The US Census Bureau thread

[Yuri]

We've discussed about Philadelphia pages ago and I think it's instructive to look at its surroundings:

------------------------ 2020 --------- 2010 --------- 2000 --------- 1990

Philadelphia ----------- 6,245,051 ---- 5,965,353 ---- 5,687,147 ---- 5,435,468 ----- 4.69% ----- 4.89% ----- 4.63%

Harrisburg-Lancast. -- 1,848,243 ---- 1,738,867 ---- 1,573,112 ---- 1,428,656 ----- 6.29% ---- 10.54% ---- 10.11%

Allentown --------------- 861,889 ------ 821,173 ------ 740,395 ------ 686,688 ----- 4.96% ---- 10.91% ----- 7.82%

Reading ----------------- 428,849 ------ 411,442 ------ 373,638 ------ 336,523 ----- 4.23% ---- 10.12% ---- 11.03%


It's 3.1 million people region just outside its MSA's borders, with a very consistent growth over the decades. That's a big asset and should be taken into account when making forecasts for Philadelphia metro area, that might expanding by either annexing those counties or by an influx of migrants coming from there.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by C.

Been to both cities recently. Was pleasantly surprised with Charlotte. I still like the vibe of Austin more, but Charlotte has real potential. It just needs to continue doing what it’s doing.

Yeah, I agree with this assessment. Austin's vibe is more west coast chill, while Charlotte's is more east coast banker, lol.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

We've discussed about Philadelphia pages ago and I think it's instructive to look at its surroundings:

------------------------ 2020 --------- 2010 --------- 2000 --------- 1990

Philadelphia ----------- 6,245,051 ---- 5,965,353 ---- 5,687,147 ---- 5,435,468 ----- 4.69% ----- 4.89% ----- 4.63%

Harrisburg-Lancast. -- 1,848,243 ---- 1,738,867 ---- 1,573,112 ---- 1,428,656 ----- 6.29% ---- 10.54% ---- 10.11%

Allentown --------------- 861,889 ------ 821,173 ------ 740,395 ------ 686,688 ----- 4.96% ---- 10.91% ----- 7.82%

Reading ----------------- 428,849 ------ 411,442 ------ 373,638 ------ 336,523 ----- 4.23% ---- 10.12% ---- 11.03%


It's 3.1 million people region just outside its MSA's borders, with a very consistent growth over the decades. That's a big asset and should be taken into account when making forecasts for Philadelphia metro area, that might expanding by either annexing those counties or by an influx of migrants coming from there.

Lancaster and Reading, potentially one day, yeah. Allentown would be part of NY metro, though.

Harrisburg is not very close to Philly. It's like saying Albany will one day be part of NYC metro. Very unlikely.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Lancaster and Reading, potentially one day, yeah. Allentown would be part of NY metro, though.

Harrisburg is not very close to Philly. It's like saying Albany will one day be part of NYC metro. Very unlikely.

Yes, I don't think this area will be part of a future Philadelphia CSA. Reading already is though.

Lancaster is an interesting, like Lakeland in Florida where the county sends half people to Tampa, half people to Orlando and as such is not part of any of them, at least not officially.

However, in the future, Reading will be more integrated to Philadelphia MSA and even if those adjacent areas don't be officially annexed, they provide a big reservoir of possible migrants looking for urban life or job prospects.

Allentown, regarded as a whole, is more integrated to New York. If we look to the county-level, however, some parts of it seems to be very integrated to Philadelphia northern suburbs and those bonds will probably get stronger as both regions keep growing.

[subterranean]

Why is accessing the data always such a shit show? Here we are, the most powerful country on the planet, and our census data runs like it's handled by Serbia.

[mhays]

One one hand they're focusing on the stuff required by law first. On the other hand, some basic god damn tables would be so easy, even with five rounds of review to catch errors.

[Thirteen Mile]

Originally Posted by craigs

Emphasis on 'were.' Today, Detroit has only 39% of Philadelphia's population; they are in different leagues now.

