The US Census Bureau thread

[proghousehead]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Way too much Schadenfreude over LA's growth rate.

I don't see a problem with New York growing faster than LA. Immigration has slowed as have birth rates, many more people live closer to New York, which has a lot more higher paying jobs across a broader range of industries, and then there are the angry white middle class who seem to have fled LA by the millions over the past 30 years. Southern California has swung LEFT while those who hate that seem much more apt to move to more politically hospitable places like Arizona, Idaho, Texas and Utah.

And that doesnt even begin to address housing costs, perceived tax burdens on individuals and businesses, that give right wing media so much fodder.

I mean, there's a lot we could talk about to try and explain away LA's slowing population but keep in mind folks, Greater Los Angeles has grown by 9 million since 1980, doubling it's population.

Lastly, as evidenced above, the growth rate across the country is slowing down almost everywhere-Austin's growth rate is down from previous decades, Dallas too, Houston too, Phoenix too, etc.

Every metro will experience a slowdown, much sooner than most people realize.

Hi Montclair of the 18 variety. No schadenfreude. It’s a shocking result
On LAs part. The better part of 2 decades has extolled LAs housing build out and transit expansion etc etc. if that doesn’t correlate to an expected increase in residents, clearly something is not working. Sad. I Hope they can figure it out. Great city. But not doing something right which is evident by the fact they didn’t hit 4 million. End.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by LA21st

In real life,
The cost of living is what people complain about here by a ton.
Traffic would be second.

Urbans dumb woke argument....who knows. 25?

LA21st gets it.

I mean common folks... think about the folks that have families. Kids are expensive and expensive cities for the majority of folks (not just the 1-3% with high paying jobs in tech or medical or business) are a big factor.

Would make sense for a younger person to live in an overpriced shoebox but minute they go up the career ladder, other locations are more desirable due to lower COL and scaling of career opportunities in other metros. Things like tax environments, regulations... surely don't help. Cost of food, fuel.. and so on and so on.

Now some folks may move because of politics or more freedom or because they are tired of the save-the-parrots folks, but those folks are far and few. Bulk is because of COL.

One locations high price environment is another locations benefit.

Originally Posted by LA21st

People don't move to areas they don't think they cant afford.
It's pretty simple.

Pretty much and if they do, its because they take a calculated risk or the career opportunities make it so that if they stick around, it'll be worth it.

Its a game of risk, the same why younger folks pay $4000 a month in SF or NYC. But unless their income scales, when a family is introduced, unless one is well off or in a good position, budgeting starts to become tight.

The ability to have a property is a big one as well. Renting is all fine and dandy but no equity gain.

Now if you've been sitting on a nice property in a high cost city for ages, yeah... makes sense not to move but the masses trying to start their lives and families... price and risk matter.

[ITB495]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Lastly, as evidenced above, the growth rate across the country is slowing down almost everywhere-Austin's growth rate is down from previous decades, Dallas too, Houston too, Phoenix too, etc.

Every metro will experience a slowdown, much sooner than most people realize.

I'm not so sure. We're currently experiencing a massive inflow of people migrating to the country. Thousands upon thousands are being allowed in and, many, to legally stay with only a future court date. People from all over the world are now traveling to Mexico and then making the trek northward. It's an unprecedented situation. The southern border is becoming the 21st Century's Ellis Island. If the current migration pace continues for a few years, and there are few reasons it won't, the population of the United States will substantially grow.

Bear in mind that under the Trump administration we had some of most restrictive immigration policies in decades. Four years. Forty percent of the previous decade. And the population of the country still grew by 7.4% over those 10 years. During the Trump years, too, naturalizations stayed at about the same level as before, averaging about 750,000 per year.

If the country grows by 10% between 2020 and 2030, that's an additional 33 million. If growth slows to 5%, which is possible, the country will still add 16.5 new residents. As the 2020 census showed, almost all the growth in the country has been occurring in the metropolitan areas. Going forward, that's unlikely to change, though some wishfully think otherwise.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by proghousehead

Hi Montclair of the 18 variety. No schadenfreude. It’s a shocking result
On LAs part. The better part of 2 decades has extolled LAs housing build out and transit expansion etc etc. if that doesn’t correlate to an expected increase in residents, clearly something is not working. Sad. I Hope they can figure it out. Great city. But not doing something right which is evident by the fact they didn’t hit 4 million. End.

