The US Census Bureau thread

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by The North One

I don't think Chicago's loses are going to last for very long, it was growing pretty well in 2012 which wasn't that long ago, loses slowed this year too.

Also, cut the "true world city" bullshit, NYC has just become an oligarch's playground and priced everybody out, it doesn't deserve a pat on the back, they didn't do shit.

Does anybody have any idea why immigration in Chicago has slowed? It seems weird that it suddenly did this.

Do you have any communication that doesn't involve hyperbole?

Yep, 8.5 million New Yorkers are "oligarchs" and everyone else has been priced out. 8.5 million, let that set in. Thats almost 3% of Americans live in the city. Think about what you say man, its laughable. You *have* a point, but it gets lost in exaggerations.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The Chicago media should be pretty ashamed with their Census rationalization campaign. The "what, me worry, it's just ghetto blacks leaving" is factually incorrect, inherently racist, and the ultimate in mindless boosterism.

The facts are as follows:

1. Chicago is the only first-tier U.S. city losing population
2. Chicago does not have notable black outmigration relative to its peers
3. Chicago's black outmigration appears to be middle class, not the poor
4. Chicago's wealth and education gains are not notable relative to peers, and don't explain the population losses

Chicago is losing population because it no longer gets immigrants in large numbers. It has nothing to do with blacks, or whites, or the rich or poor. There has been a massive decline in Chicago-area intl. in-migration. But the media spin is "the ghetto blacks are leaving and wealthy white folks are replacing them" with zero mention of the actual issue.

Not true, the local media has indeed discussed the slowdown in immigration. Characterizing the local media as "boosterism" is quite inaccurate. Much of Chicago's local media is quite pragmatic and can be harsh.

But the numbers don't lie--and you can't dispute it. Chicago is clearly gentrifying. It's not just losing people and dwindling and dying. Far and away from it.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

But the numbers don't lie--and you can't dispute it. Chicago is clearly gentrifying. It's not just losing people and dwindling and dying. Far and away from it.

Yep. Chicago is both thriving & gentrifying AND dwindling & dying, all at the same time.

No US city simultaneously represents both the best and worst of urban america to quite the same degree that chicago does.

A tale of two cities through and through. A sad legacy of some of the most extreme racial segregation in history.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Obadno

I would think Phoenix city growth is mostly in the central city, the only unbuilt areas in the city limits are Mountain Preserves and large tracts of empty desert with far more restrictive land use than in previous decades.

If you are really worried about sprawl (which I've said a million times isn't going anywhere and happens in every metro area even Chicago, NY, DC etc.) it would be cities like Glendale, Gilbert, Peoria, Surprise etc.

Buckeye is fast growing that's legitimately far out on the edge of the metro but its a small town of only 65k in an area of ~5 million.

I just stumbled upon some interesting figures for Phoenix.

Since 2015, Phoenix has built 21,500 new apartments concentrated in Central Phoenix and the inner cities of Tempe and Scottsdale, with another 17,900 apartments that are either under construction or planned.

With all of the apartment infill rents have stabilized in the central city, with the largest increases expected in the outer cities like Surprise, Gilbert, Peoria and Chandler as most of the apartment growth has focused in the inner urban areas.

Last year the region added 74,000 new residents with strong growth of 54,000 new jobs.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Yep. Chicago is both thriving & gentrifying AND dwindling & dying, all at the same time.

No US city simultaneously represents both the best and worst of urban america to the same degree that chicago does.

A tale of two cities through and through. A legacy of some of the most extreme racial segregation in world history.

It was always said that Chicago is the big city that most represents America.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

It was always said that Chicago is the big city that most represents America.

yeah, that's a common epithet for the city, but i'm not sure i entirely buy it.

america is a big giant diverse nation full of all kinds of different regions and cities.

this notion that the midwest, and its de facto capital city of chicago, somehow represents a more "real" form of america than other regions/cities has always seemed a bit dubious to me.

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The Chicago media should be pretty ashamed with their Census rationalization campaign. The "what, me worry, it's just ghetto blacks leaving" is factually incorrect, inherently racist, and the ultimate in mindless boosterism.

The facts are as follows:

1. Chicago is the only first-tier U.S. city losing population
2. Chicago does not have notable black outmigration relative to its peers
3. Chicago's black outmigration appears to be middle class, not the poor
4. Chicago's wealth and education gains are not notable relative to peers, and don't explain the population losses

Chicago is losing population because it no longer gets immigrants in large numbers. It has nothing to do with blacks, or whites, or the rich or poor. There has been a massive decline in Chicago-area intl. in-migration. But the media spin is "the ghetto blacks are leaving and wealthy white folks are replacing them" with zero mention of the actual issue.

yup

[C.]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The Chicago media should be pretty ashamed with their Census rationalization campaign. The "what, me worry, it's just ghetto blacks leaving" is factually incorrect, inherently racist, and the ultimate in mindless boosterism.

