The US Census Bureau thread

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Connecticut has already been released...

Oh yeah, I added them to my list today! I was glancing at the Census map to see what states hadn't been out yet, and the little New England states started to merge together.

[JivecitySTL]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Firstly, learn the difference between a city and a metropolitan area.

Secondly, the Globalization and World Cities Research Network considers these American cities (read this as metropolitan areas) as global:

Alpha ++: New York City
Alpha: Chicago
Alpha -: Los Angeles
Beta +: Washington, San Francisco, Atlanta
Beta: Dallas, Boston
Beta -: Miami, Houston
Gamma +: Denver, Minneapolis, Seattle
Gamma: Philadelphia, Portland
Gamma -: Detroit, San Diego, Columbus

They also put out a list of cities that are on the cusp of being global:
High Sufficiency: Phoenix, Cleveland, Tampa, Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Orlando, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Baltimore, St. Louis
Sufficiency: Sacramento, Milwaukee, San Jose, Richmond, Las Vegas, Memphis, Hartford, Nashville, Honolulu, Omaha, Raleigh, Salt Lake City, Austin, Birmingham, Cincinnati, New Orleans

Something I've always considered odd is that they perennially leave San Antonio off the list even though it is a major tourist hub.

This is such a ridiculous list. Seattle above Philly? Portland above Detroit? Columbus above Cleveland, St. Louis and Baltimore? I think not.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by JivecitySTL

This is such a ridiculous list. Seattle above Philly? Portland above Detroit? Columbus above Cleveland, St. Louis and Baltimore? I think not.

Not my data... I was just throwing it out there as a way to provide relevant data to the discussion about Detroit being global or not. Seattle above Philadelphia is reasonable, but Portland above Detroit isn't. Columbus and Cleveland are on par. St. Louis and Baltimore as well.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Crawford

How about it has one of the world's largest economies?

It's a top-10 or (at absolute worst) top-15 metro in the U.S. in terms of population and economy.

It's also quite obviously the world's automotive center.

Now if your list of global cities is limited to the dozen or so global megacities, then obviously Detroit is nowhere close. But if you're talking 40 or 50 cities globally, then Detroit easily makes the list.

Hey we kind of agree for once. Though I take exception that Detroit is still the world's automotive center......The Chinese, The Japanes both produce more than the US does.

The Germans are not too far behind. The automotive world is polycentric not unicentric as it used to be

[CentralGrad258]

Originally Posted by Crawford

No, the stereotypes are quite obviously true, and confirmed by Census data.

Did you even look at the data? It shows the exact opposite of what you said. The growth came almost explicitly from increases in the Asian and Hispanic population.

Originally Posted by Crawford

Are you seriously arguing that Philly receives comparable levels of immigration as NYC, Boston, or DC? Are you seriously arguing that gentrification is comparable?

I'm not saying that, I don't go around making sweeping generalizations about cities I've only visited or lived in a long time ago. I'm saying that your stereotypes about Philly are stale and old. The growth happened exactly in the neighborhoods that are gentrifying and attracting immigrants.

Originally Posted by Crawford

The Philly MSA is comparable to the Detroit MSA, in terms of proportional levels of immigration and annual naturalizations. That's why Philly's growth is extremely impressive. It grew despite lacking the primary driver of U.S. urban growth.

Do you have any data to back this up, beside vague generalizations?

Originally Posted by Crawford

Well, yeah; and how does that contradict what I wrote? You do realize that most Latinos and Asians aren't immigrants, right?

And, in the Northeast, our biggest Latino or Asian ethnic group is 100% non-immigrant (I'll let you guess).

Whatever you say buddy. Come to Philly and take a walk around South Philly, Olney, Southwest Philly, Chinatown, Kensington, and Lower Northeast, then tell me the people moving here aren't first generation immigrants.

[Chase Unperson]

So what do we think the bottom for Cleveland, Detroit, STL and Chicago will be.

For Chicago, I think the next census will be 2500000 and it won't go lower.

For Cleveland, I would say 300,000

For STL I would say 200,000

For Detroit I will say 600,000.

What do you think.

[plinko]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Not my data... I was just throwing it out there as a way to provide relevant data to the discussion about Detroit being global or not. Seattle above Philadelphia is reasonable, but Portland above Detroit isn't. Columbus and Cleveland are on par. St. Louis and Baltimore as well.

FYI, We're all quite aware of this list and everytime somebody brings it out we all laugh and simply disagree. It ranks on this forum somewhere just above Forbes.

[Thundertubs]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

So what do we think the bottom for Cleveland, Detroit, STL and Chicago will be.

For Chicago, I think the next census will be 2500000 and it won't go lower.

For Cleveland, I would say 300,000

For STL I would say 200,000

For Detroit I will say 600,000.

What do you think.

