Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
No, this list is false.
You are comparing two different ways to measure population.
The 2010 Census isn't a continuation of the annual estimates. It's an entirely different type of measurement.
In other words, if the 2010 Census were conducted in 2009 (or any other year), the numbers would be totally different than the estimates for that year.
|
But it is interesting to see just how off the estimates were. The 2009 estimate for Arizona was 6,595,778 yet the official count found only 6,392,017. In 2007 the state had an estimated population of 6,362,241, and despite all indications that the state had seen its population growth slow to a crawl during the recession, the Census Bureau continued to estimate massive population gains over the following two years. Assuming that the estimates for 2007 were remotely accurate, it seems that Arizona has been relatively stagnant during the recession.
It's interesting because the Census Bureau was relatively accurate with (if not underestimating) Nevada. Between 2007 and 2009 they estimated growth of 75,333, or under 38,000 per year. However, after the official count, they found that the 2010 results were 57,466 above the 2009 estimates. Assuming the estimates for 2007 were relatively accurate, Nevada performed slightly better through the recession than the Census Bureau estimated.
Another state with inflated estimates was Georgia. The 2009 estimate had the population at 9,829,211 but the official count found 9,687,653. It seems as if the estimates were looking for a population of roughly 10 million for 2010, but found far fewer.