They're not building out. That's the problem. They're hundreds of thousands of units short of where they're supposed to be. It's going to take a long time to catch up, even if they make a better dent in this decade. The city needs to speed up the development process and get rid of their dated zoning. There's no reason why Santa Monica and Sunset blvds in Hollywood shouldn't be wall to wall 10-20 story residential already, just to name a few streets.

The good news is they're tearing down a bunch of warehouses to build housing now. It's way over due, but it's starting.

The transit expansion isn't even complete, not sure what youre talking about. Purple Line hasn't even reached LaBrea yet.

[ITB495]

Originally Posted by LA21st

People don't move to areas they don't think they cant afford.
It's pretty simple.

Yes, it is. Because the job determines the affordability. Why did thousands of people move into San Francisco and Alameda County, both expensive areas to live. Because they determined they could afford it.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by ITB495

Yes, it is. Because the job determines the affordability. Why did thousands of people move into San Francisco and Alameda County, both expensive areas to live. Because they determined they could afford it.

Again, and as stated by others, the Bay Area is unique because of it's salaries.
There is no other metro like it. Just look at the median income versus anywhere else.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by ITB495

I'm not so sure. We're currently experiencing a massive inflow of people migrating to the country. Thousands upon thousands are being allowed in and, many, to legally stay with only a future court date. People from all over the world are now traveling to Mexico and then making the trek northward. It's an unprecedented situation. The southern border is becoming the 21st Century's Ellis Island. If the current migration pace continues for a few years, and there are few reasons it won't, the population of the United States will substantially grow.

Bear in mind that under the Trump administration we had some of most restrictive immigration policies in decades. Four years. Forty percent of the previous decade. And the population of the country still grew by 7.4% over those 10 years. During the Trump years, too, naturalizations stayed at about the same level as before, averaging about 750,000 per year.

If the country grows by 10% between 2020 and 2030, that's an additional 33 million. If growth slows to 5%, which is possible, the country will still add 16.5 new residents. As the 2020 census showed, almost all the growth in the country has been occurring in the metropolitan areas. Going forward, that's unlikely to change, though some wishfully think otherwise.

The US growth has all but collapsed. Natural growth (births minus deaths) went from 1.9 million in 2007 to 200k in 2020 (700k in 2019, without Covid). Immigration is far from its all time high. By the end of this decade, the US might be registering more deaths than births.

16 million people in a country of 331 million people is not that much. The time of boomtowns will be a thing of the past.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by Emprise du Lion

This has more to do with Illinois' larger issues than St. Louis'. Doesn't change the fact that the counties are shrinking, but absent St. Louis going through an economic boom, there isn't much that St. Louis can do. The solution will have to come from Springfield.

Problem is that even from the Illinois side, there is very little that Springfield can do for Metro East short of moving the state capital. They’ve got a military base, airport, major university campus, and casinos.

But it’s mostly an area of heavy industry and unremarkable company towns. Distribution centers for St. Louis are the only major businesses with real interest.

There’s zero incentive for Illinois to negotiate high-end manufacturing for Metro East when Chicago and Central Illinois guarantee that most new taxpayers will not live across the state line.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by ITB495

I'm not so sure. We're currently experiencing a massive inflow of people migrating to the country. Thousands upon thousands are being allowed in and, many, to legally stay with only a future court date.

Nope, the number of people at the border might look daunting on tv, but it's nothing versus 330 million people, and it amounts to peanuts compared to the numbers we allowed in legally before Donald Trump decided to cut legal immigration by 50%.

In 2016, the US govt permitted 1.1 million people to immigrate legally into the country--the was slashed to 600,000 by Trump.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuarta...h=57a5f99f6168

So immigration is way down. That would affect Los Angeles probably more than anywhere except New York.

People from all over the world are now traveling to Mexico and then making the trek northward. It's an unprecedented situation.

No, it's not unprecedented, illegal immigration was much more prevalent in the 1980s tben today. What's unprecedented is the blatant politicizing of the issue.

And so hopefully Joe Biden will change immigration policy and return us to our normal levels of legal immigration, because we need them. The White population is not growing at replacement level anymore so we need to replenish by letting in more people.

US Non-Hispanic White Population:
2020 191 Million
2010 196 Million

https://apnews.com/article/race-and-...a67d3a324fc90d

[ITB495]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

The US growth has all but collapsed. Natural growth (births minus deaths) went from 1.9 million in 2007 to 200k in 2020 (700k in 2019, without Covid). Immigration is far from its all time high. By the end of this decade, the US might be registering more deaths than births.

