L.A.'s Population Tops 4 Million for the First Time

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by mhays

We've heard nothing about what they do in Chicago, other than anecdotes. I bet a lot of people walk their groceries.

I walked through Koreatown a couple times last month. It's dense but not as dense as the Seattle neighborhoods I'm talking about.

We'll disagree about whether car prevalence makes a place less urban.

I never said they dont. I'm saying for the big trips, theyre driving. That's what's all the parking is for.
Thus isn't complicated . Obviously people in downtown Chicago are driving to them or it wouldn't be a need.
Does it make it less urban than Seattle?
Um, no.

That's the point. You guts are harping on the wrong thing.

. You're giving anecdotes too. .

I

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by Crawford

OK, no offense, but are you really a Statistics PhD? Do you really have the background to objectively assess whether or not the Census methodology is reliable?

Again, if you don't like the Census data, fine, but there is no other apples-to-apples national count or imputation. It isn't that there is no better source, it's that there is no other source, period.

I merely said I disagree. No I wasn't a statistics major but on the other hand its pretty common to hear/read stories of census workers not being able to talk to certain people who won't open their doors for them or fill out a survey. Another issue is new immigrants who are unable to read/speak English and fill out the survey or talk with workers.

http://www.civilrights.org/census/ac...ww.google.com/

Up until 1990, the overall accuracy of the census improved with each decennial census. In 1990, however, the trend reversed; the national net undercount, as well as the differential undercount of minorities, increased from the previous census. With a new communications plan that included paid advertising, a partnership program, and increased funding, the 2000 census was a significant improvement over the 1990 census. However, this time the census resulted in a net national overcount of one half of a percent and a Black-White (non-Hispanic) differential undercount of 3.0 percent.

Several reasons account for the persistent and disproportionate undercount of people of color and low-income people. Lower-income areas experience lower response rates for mail and door to door collection methods. People with lower education levels, lower literacy abilities, and difficulty with the English language may have difficulty understanding the census. These communities may generally misunderstand the importance of census participation. Furthermore, many distrust or are suspicious of the government because they fear that census responses may be used by immigration or law enforcement officials to deport or incarcerate them or their family members or may disqualify them for social welfare programs.

Rural residents are also difficult to count. Many homes are very remote and, therefore, inaccessible. Also, individuals living in rural areas tend to use post office boxes and/or general delivery “rural route” addresses rather than individual home addresses, making it more difficult to deliver and collect census forms.

[...]

The 2000 census included a procedure, called the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation survey, to check for missing housing units and people who were not reported on a census form. However, concerns about the reliability of the accuracy evaluation led the Census Bureau to revise its estimates of undercounts and overcounts several times and ultimately to conclude that it could not use the estimates to make any corrections to the original census numbers.

This has been going on for decades, so I'm not just inventing a theory on the spot.

And even then, perhaps the census is more accurate than these other surveys but that's like saying one badly manufactured product is better than another. You can't rely much on either, which is why they're to be taken with a grain of salt. Here's another article on the same phenomenon:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/0...s.controversy/

[mhays]

Originally Posted by LA21st

I never said they dont. I'm saying for the big trips, theyre driving. That's what's all the parking is for.
Thus isn't complicated . Obviously people in downtown Chicago are driving to them or it wouldn't be a need.
Does it make it less urban than Seattle?
Um, no.

That's the point. You guts are harping on the wrong thing.

. You're giving anecdotes too. .

I

When you admit that many people don't use cars in any form for grocery shopping, we'll be getting somewhere.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by mhays

Wow, what a total misunderstanding of statistics! You clearly don't know much.

Lesson #1 is that it's REALLY important to be skeptical of any stat you see. This doesn't change just because it's the Census Dept.

Further, their methods have serious problems. For example missing entire buildings because nobody lets them in. The count misses stuff the estimates don't.

And to add on to my last post, I've spoken to a census worker in real life who had such issues.

And again, it just may be the most accurate count.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Well then why don't you educate us on statistics. This should be good...

Then it's a good thing the Census provides massive amounts of public documentation of their methodology, including detailed explanations of their technical business rules.

I'm assuming you've reviewed these technical business rules and can tell us exactly why the hundreds of PhDs at the Census are mistaken in their imputations, correct?

