The US Census Bureau thread

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

If you look at both revised year and new year, the headlines are completely different.

The main takeaway from the is release is the Midwest, and particularly OH and MI. But they revised OH and MI massively downward in the previous year, meaning both actually "lost" population from last year. The headlines completely miss the context.

What are you referring to? The table shows the "April 1, 2020 Estimates Base", which I assume is the actual count from the 2020 census, followed by estimates for 2020-2025.

Michigan's 2020 base was 10,079,362. Per the estimates, it looks like Michigan lost population in 2020 and 2021, but has gained since then. Its 2025 estimate is 10,127,884.

Ohio's 2020 base was 11,799,445. Estimates similarly showed small drops in 2020 and 2021, and then continued growth through 2025, with its most recent estimate showing as 11,900,510.

Florida showed growth in every year.

Also I'm not sure why Ohio and Michigan are being touted as standouts in the Midwest when several other Midwestern states showed larger gains. Michigan grew by less than 50,000 people, while Indiana, for example, grew by almost 200,000.

What am I missing here?

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by edale

What are you referring to? The table shows the "April 1, 2020 Estimates Base", which I assume is the actual count from the 2020 census, followed by estimates for 2020-2025.

Michigan's 2020 base was 10,079,362. Per the estimates, it looks like Michigan lost population in 2020 and 2021, but has gained since then. Its 2025 estimate is 10,127,884.

Ohio's 2020 base was 11,799,445. Estimates similarly showed small drops in 2020 and 2021, and then continued growth through 2025, with its most recent estimate showing as 11,900,510.

Florida showed growth in every year.

Also I'm not sure why Ohio and Michigan are being touted as standouts in the Midwest when several other Midwestern states showed larger gains. Michigan grew by less than 50,000 people, while Indiana, for example, grew by almost 200,000.

What am I missing here?

Indiana has always grown fast. No surprise there. For Michigan and Ohio it's quite robust numbers.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by edale

What are you referring to? The table shows the "April 1, 2020 Estimates Base", which I assume is the actual count from the 2020 census, followed by estimates for 2020-2025.

Michigan's 2020 base was 10,079,362. Per the estimates, it looks like Michigan lost population in 2020 and 2021, but has gained since then. Its 2025 estimate is 10,127,884.

Ohio's 2020 base was 11,799,445. Estimates similarly showed small drops in 2020 and 2021, and then continued growth through 2025, with its most recent estimate showing as 11,900,510.

Florida showed growth in every year.

Look at the revision to the 2024 numbers. OH and MI lost population. FL barely grew.

They do this same crap every estimate release, and the inaccurate headlines follow.

-State X shows 20,000 pop gain in 2025
-But Census revised State X 2024 numbers downward by 30,000
-So State X has officially 10,000 fewer people than this time last year, even though the headlines trumpet the 20,000 growth. It's nonsensical.

And when done repeatedly, it's pretty obvious that they're messing up the annual estimates, if they keep having to revise the previous estimate the following year.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Indiana has always grown fast. No surprise there. For Michigan and Ohio it's quite robust numbers.

Michigan grew by less than 50,000 people over 5 years. 10,000 a year for a state with over 10,000,000 people doesn't seem notable.

Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Indiana larger gains both in terms of total gains and obviously percentage, too. Iowa added about the same amount of people as Michigan.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by Six Corners

A lot of the growth in Texas is driven by immigration. From 2024 to 2025 there were 167,000 international migrants and 67,000 domestic migrants. That's a 48% decline in international migration from 2023-2024 when there were about 319,000 international migrants. If only looking at population change due to domestic growth, Texas ranks 18th, between Missouri and Indiana.

With those figures and the current political climate, I'm curious if Texas's growth will decrease significantly over the next couple Census estimates. Of course the populations of California, Florida, New York, and Illinois are heavily driven by international migration as well. State population rankings and growth among the most populous states could get pretty wacky.

I assume you mean Texas would rank 18th on a percentage basis. Texas's 67k net domestic migration is second only to North Carolina on a raw numbers basis. (Side note: 84,000 net domestic migrants to North Carolina in one year is crazy!) And Texas dwarfs everyone in net natural change; 157k in this year, with the next closest being California at 109k. I don't see anything indicating Texas's growth will slow relative to other states. Its growth may slow with the country overall due to decreased international migration though.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Look at the revision to the 2024 numbers. OH and MI lost population. FL barely grew.

They do this same crap every estimate release, and the inaccurate headlines follow.

-State X shows 20,000 pop gain in 2025
-But Census revised State X 2024 numbers downward by 30,000
-So State X has 10,000 fewer people than this time last year, even though the headlines trumpet the 20,000 growth. It's nonsensical.

And when done repeatedly, it's pretty obvious that they're messing up the annual estimates, if they keep having to revise the previous estimate the following year.

Where are you seeing the revision to the 2024 numbers? I'm not seeing anything about that here: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-state-total.html

I've been looking at this document:
Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for the United States, Regions, States, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2025

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by edale

Michigan grew by less than 50,000 people over 5 years. 10,000 a year for a state with over 10,000,000 people doesn't seem notable.

Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Indiana larger gains both in terms of total gains and obviously percentage, too. Iowa added about the same amount of people as Michigan.

Michigan is Rust Belt's main symbol. It's been either stagnant and even losing population in the past 5- yars, in a time the US population as a whole grew much faster than now. In this context, 50,000 is quite decent for a 5-year period.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

IMO, within 5-10 years, there will be a dramatic slowdown in TX growth. TX has a ginormous population of young Hispanic adults in childbearing years, and the second highest fertility rates in the U.S., just behind Mormon Utah.

