The US Census Bureau thread

[bnk]

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

If Chicago's metro area really did only grow by 200k, that puts Baltimore-Washington well within 1,000,000 of Chicago as that's only 9.3 million (Balti-Wash is around 8.5, if someone had specific census numbers it would be great!). The difference between the two is decreasing at about 5-600,000/decade, so 2025 may mark the time when DC becomes the #3 CSA in the US.

I doubt it. You are missing the Chicagoland that exists in Indiana and Wisconsin.

here are old numbers prior to the addtional +210K addition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_metropolitan_area
Area

- MSA 9,580,567 (3rd)
- CSA 9,804,845 (3rd)

2000 numbers above

Round est 2010 ~+210,000

MSA 9,791,000
CSA 10,020,000


at your rate with no changes it would be more like around 2045.

[jcchii]

CHA demolition would seem to be a factor, but maybe too early to say it's THE factor. Foreclosures also have hit some lower income neighborhoods fairly hard.

DuPage number suggests that county is basically built out

and the metro increase is still good news, I agree

[Mr Roboto]

Honestly the main issue is the lack of jobs, it seems the city cannot support the population without the jobs. In an ideal world it would be much better to try to keep the poor black population in chicago, while focusing on ways to improve the public school system and increase job opportunities. Difficult tasks of course, and could take generations, but erradicating all of that housing mostly within a decade and leaving empty barren lots is just stupid to me.

Surely they could have had a better plan than that, or at least a more gradual one. Ive only seen a small semblance of redevelopment or refurbishment in places like the Cabrini-Green area (because they had views and downtown to sell to yuppies), Hilliard, and some parts near the former stateway gardens, and altgeld far on the southside. Most of the other areas look like barren wasteland.

Id just like to think that at some point, the city could have thought of a better way to re-engage the people of these communities and find creative ways to funnel future generations into the work force of the city, rather than simply shove them all out. Very sad.

I guess we'll see if a recount will take place, im sure the citizens underreported, but obviously the demolition of the CHA has had a profound effect on the population. I personally think we need people of all social status, from poor to rich, who perform all types of jobs - we just need the jobs and unfortunately in chicago it would seem that is what the city has not been able to keep.

[Allnatural85]

Does anyone know when the California Census numbers are suppose to be out?

[jcchii]

probably we'll wind up seeing a central core - Loop/Near North/South Loop/West Loop and surrounding neighborhoods getting denser, taller, richer and more populous, and the downtrodden zones poorer and less populated. And then the burbs growing as always.

That's why the city seems busier and more vibrant and wealthy and there's a building boom at the same time the city population decreases.

The city's main battery is in hyperdrive while the hood empties out. Hopefully the core will continue to spread and revitalize neighborhoods one by one.

Chicago still in my view is developing more of a Paris format. Super rich center, poor on city fringe and inner burbs. It is not emptying like the obvious example (Det.)

And the metro will remain in the 10 million range, making it one of Earth's top 50 urban blobs as seen from space

[the urban politician]

^ One thing for sure: the cocaine is gone.

No longer is Chicago high off of a false pretense that somehow "the city is back and on the attack!" like it has been for the past 10 years or so.

Time to come back down to earth and look in the mirror.

You simply can't look at New York City's (albeit slow) growth and brush Chicago's losses off as being due to gentrification, preference for suburban living, or taxes, or things of that nature. Chicago was once 1/2 the size of New York, and now it is less than 1/3 and still falling. Who the hell can take pride in that?

I really, genuinely hope that population is discussed at the next Mayoral debate.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ One thing for sure: the cocaine is gone.

No longer is Chicago high off of a false pretense that somehow "the city is back and on the attack!" like it has been for the past 10 years or so.

Time to come back down to earth and look in the mirror.

You simply can't look at New York City's (albeit slow) growth and brush Chicago's losses off as being due to gentrification, preference for suburban living, or taxes, or things of that nature. Chicago was once 1/2 the size of New York, and now it is less than 1/3 and still falling. Who the hell can take pride in that?

I really, genuinely hope that population is discussed at the next Mayoral debate.

Perhaps NYC's numbers will be well below expectations as well, although I am sure they will show an increase of some kind even if it is small.

I know that Gery, Indiana is entirely different than Chicago but they had a loss much much more than expected. I am starting to wonder if many urban areas will be dissapointed when the results come out. I was initally encouraged upon hearing that the District of Columbia saw an increase for the first time and I still have hopes for St. Louis but when it came to the midwest it seems rather dissapointing so far.

The problem is we have to think moving forward, this trend cannot continue and Chicago needs to make a permament increase and still work towards the goal of reaching the 1950 population. It will be alot of work and innovation and it will likely be a project that will last a lifetime but I for one am willing to devote my life to such a goal for Chicago.