No city on that list has ever seen a 35+% drop like you are assuming in STL's case, not even in the brutal decade of the 1970's. I can't imagine how casually suggesting historically rapid acceleration of decline would lead to productive discussion. Silly post. Moving on.

Also, this [?] is a question mark, it goes at the end of sentences that are questions.

[hudkina]

I highly doubt St. Louis will bottom out at 200,000. For all we know 2010 was the bottom, and even if it wasn't, I think it will stay above 300,000, at least in our lifetimes. As for Detroit, that is a bit different. The only saving grace could be hispanics and asians. The white population is nonexistant, and the black population is beginning to see the same decline that the white population experienced in previous decades. If the political circus that dominated city government over the last decade doesn't return, then maybe the city will bottom out in the 750,000-800,000 range. Granted, that's assuming that the current population is still in the 850,000 range...

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by CentralGrad258

Did you even look at the data? It shows the exact opposite of what you said. The growth came almost explicitly from increases in the Asian and Hispanic population..

I never said a thing about Asians or Hispanics. I commented on immigrants.

And obviously Asians and Hispanics fuel Philly's growth. In what major U.S. Metro are Asians and Hispanics not fueling population growth?

In every major metro, from LA to Detroit to DC, Asians and Hispanics are fueling growth, and whites and blacks are growing more slowly, or declining.

Originally Posted by CentralGrad258

I don't go around making sweeping generalizations about cities I've only visited or lived in a long time ago.

That's great and all, but I'm strictly going by U.S. Census numbers. The Census shows that Philly metro attracts relatively few immigrants compared to the other three Northeast metros.

By proportion, Philly and Detroit attract almost the exact same number of foreign-born residents.

Philly MSA- 8.8% foreign-born

Detroit MSA- 8.6% foreign-born

In contrast, the three other major Northeast metros have much higher proportions of foreign-born residents.

NYC MSA- 27.6% foreign-born

DC MSA- 19.9% foreign-born

Boston MSA- 15.8% foreign-born

Source-
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADP..._2009_5YR_G00_&_lang=en&_ts=317856996437

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by hudkina

I highly doubt St. Louis will bottom out at 200,000. For all we know 2010 was the bottom, and even if it wasn't, I think it will stay above 300,000, at least in our lifetimes. As for Detroit, that is a bit different. The only saving grace could be hispanics and asians. The white population is nonexistant, and the black population is beginning to see the same decline that the white population experienced in previous decades. If the political circus that dominated city government over the last decade doesn't return, then maybe the city will bottom out in the 750,000-800,000 range. Granted, that's assuming that the current population is still in the 850,000 range...

Detroit's population loss has never been because of the shenanigans at city hall.

If Fannie and Freddie die out and are not replaced, which is highly likely as this point, sprawl is gonna get a lot more expensive in the U.S. I wouldn't expect anymore of these wild population fluctuations, especially among the built out cities of the northeast and industrial Midwest that have suffered the most from the government's post war subsidization of sprawl.

[BevoLJ]

Originally Posted by CentralGrad258

The growth happened exactly in the neighborhoods that are gentrifying and attracting immigrants.

Did you varify this through the census tracts? I would love to see the numbers from the areas that did a lot of gentrification. From what I have read and everyone has been saying in every other city it has shown that those area have had a huge decrease in population due to smaller household sizes and the higher cost pushing people out to the burbs that used to live in those areas. I am not denying what you say is true, but if some how Phily was able to do what no one else has then it would be interesting to see how they managed it.

Originally Posted by Crawford

Source-
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADP..._2009_5YR_G00_&_lang=en&_ts=317856996437

It is an interesting discussion and I checked the towns in Texas (I know they have nothing to do with y'alls discussion but I was interested... so .. )

Here are the percentages for the Texas cities (MSA) that are foreign born.

Austin - 15%
Houston - 21%
DFW - 17%
San Antonio - 11% (who would have guess this to be the lowest major city?)
El Paso - 27%

And while I know Corpus Christi is a much smaller city than the rest it is at 7%. Who would have guess that to be the case?

[Urbanguy]

Has anyone done metro numbers for their region or favorite metro areas?

Here are several that i've done for the Northwest & Hawaii:

Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA CSA: 4,199,312 (+492,168)
Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA MSA: 2,226,009 (+298,128)
Honolulu, HI MSA: 953,207 (+77,051)
Boise City-Nampa, ID MSA: 616,561 (+151,721)
Spokane, WA MSA: 471,221 (+53,282)
Salem, OR MSA: 390,738 (+43,524)
Eugene-Springfield, OR MSA: 351,715 (+28,756)

*Keep in mind that the figures for population growth for Seattle & Portland are based on the same counties that make up their metro areas as they are defined by the US Census currently. For example, in 2000 Salem (Marion County) was included with Portland's metro area & now it's not.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Urbanguy

Has anyone done metro numbers for their region or favorite metro areas?