Once that cohort exits childbearing years, there will be a slowdown.

Yup. Also, Hispanics are nearing anglos in terms of dropping fertility rates so their kids will have less kids but we are overdue for a slowdown in growth anyways because it was too unsustainable for too long.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by edale

Where are you seeing the revision to the 2024 numbers? I'm not seeing anything about that here:

Here are the 2024 revised changes (initial, revised, difference):

Florida 23,372,215 23,265,838 −106,377
Michigan 10,140,459 10,099,962 −40,497
Ohio 11,883,304 11,860,621 −22,683

It's like if you were paid 120k in 2024, then paid 110k in 2025, and the boss called it a 10% increase, since he revised the 2024 pay scale to 100k.

[mhays]

Texas, like the Sun Belt in general, has a climate change problem. California's heat is mitigated in coastal areas by prevailing winds off the ocean. My guess is Texas won't grow heavily in future decades.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Here are the 2024 revised changes (initial, revised, difference):

Florida 23,372,215 23,265,838 −106,377
Michigan 10,140,459 10,099,962 −40,497
Ohio 11,883,304 11,860,621 −22,683

It's like if you were paid 120k in 2024, then paid 110k in 2025, and the boss called it a 10% increase, since he revised the 2024 pay scale to 100k.

Those revised numbers are consistent with that is shown in the tables I was looking at here.

Florida didn't post a decline at any point from 2020-2025. In fact, they gained 1,924,311 residents in this 5 year span!

Over that same timeframe, Michigan gained 48,522 residents, while Ohio gained 101,065.

[Crawford]

Again, Ohio and Michigan both lost population. The media is not including the revised population base. Their official current populations are smaller than their official current populations during the last annual estimate.

Florida grew, but it was by far the least growth in modern decades.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by mhays

Texas, like the Sun Belt in general, has a climate change problem. California's heat is mitigated in coastal areas by prevailing winds off the ocean. My guess is Texas won't grow heavily in future decades.

They might have to kayak to the office but as long as the CoL remains relatively low and there's jobs, people will come.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Again, Ohio and Michigan both lost population. The media is not including the revised population base. Their official current populations are smaller than their official current populations during the last annual estimate.

Florida grew, but it was by far the least growth in modern decades.

I feel like I'm going crazy. So the numbers that I have linked to multiple times on the census bureau's website are not the official annual estimates?

Ohio's 2020 census count was 11,799,448. It's now estimated at 11,900,510. How did it lose population? When are you saying Ohio and Michigan lost population? According to the link I shared, both lost population in the 2020 and 2021 estimates, but both had rebounded to growth again by 2022, and both have higher populations in 2025 than they did in 2020.

I also don't know why you're talking about the media, when I've only been referring to the numbers I've been looking at on the census website. I haven't seen media coverage about Ohio or Michigan's 2025 population estimates.

[Yuri]

Between 2020-2025 the US population has grown by 10.2 million people. Natural growth (births minus deaths) accounted for 2.2 million.

So US Census estimated the US immigrant population has grown by 8 million over those five years.

[mhays]

I shudder to think of what will happen to our cities when our growth rate hits negative.

[BigDipper 80]

^Youngstown everywhere, most likely. Hopefully cities are learning from the rust belt and parts of Asia on how to "smart-shrink", but I highly doubt anyone is actually that forward thinking.

What I'm kind of surprised by is that we really haven't started seeing signs of a suburban hollowing-out as they continue to age. American inner-cities boomed primarily from 1900-1950 (with a few exceptions) and contracted after the war kicked the sprawl machine into gear, but 50 years was also when many buildings start reaching the end of their useful life. Infrastructure in the suburbs is reaching or has passed that critical 50 year mark and while I do see a lot of places complaining about the costs of sewer and water replacement, you're not really seeing any sort of large scale "suburban decline" as people "throw away" their out of date stuff. Maybe the massive subsidies suburbs get has helped mask some of the fallout that inner cities saw after the same 50 year cycle.

[mhays]

Smart shrinking is great when there's a massive generational shift. But I'm also worried about basic stagnation.

I want to consider every parking lot a likely development site. I want transit ridership to grow every year. I want to dream about sidewalks getting busier and busier. My dream requires a growing, densifying city.

Some places will do better than others. Maybe climate, etc., will keep my region on the positive side, but who knows.

[edale]

Originally Posted by mhays

Smart shrinking is great when there's a massive generational shift. But I'm also worried about basic stagnation.

I want to consider every parking lot a likely development site. I want transit ridership to grow every year. I want to dream about sidewalks getting busier and busier. My dream requires a growing, densifying city.

Some places will do better than others. Maybe climate, etc., will keep my region on the positive side, but who knows.

Even if the state or country is shrinking, that doesn't preclude cities from growing and becoming more vibrant. Chicago is down about a million people from its peak population, and some neighborhoods on the South Side are a shell of their former selves, but downtown and the North Side have seen tremendous growth. It's a stagnant city and basically a stagnant metro area, but downtown continues to pump out 800 ft residential towers, parking lots keep getting developed, new nodes of activity are created, etc...

Decline or stagnation doesnt have to mean everything gets shittier everywhere. Youngstown is not the destiny for every stagnant or shrinking city. Hell, Youngstown is even a bit of an anomaly within the Ohio context, which is full of shrinking cities! Even in the darkest periods of decline and population loss, Cincinnati and Cleveland had neighborhoods that were successful, growing, and becoming more vibrant. Youngstown was an industry town that busted as fast as it boomed, and when the industry left, there really wasn't much else there. It's a little doomsday to say that Seattle will have the Youngstown experience if it stops growing.

[mhays]

That's why I differentiated shrinking from stagnating.