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by Chicago103

Well it should be obvious, Chicago is my hometown and I care about it deeply. I have witnessed unprecedented gentrification and housing construction in the past 10 years and I am very curious as to how this impacted city-wide population growth. I am sure the there will be population growth but part of me fears it might be smaller than what I originally thought only because the Illinois population growth was only 3.3%, in the 1990's the city of Chicago growth rate alone was 4% whereas Illinois was 9%. Is it possible that the city of Chicago had a higher % population increase in the 2000's than Illinois as a whole? It is possible I think since NYC has a higher growth rate than NYS, it would be the first time since 1920 I think that Chicago had higher % growth than Illinois as a whole. It is possible that the city of Chicago's growth rate is about the same as the state average, the suburbs were above the average and downstate was below average, even a population loss.

It is silly to get wrapped up in intense city-nationalism sentiment and remember that if you weren't from where you are from you would be from somewhere else. Are you happy in Chicago? Are you fulfilled? If you are, that is all that matters. Taking pride in a population gain or feeling demoralized by a population loss is pointless. If means that much to you than move to a city were the population is gaining like NYC or LA.

I despise nationalism and think cityism is just plain silly.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by 10023

Eh, not much. And they also cost more, believe it or not.

One shouldn't be concerned with whether their city's population goes up or down, but rather with whether their city's tax base goes up or down.

This is very true. If the majority of the 200k people who left Chicago had consumed more public goods/city services than they paid for through taxes, the city will be financially much better off. (And there's reason to believe they indeed did because black Chicagoans were disproportionately represented among the city's poor and we know the exodus reflects a net loss of blacks.)

Obviously there would still be a problem, but it would be a moral rather than economic one. Black urban poor are the embarrassing legacy of this country's institutionalized racism, the most relevant form of which undergirded White Flight and stranded blacks in core cities with tax bases too depleted to offer the kinds of services necessary for a population that continued to deal with the effects of slavery, Jim Crow and segregation laws (still on the books when suburbanization began!). Fifty years after the Civil Rights Movement raised awareness of the plight of black urban poor, Chicago still hadn't managed to adequately address these issues. The black exodus out of Chicago during the past decade, IMO, reflects this. The city failed them, and that's reason for shame.

That said, it will be interesting to see the demographic breakdown of the much more populous suburbs, especially racial/ethnic compositions. I wonder how many of the city's former black residents remained in Chicagoland. (I also wonder where those who have left the state altogether have settled, and whether or not their opportunities/fortunes have improved if they indeed moved to cities with more successful black representation.) And I am happy to hear about the "influx" of whites and Asians into Chicago. Are those numbers out yet?

[mongoXZ]

Illinois, the new Ohio!

[whyhuhwhy]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ One thing for sure: the cocaine is gone.

No longer is Chicago high off of a false pretense that somehow "the city is back and on the attack!" like it has been for the past 10 years or so.

Time to come back down to earth and look in the mirror.

You simply can't look at New York City's (albeit slow) growth and brush Chicago's losses off as being due to gentrification, preference for suburban living, or taxes, or things of that nature. Chicago was once 1/2 the size of New York, and now it is less than 1/3 and still falling. Who the hell can take pride in that?

I really, genuinely hope that population is discussed at the next Mayoral debate.

You can add me and my wife to the list (eventually). And we are upper-middle class. I know no one in here cares about me personally and this is anecdotal, but the simple fact is my wife (born and raised Chicago) and myself (hardcore Chicago advocate who got several friends to move here 8 years ago when I did) are just increasingly fed up with the city. Everyone I work with at Rush is increasingly fed up with Chicago. This is not the Chicago of 10 years ago. Traffic is much worse. Traffic lights are STILL not actuated. Income taxes are up 67%. My property taxes have almost doubled since I bought my house in the city. The parking fees are a total disaster and WAY different than when I moved here just 8 years ago. There are red light cameras everywhere with a "gotcha" mentality. This is all different than when I moved here. It's just become a difficult place to live.

It would be all good if the weather was great or there was a good sense about the future here, but there's none of that. Chicago is a union controlled town and this is becomingly increasingly evident, and the future with our pension mess looks bleak (worst in the country). My best friend just moved to Peoria from Wicker Park, LOL. That really said something to me. But I digress.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

It is silly to get wrapped up in intense city-nationalism sentiment and remember that if you weren't from where you are from you would be from somewhere else. Are you happy in Chicago? Are you fulfilled? If you are, that is all that matters. Taking pride in a population gain or feeling demoralized by a population loss is pointless. If means that much to you than move to a city were the population is gaining like NYC or LA.

I despise nationalism and think cityism is just plain silly.

What are you compaining about? How is anything I said that you posted excessive nationalism or cityism? So I said that I care deeply about my city does that qualify as excessive to you? I would say that if someone doesn't feel strongly about where they live and where they are from and/or want to be there is something wrong with them. To not care at all that your city lost 200,000 people to me is apathy and there is way too much of that in our society.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

You can add me and my wife to the list (eventually). And we are upper-middle class. I know no one in here cares about me personally and this is anecdotal, but the simple fact is my wife (born and raised Chicago) and myself (hardcore Chicago advocate who got several friends to move here 8 years ago when I did) are just increasingly fed up with the city. Everyone I work with at Rush is increasingly fed up with Chicago. This is not the Chicago of 10 years ago. Traffic is much worse. Traffic lights are STILL not actuated. Income taxes are up 67%. My property taxes have almost doubled since I bought my house in the city. The parking fees are a total disaster and WAY different than when I moved here just 8 years ago. There are red light cameras everywhere with a "gotcha" mentality. This is all different than when I moved here. It's just become a difficult place to live.