16 million people in a country of 331 million people is not that much. The time of boomtowns will be a thing of the past.

Again, I'm not so sure. Immigration to the U.S. is largely determined by federal policy. A tweak here and there, like we've seen under the Biden administration, can produce a significant change in the numbers. For instance, work visa and refugee programs can be vastly expanded if desired. Or a more relaxed policy on family reunification.

The world's population continues to grow. As it does, migration will increase worldwide, not just to the United States, but to Europe, and other regions where more economic opportunities exist. It's natural for people to want a better life for themselves and their children.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if the U.S. grew by more than 10% between 2020 and 2030. It will depend, of course, on the level of immigration. If the current pace keeps up for a few years we'll probably hit that mark. The country is undergoing a change in which political power is returning to metropolitan areas at the expense of the rural. The state of Georgia is a prime example. How this will affect immigration policy remains to be seen, but as most metropolitan areas are already diverse, a tilt toward a more relaxed immigration policy is very possible.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by proghousehead

Hi Montclair of the 18 variety. No schadenfreude. It’s a shocking result on LAs part.

Why is it shocking though? Why are you shocked by the news that the nation's largest city grew more than a city half it's size?

The better part of 2 decades has extolled LAs housing build out and transit expansion etc etc.

No, the better part of 4 decades has dismissed LA as an auto-oriented, soulless, suburban strip mall. Right?

LA is undergoing an urban renaissance like many other places, and the results are palpable to anywhere who has gone to Downtown LA lately. At the same time, population in outer areas may have decreased not unlike Chicago which continued to develop it's inner core like crazy while folks in outer areas moved out.

If that doesn’t correlate to an expected increase in residents, clearly something is not working. Sad. I Hope they can figure it out. Great city. But not doing something right which is evident by the fact they didn’t hit 4 million. End.

I am still trying to understand how you can say that hitting a population milestone defines a city's overall success? Furthermore, LA's economic numbers look great for the decade so far.

2010-2019 Metro Area GDP Growth
New York-Newark-Jersey City......................+$576.963 Billion(+44.92%)
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim ...............+$357.943 Billion(+48.98%)
San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley................. +$273.647 Billion(+85.97%)
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin.............................+$192.645 Billion(+37.51%)
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington.........................+$187.644 Billion(+55.81%)
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue.............................+$185.366 Billion(+77.43%)
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara...................+$170.914 Billion(+99.80%)
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land............+$163.313 Billion(+46.80%)
Boston-Cambridge-Newton..........................+$155.976 Billion(+47.46%)
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta.................+$154.661 Billion(+57.81%)
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria..................+$139.264 Billion(+33.17%)
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach.........+$130.348 Billion(+52.73%)
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington..................+$114.176 Billion(+33.53%)
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler.................................+$97.022 Billion(+55.41%)
Denver-Aurora-Lakewood..............................+$86.366 Billion(+61.23%)
San Diego Chula Vista-Carlsbad .....................+$85.430 Billion(+50.64%)
Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington....................+$83.606 Billion(+43.90%)
Detroit-Warren-Dearborn...............................+$79.264 Billion(+41.59%)
Riverside-San Bernardino-Riverside................+$76.190 Billion(+61.71%)
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia...........................+$68.585 Billion(+62.44%)
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro.........................+$64.678 Billion(+58.66%)
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson..........................+$60.055 Billion(+38.63%)
Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater................... +$54.071 Billion(+46.59%)
Pittsburgh........................................ ...........+$45.782 Billion(+39.33%)
St Louis............................................. ..........+$35.166 Billion(+25.42%)

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by ITB495

Again, I'm not so sure. Immigration to the U.S. is largely determined by federal policy. A tweak here and there, like we've seen under the Biden administration, can produce a significant change in the numbers. For instance, work visa and refugee programs can be vastly expanded if desired. Or a more relaxed policy on family reunification.

The world's population continues to grow. As it does, migration will increase worldwide, not just to the United States, but to Europe, and other regions where more economic opportunities exist. It's natural for people to want a better life for themselves and their children.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if the U.S. grew by more than 10% between 2020 and 2030. It will depend, of course, on the level of immigration. If the current pace keeps up for a few years we'll probably hit that mark. The country is undergoing a change in which political power is returning to metropolitan areas at the expense of the rural. The state of Georgia is a prime example. How this will affect immigration policy remains to be seen, but as most metropolitan areas are already diverse, a tilt toward a more relaxed immigration policy is very possible.