And then you can point us to another apples-to-apples population estimation for U.S. cities that provides superior data, correct?

Wow, just wow.

This is classic Crawford...latching onto something "official" but showing the understanding of a housepet.

The PhDs at the Census will say they don't count certain buildings that clearly exist, because they couldn't get in.

Here's a concept that's beyond you: The smarter you are, the more you admit you don't know. The same goes for studies of all kinds. And that certainly includes any count or poll.

I'm not a statistician but I follow trends for work, as a builder of housing, offices, retail, hotels, biotech, schools, etc. That requires some understanding the context and limits of data. Regurgitating stats without context is a poor practice in the professional world.

Meanwhile you're a "fan" who uses stats only for internet discussions.

[caligrad]

Maybe this is why LA reached the 4 million milestone

Made the second page of MSN.com today (obviously after the tragedies in Orlando).

"California is officially the 6th largest economy in the world, takes over France for the number 6 spot"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/marke...cBZ?li=BBnbfcN

And here's another link. I'm loving this specific line though

"California created more Jobs than the second and third most populous states Texas and Florida COMBINED" (Texas has lost 60 thousand jobs this year because of the oil industry, total is far higher if last year and this year were combined)

http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/Econo.../15/id/733946/

"Most of the job creation is from the tech industry, bioengineering, aerospace, indie start ups, entertainment/media industry resurgence, Medical/healthcare, Banking and a booming construction industry is leading the way"

Not to mention 4 of the 10 largest companies in the WORLD are based in California.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by caligrad

"California is officially the 6th largest economy in the world, takes over France for the number 6 spot"

Much better wine too!



California is a great state though. I'd trade NJ any day of the week for Cali. Beautiful people, beautiful landscapes, chill mentality, and the best U.S. state IMO.

Some of the best people that I have ever encountered are from Cali.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by caligrad

Maybe this is why LA reached the 4 million milestone

Made the second page of MSN.com today (obviously after the tragedies in Orlando).

"California is officially the 6th largest economy in the world, takes over France for the number 6 spot"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/marke...cBZ?li=BBnbfcN

And here's another link. I'm loving this specific line though

"California created more Jobs than the second and third most populous states Florida and Texas COMBINED" (Texas has lost 60 thousand jobs this year because of the oil industry, total is far higher if last year and this year were combined)

http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/Econo.../15/id/733946/

"Most of the job creation is nonfarm jobs. Tech, bioengineering, aerospace, indie start ups, entertainment/media industry resurgence, Medical/healthcare, Banking and a booming construction industry is leading the way"

Not to mention 4 of the 10 largest companies in the WORLD are based in California.

Great Britain better watch out.... were coming for you. What needs to be said, we live in the greatest, most productive place on earth

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Great Britain better watch out.... were coming for you. What needs to be said, we live in the greatest, most productive place on earth

When you guys legalize the good stuff this November, that will add many more billions into the economy. Already is, but man, what a cash cow it will be.

Eh, let the red states continue to be different. California is a model for the world and for other states in the U.S..

Not to mention an energy pioneer. A state that believes in green energy and is making strides to make it happen.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by chris08876

When you guys legalize the good stuff this November, that will add many more billions into the economy. Already is, but man, what a cash cow it will be.

Eh, let the red states continue to be different. California is a model for the world and for other states in the U.S..

Not to mention an energy pioneer. A state that believes in green energy and is making strides to make it happen.

Not sure about that. Last I checked it didn't do much for Colorado.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

Not sure about that. Last I checked it didn't do much for Colorado.

Pretty sure you couldnt be more wrong. Legalized and taxed weed is going to be HUGE in California, just like its been huge in Colorado and elsewhere

http://time.com/money/4043550/colora...na-tax-double/

Heres one example from 2015... a nice influx of 125 million into the Colorado treasury from just the taxes on weed.. Add in the ancillary spending, tourism boost, etc, it becomes a no brainer

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Much better wine too!



California is a great state though. I'd trade NJ any day of the week for Cali. Beautiful people, beautiful landscapes, chill mentality, and the best U.S. state IMO.

Some of the best people that I have ever encountered are from Cali.