It would be all good if the weather was great or there was a good sense about the future here, but there's none of that. Chicago is a union controlled town and this is becomingly increasingly evident, and the future with our pension mess looks bleak (worst in the country). My best friend just moved to Peoria from Wicker Park, LOL. That really said something to me. But I digress.

Well if the prelimnary data is true it actually has little to do with the issues you are describing. It seems like the white population, no doubt many of them are of better off financial means have actually increased in the past decade. Not that I don't think the political issues you brought up don't matter but its pretty clear the census results are not about yuppies not being able to find a parking space but rather displaced public housing residents and people on welfare felt they could no longer afford to live in Chicago. So actually its people that are quite different from you that are the ones leaving Chicago in droves.

[Trae]

Looks like Houston could take the number three spot from Chicago quicker than most thought.

[whyhuhwhy]

Originally Posted by Chicago103

Actually that hits the nail on the head. Chicago is becoming a tale of two cities, one Chicago that is somewhat like NYC becoming more dense and wealthier. Then there is the other Chicago that is like Detroit with massive population loss, ghettos, vacant lots and urban prairie.

I just don't see this. Are those details in the report? Or are we just assuming to make ourselves feel better? For example, I have connections at NMH and they are postponing expansion plans for new hospital expansions due to decreasing demand/trend. Apartment complexes in Streeterville are getting canceled. I personally know of two people of upper-middle class that have recently moved out of Chicago, and I am planning on doing the same. I realize this is all anecdotal. Even Michigan Avenue doesn't have the same energy as 10 years ago in my opinion.

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by Chicago103

What are you compaining about? How is anything I said that you posted excessive nationalism or cityism? So I said that I care deeply about my city does that qualify as excessive to you? I would say that if someone doesn't feel strongly about where they live and where they are from and/or want to be there is something wrong with them. To not care at all that your city lost 200,000 people to me is apathy and there is way too much of that in our society.

You don't have a city. You happened to be born somewhere. IF you weren't born there, you would have been born somewhere else. Care about all cities. Are you happy? Are you fulfilled? If so, you are lucky and count your blessings. 200,000 more people in your city have no effect on your happiness and fulfillment.

Nearly 10,000 children die each day from a preventable disease, malaria. If 10,000 chicago children died each day from malaria or 10,000 americans, would we accept that? Would we intervene? Why do we do nothing? Because they are not from our cities or our countries? Cityism and Nationalism are selfishness. For the individual selfishness uglifies the soul, in a population selfishness is extinction. The devil will take the hindmost until the foremost is the hindmost.

Don't feel pride or despair if your city is 200,000 greater or fewer than it was 10 years ago. If you are happy there, then that is good enough.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

Traffic is much worse.

get a bike

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

Traffic lights are STILL not actuated.

get a bike

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

Income taxes are up 67%.

yeah, the tax hike sucks.

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

My property taxes have almost doubled since I bought my house in the city.

mine have been flat for the last 5 years. odd.

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

The parking fees are a total disaster and WAY different than when I moved here just 8 years ago.

get a bike

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

There are red light cameras everywhere with a "gotcha" mentality.

get a bike





seriously, nothing, and i mean absolutely nothing, can more immediately and more profoundly positively affect your life in chicago than becoming a commuter and utility cyclist. discovering urban biking is literally one of the best things that has ever happened to me and since becoming a daily bike rider 4 years ago, my overall physical and mental health has skyrocketed and my love for the city of chicago has only grown stronger. i know that i say it a lot, but bicycles do in fact completely rule the universe................... and cars are stupid.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

Apartment complexes in Streeterville are getting canceled.

funny, crain's just had an article the other day about the potential for 6 new large apartment high rises in downtown to begin construction this year.

but you are clearly not happy in chicago and you should probably move. life's too short to be miserable. and besides, a defeatist attitude like yours will only hinder chicago's rise to glory anyway.

[Alliance]

The bottom line is if the city isn't growing its not healthy. If anyone felt differently we wouldn't be having this discussion. Its actually kind of shocking to me that the numbers are so low given the tremendous resurgence of the city at both a local and global level over the past decade.

[whyhuhwhy]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

get a bike

I got one. Chicago is a great biking town, but it's too damn cold most of the time, and the roads are kind of dangerous IMHO. I know you are a hard ass Steely and I respect that, but I'm personally too much of a pussy (like many people) and can't bike to work when it's 10 degrees out. And I'm a doctor and work weird hours and have to show up to work clean cut.

mine have been flat for the last 5 years. odd.

Crazy. I'm in Avondale. Just in the last two years our property taxes have gone up a little over 30%.