US growing 10% might not surprise you, but certainly would surprise all demographers around and the US Census Bureau.

To reach such number, the US would have to bring in 3 million immigrants every single year (probably much more, because many return), something unimaginable with current political climate. In fact, it would be almost impossible numbers even with an extremely pro-immigration mood.

Not it's not only the US that's slowing down. In Latin America as a whole fertility rate is below replacement level. Brazil, the largest country, it's on 1.7 child/women and falling. Traditional sources of immigrants to the US would soon be lacking of youngsters to feed the flow to the US.

[chris08876]

Rural counties really took a nose dive.

BoshWash continues to excel. Washington DC and the surrounding counties...

This is for total population change from 2010 to 2020.

[chris08876]

Same thing. Total pop change from 2010 to 2020.

[chris08876]

The whole nation. Total pop change; 2010 to 2020.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Rural counties really took a nose dive.

BoshWash continues to excel. Washington DC and the surrounding counties...

This is for total population change from 2010 to 2020.

Those red counties aren't all rural. Wayne County, MI (pop. 1.749 million) and Cuyahoga County, OH (pop. 1.264 million) both shrank.

[ITB495]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Nope, the number of people at the border might look daunting on tv, but it's nothing versus 330 million people, and it amounts to peanuts compared to the numbers we allowed in legally before Donald Trump decided to cut legal immigration by 50%.

In 2016, the US govt permitted 1.1 million people to immigrate legally into the country--the was slashed to 600,000 by Trump.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuarta...h=57a5f99f6168

So immigration is way down. That would affect Los Angeles probably more than anywhere except New York.

Yes, immigration slowed during Trump's four years. But Trump and his policies are gone. And because of that we're seeing a significant new influx of people. This migration, if it continues for a number of years, will have a meaningful impact on population growth in the U.S.

Please, bear in mind, I'm not making any judgment on whether increased immigration is good or bad. I'm just pointing out we're seeing very large numbers of people who are making the journey to try and enter the U.S. Last month, I believe, Border authorities encountered more than 200,000 migrants on the southern border. That's an big number.

Originally Posted by dimondpark

No, it's not unprecedented, illegal immigration was much more prevalent in the 1980s tben today. What's unprecedented is the blatant politicizing of the issue.

What's unprecedented now about the situation on the southern border is that people from all over the world are arriving and crossing. Romanians. South Africans. Brazilians. Russians. And from everywhere else.

Again, not making any judgement on the situation. People are wanting better lives for themselves and their children. It's understandable. It is what is it.

[ITB495]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

US growing 10% might not surprise you, but certainly would surprise all demographers around and the US Census Bureau.

Don't think so. Demographers are well aware an uptick in immigration can quickly change their calculations.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

To reach such number, the US would have to bring in 3 million immigrants every single year (probably much more, because many return), something unimaginable with current political climate. In fact, it would be almost impossible numbers even with an extremely pro-immigration mood.

The work visa programs and family reunification programs already bring in very substantial numbers. I'd don't have the numbers at hand, but they're significant. This is little controversy about these programs, as they've been around for a long time. The Trump admin attempted to shrink the number of foreign work visas, but backed off after the tech industry protested. Under Biden, it's unlikely any attempt will be made to expand immigration — that's too hot politically, as you note — but just a return to the status quo of the Obama era and before.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Not it's not only the US that's slowing down. In Latin America as a whole fertility rate is below replacement level. Brazil, the largest country, it's on 1.7 child/women and falling. Traditional sources of immigrants to the US would soon be lacking of youngsters to feed the flow to the US.

Indeed, some countries are experiencing falling fertility rates. However, by and large, population growth continues, for example in Mexico:

1990 81,249,645
2000 97,483,412
2010 112,336,538
2020 126,014,024

Source: Wikipedia

Now if one of 20 Mexicans decides to migrant to U.S. in the next 10 years, a possibility, that's 6.3 million people. Now, bear in mind, I don't know the rate of immigration from Mexico to the U.S., other than it being significant.

[ChiSoxRox]

I have updated the Wiki list of MSAs.

The largest MSA to shrink from 2010 was Akron (#83, 702,219). This might be the first Census since 1970 to have every 1M+ metro growing!

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by deja vu

I know you meant states, and not cities. Georgia too, right? North Carolina and Georgia grew enough to move past Michigan in the ranking of large states. NJ & VA are catching up quickly too.


http://citypopulation.de/en/usa/cities/

(delete)

Texas is where California was 30 yrs ago.