jobs that boost growth metrics. At the same time there are Rust Belt metros that are adding a smaller number of well-paying manufacturing jobs in addition to some eds and meds, professional services and other jobs. Maybe Sun Belt metros win out in overall growth, but Rust Belt metros are growing in ways that bring wider and stronger prosperity.