The facts are as follows:

1. Chicago is the only first-tier U.S. city losing population
2. Chicago does not have notable black outmigration relative to its peers
3. Chicago's black outmigration appears to be middle class, not the poor
4. Chicago's wealth and education gains are not notable relative to peers, and don't explain the population losses

Chicago is losing population because it no longer gets immigrants in large numbers. It has nothing to do with blacks, or whites, or the rich or poor. There has been a massive decline in Chicago-area intl. in-migration. But the media spin is "the ghetto blacks are leaving and wealthy white folks are replacing them" with zero mention of the actual issue.

This needed to be said.

[subterranean]

Chicago is up by nearly a percent over 2010. I struggle to see how recent, small population losses are real issues worthy of any concern, especially in light of the population losses in the decades following the 1960 census. Similar with Detroit, only less stark. Detroit may have lost almost 6%, but compared to losses of one-fifth or even one-quarter, 5.7% almost seems like a positive.

[dubu]

you would thing the hot states would be loosing people because the 2020's are suposed to get real hot then it will get colder ofter the 20's. its a wait and see thing thing though. sea levels and earthquakes, also volcanos will happen. the yellowstone volcano could be bad or be like the hawaii volcano's. ash would be bad because. you couldnt breath. im not worried about anything though. i think i went off topic again. also i was typing on my xbox and theres typing glitches. delete if you want

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by dubu

you would thing the hot states would be loosing people because the 2020's are suposed to get real hot then it will get colder ofter the 20's. its a wait and see thing thing though. sea levels and earthquakes, also volcanos will happen. the yellowstone volcano could be bad or be like the hawaii volcano's. ash would be bad because. you couldnt breath. im not worried about anything though. i think i went off topic again. also i was typing on my xbox and theres typing glitches. delete if you want

So the "rust belt's" great hope is that climate change, earthquakes and volcanoes will make the coasts and western US uninhabitable?

[dubu]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

So the "rust belt's" great hope is that climate change, earthquakes and volcanoes will make the coasts and western US uninhabitable?

i think some people will move to the midwest because its safe. oregon has so many volcanos and a earthquake could happen. im glad my dad has property in the next town east of here

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

So the "rust belt's" great hope is that climate change, earthquakes and volcanoes will make the coasts and western US uninhabitable?

Why not? The Sun Belt has been capitalizing on warmer weather...

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by dubu

you would thing the hot states would be loosing people because the 2020's are suposed to get real hot then it will get colder ofter the 20's. its a wait and see thing thing though. sea levels and earthquakes, also volcanos will happen. the yellowstone volcano could be bad or be like the hawaii volcano's. ash would be bad because. you couldnt breath. im not worried about anything though. i think i went off topic again. also i was typing on my xbox and theres typing glitches. delete if you want

im beginning to think youre a bot lol

[YSL]

I wonder why immigration to Chicago has tumbled? And which countries were traditionally the main drivers of immigrants?

[dubu]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

im beginning to think youre a bot lol

i always get posts deleted and i got a warning.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by YSL

I wonder why immigration to Chicago has tumbled? And which countries were traditionally the main drivers of immigrants?

There are still lots of immigrants coming to Chicago, but it’s just not nearly as robust as it once was. Mexican immigration in particular was so dramatic in the 90s that the population soared (despite declining white and black populations) and whole neighborhoods were transformed.

Despite Crawford’s predictable anti-Chicago rubbish, indeed the local media has been discussing these changes for quite some time. Here is an article that goes into it a bit:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...r-other-cities

[TexasPlaya]

Part of Chicago is just the several decades long secular shift of logistics/population growth to the Gulf Coast and SE. DFW and Atlanta to a lesser extent have taken up that Chicago role of the late 19th/early 20th century.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

So the "rust belt's" great hope is that climate change, earthquakes and volcanoes will make the coasts and western US uninhabitable?

No, but cities in regions where natural disasters are essentially non-existent is a longevity advantage.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by dubu

you would thing the hot states would be loosing people because the 2020's are suposed to get real hot then it will get colder ofter the 20's. its a wait and see thing thing though. sea levels and earthquakes, also volcanos will happen. the yellowstone volcano could be bad or be like the hawaii volcano's. ash would be bad because. you couldnt breath. im not worried about anything though. i think i went off topic again. also i was typing on my xbox and theres typing glitches. delete if you want

I don’t think a degree or two extra high or low will vastly change living patterns, maybe back in borderline pre-Neolithic times we would be at the mercy of the gods but in modern times of climate control it isn’t going to be a drastic problem like say sea level rise.

Even so global average temperature being set to rise a few degrees by end of century that does not apply evenly and does not apply everywhere the same way.

Some places who get more rain, some less , some places will get colder, some warmer.

Climate change predictions and projections pretty all over the place in terms of what may or may not happen. It is hard to conclude much for any local area based off of them.