Here are several that i've done for the Northwest & Hawaii:

Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA CSA: 4,199,312 (+492,168)
Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA MSA: 2,226,009 (+298,128)
Honolulu, HI MSA: 953,207 (+77,051)
Boise City-Nampa, ID MSA: 616,561 (+151,721)
Spokane, WA MSA: 471,221 (+53,282)
Salem, OR MSA: 390,738 (+43,524)
Eugene-Springfield, OR MSA: 351,715 (+28,756)

*Keep in mind that the figures for population growth for Seattle & Portland are based on the same counties that make up their metro areas as they are defined by the US Census currently. For example, in 2000 Salem (Marion County) was included with Portland's metro area & now it's not.

Scroll back a page or two. I've put together a list of all metropolitan areas over 1,000,000.

[Urbanguy]

^Are those all MSA numbers only? I know that Los Angeles CSA is over 17 million as of 2010.

[rds70]

Originally Posted by Urbanguy

Has anyone done metro numbers for their region or favorite metro areas?
.

Colorado metro area populations:

Denver-Aurora-Greeley CSA: 3,090,874 (+460,894)
Colo. Springs MSA: 645,613 (+108,129)
Ft. Collins-Loveland MSA: 299,630 (+48,136)
Pueblo MSA: 159,063 (+17,591)
Grand Jct MSA: 146,723 (+30,468)

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Urbanguy

^Are those all MSA numbers only? I know that Los Angeles CSA is over 17 million as of 2010.

MSA only. If someone else wants to do CSA, fine, but CSA numbers IMO are only useful in certain contexts.

[LMich]

Surprised no one commented on the shocking difference between the city numbers for Arizona. We knew with the release of the state numbers, last week, that Arizona was among the most overestimated states, but I didn't think the numbers for the big cities would be so far off. The numbers for Phoenix city and metro will leave Philly firmly in fifth place as a municipality, and Detroit was not passed by Phoenix, last decade, in metropolitan population.

BTW, look at some of these slow down for big (and matured) city propers in the sunbelt:

Phoenix:

1970: 581,572 32.4%
1980: 789,704 35.8%
1990: 983,403 24.5%
2000: 1,321,045 34.3%
2010: 1,445,632 9.4%

Dallas:

1970: 844,401 24.2%
1980: 904,078 7.1%
1990: 1,006,877 11.4%
2000: 1,188,580 18.0%
2010: 1,197,816 0.7%

Houston:

1970: 1,232,802 31.4%
1980: 1,595,138 29.4%
1990: 1,630,553 2.2%
2000: 1,953,631 19.8%
2010: 2,099,451 7.5%

And, these are cities with relatively huge land areas, to boot.

All that said, it's very hard to project a trajectory for any city. I mean, Detroit had boomed since the 00's, and went from a growth of nearly 60% during the 20's, but then droping to just 3.5% in the 30's, and then accelerating again in the 40's (~+14%), before posting a significant drop of nearly 10% for the 50's, and it just went downhill from there.

BTW, I'm very impressed with Milwaukee having staunched it's population loss. It was a success story that I'd be skeptical of given what's taken place in nearby Great Lakes cities:

State's Latino population increases 74% in 10 years

By Georgia Pabst and Ben Poston of the Journal Sentinel

March 10, 2011

...

Unlike some other Midwest cities, such as Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, which experienced losses from 7% to 17%, Milwaukee's population declined by less than 1%, to 594,833 from 596,974 in 2000. That shows "remarkable stability" in the last 10 years, Mayor Tom Barrett said at a news conference Thursday.

...

The city's growth was also largely attributable to the growth in the Hispanic population, which for the first time grew to more than 100,000, an increase of almost 44% in the last 10 years, Barrett said.

The figures show blacks make up 39% of Milwaukee's population, whites 37% and Hispanics 17.3%, said William Frey, a demographer for the Brookings Institution.

Along with the growth in Latinos, Milwaukee also saw a modest increase in its African-American population, unlike other Midwest cities that are losing blacks, Frey said.

...

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Urbanguy

Has anyone done metro numbers for their region or favorite metro areas?

Some metros in Illinois and Wisconsin:

Madison, WI 568,593 (+66,819)
Peoria, IL 379,186 (+12,287)
Rockford, IL 349,431 (+29,227)
Springfield, IL 210,170 (+8,733)

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Thundertubs

No city on that list has ever seen a 35+% drop like you are assuming in STL's case, not even in the brutal decade of the 1970's. I can't imagine how casually suggesting historically rapid acceleration of decline would lead to productive discussion. Silly post. Moving on.

Also, this [?] is a question mark, it goes at the end of sentences that are questions.

chase's post was not silly. he was merely adding to the discussion. you reserve the right to disagree with people, but not to hate.

correct grammar is also not a requirement of this site. i don't capitalize - but i'm pretty sure i am still able to get my point across. obviously you were able to understand without the '?'.