I agree. I accept that California has MANY flaws. Car crazy, overpopulated, lack of housing, never rains in the south and some other things but California is a great state. I just find it odd that EVERY politician uses California as the "bad/liberal/backwards/wasteland" state during their speeches of "what the country shouldn't be" when to be 100% honest, I've lived all over this country and wouldn't want to be anywhere else but here.

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Great Britain better watch out.... were coming for you. What needs to be said, we live in the greatest, most productive place on earth

Yeah apparently at the rate California is growing (knock on wood, no major economic issues) We might bypass Great Britain within a decade. But be careful. The trolls might return all crazy lol. But since I've posted those articles stating FACTs. They have been mute. "crickets crickets crickets". LOL

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by YSL

Millennials? Are there numbers to back that up?

Interesting thing about this post way back on page 2. YSL made this comment back when their profile location said they were from Houston, but seeing where Houston lands on the list, I see why they changed their location to Austin .

Originally Posted by YSL

https://www.abodo.com/blog/living-millennial-dream/

Fast forward to today. YSL created a thread to answer their own question. Millennials, as I said, are flocking to LA and most find LA a desirable/attractive place to move to and live, plus for their careers and way of life.

That is all. Carry on

[Just-In-Cali]

The biggest part of the story for Los Angeles is that it is finally having its renaissance. Many of the Snowbelt cities have had or are halfway through theirs, starting in the 90s. Where the main flaws and challenges of each respective location was addressed in a meaningful way. LA is now finally at full steam in this transformation. The LA today is so far beyond what was there in 1990 its almost shocking. Transit, crime, density, environmental issues, energy, economy. It’s coming into its own. The last 10 years alone have changed the game. It’s hitting its stride. In 20 years when I’m in my early 50s, I can’t wait to see what this global center will have to show for itself. Never perfect, but perfectly itself.

[bobbyv]

Originally Posted by mhays

We've heard nothing about what they do in Chicago, other than anecdotes. I bet a lot of people walk their groceries.

I walked through Koreatown a couple times last month. It's dense but not as dense as the Seattle neighborhoods I'm talking about.

We'll disagree about whether car prevalence makes a place less urban.

I would love to know which neighborhood let alone neighborhoods of Seattle are denser than Koreatown or Westlake, here's a hint for you: ZERO

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by bobbyv

I would love to know which neighborhood let alone neighborhoods of Seattle are denser than Koreatown or Westlake, here's a hint for you: ZERO

I didnt know what he meant by that.

I'm guessing he's gonna say KoreaTown/Westlake crams immigrants into apartments, as if LA is the only city where that happens. But it's ALWAYS used against these two neighbohoods.

I really doubt those Seattle areas have the storefront concentration of Koreatown either.

I lived in Chicago, and Chicago areas just don't pack that many storefronts in like that.

Only NYC packs in more, from my experience.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by Just-In-Cali

The biggest part of the story for Los Angeles is that it is finally having its renaissance. Many of the Snowbelt cities have had or are halfway through theirs, starting in the 90s. Where the main flaws and challenges of each respective location was addressed in a meaningful way. LA is now finally at full steam in this transformation. The LA today is so far beyond what was there in 1990 its almost shocking. Transit, crime, density, environmental issues, energy, economy. It’s coming into its own. The last 10 years alone have changed the game. It’s hitting its stride. In 20 years when I’m in my early 50s, I can’t wait to see what this global center will have to show for itself. Never perfect, but perfectly itself.

Yea, it's exciting. It really is. I dont think many people know what's really going on, or what's coming later.

[mrsmartman]

NYC is nearly double of the first place. A clear victory of bankers against yuppies.

[mhays]

Koreatown's peak densities are higher than I thought. I think I walked up Western (store signs mostly in Korean) and back a little east of that. Western didn't seem very dense even where it had continuous storefronts. To the east it was denser in parts. I don't know the neighborhood boundaries.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by mhays

Koreatown's peak densities are higher than I thought. I think I walked up Western (store signs mostly in Korean) and back a little east of that. Western didn't seem very dense even where it had continuous storefronts. To the east it was denser in parts. I don't know the neighborhood boundaries.

Koreatown looks much denser on the residential streets, as is the case of most of urban LA (Westlake/Hollywood/East Hollywood etc) It actually surprised me when I first moved there how many large buildings there are.
You wont notice it as much on Vermont and Western.

This is going to change as LA builds more residential/mixed use on its commerical streets though.