Detroit is a strange case as always and yes if your talking about within city boundaries but if you compare regional populations then they are actually where they have historically been. The greater Detroit region when taken as a whole can be counted as having ~7.1 million if you stretch the boundaries of the defined metro area. I know this is an argument that may seem trivial or reaching but with the unique geography of Michigan and the broader region as a whole it has to be given some weight.

Let me set up my argument.

There’s a dichotomy of the type city Detroit is a Great Lakes city yes not as dense as east coast but not a sunbelt sprawler. However as the motor city Detroit took the lead nationally in auto centric urban planning back in the 40s-60s as a result the nature of suburban and exurban growth is somewhat unique.

You have a ring of older dense satellite cities from Port Huron to Flint in the north then Lansing in the North west, Ann Arbor or Jackson if you want to use US 127 to 223 coming south out of Lansing through to Toledo as the aprox outer ring (I-69) is too distant after Lansing).

However in between especially in the north and west there is a large body of sprawl in what we’ll call the greater Irish Hills or lakes region from south of Lapeer down through Oakland County into Livingston and northern Washtenaw County. While the connection of Detroit and Lansing is tenuous but at best its strong with Livingston county a piece of Metro Detroit at the crux of Flint, Lansing and Ann Arbor.



Now I’m not making the argument that the csa should be extended to include Lansing let alone Toledo by its standards the definition isn’t met but by geographical boundaries set up due to the coastline of the lakes Detroit’s influence is magnified.

Then there’s Canada too add in the SW Ontario peninsula falls into Detroit’s influence too we can draw the line when we get to London. Which is where it is at the confluence of two of Canada’s most important trade routes 401 and 402 carrying the equivalent of all US - Japanese trade on edge of the peninsula under Detroit’s influence about half way between Toronto and Detroit. Though these days with Toronto’s burgeoning growth it’s probably 75% in Toronto’s influence to 25%
Detroit.




The city of Detroit itself being diminished while being the center of a massive region with the legacy institutions of its world class days makes for an interesting situation. I only use the Philadelphia - Detroit comparison because if you add up the population in the region within about an hours drive of Detroit you get to ~7.1 million using pre 2020 numbers bit less than Philly Metro its former place.

So to wrap up my spiel the Detroit region is historically in a similar position to where it has been for the most part except for its brief surpassing of Philly in the 50s. The weight of the region is still here but the weight of the city center has been hollowed out yes overall the proportions can be said to be similar but until Detroit completes its turnaround bringing widespread vibrancy to the inner city the national and international draw of Detroit won’t be in the same league as say Philly.

What can I say I find geography interesting along with Detroit I had been thinking about this nugget for a bit but havn’t had the proper opportunity to broach the subject.

[memph]

Map of growth in Houston's 610 Loop.



Overall

2010: 479,133
2020: 520,576
Change: +41,443 (+8.65%)

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Thirteen Mile

Detroit is a strange case as always and yes if your talking about within city boundaries but if you compare regional populations then they are actually where they have historically been. The greater Detroit region when taken as a whole can be counted as having ~7.1 million if you stretch the boundaries of the defined metro area. I know this is an argument that may seem trivial or reaching but with the unique geography of Michigan and the broader region as a whole it has to be given some weight.

Don't take the bait. It was a nonsense statement. By his logic, San Francisco also isn't in the same league as Philadelphia, since it's only 54% of Philadelphia's population.

[memph]

Originally Posted by Thirteen Mile

Detroit is a strange case as always and yes if your talking about within city boundaries but if you compare regional populations then they are actually where they have historically been. The greater Detroit region when taken as a whole can be counted as having ~7.1 million if you stretch the boundaries of the defined metro area. I know this is an argument that may seem trivial or reaching but with the unique geography of Michigan and the broader region as a whole it has to be given some weight.

Let me set up my argument.

There’s a dichotomy of the type city Detroit is a Great Lakes city yes not as dense as east coast but not a sunbelt sprawler. However as the motor city Detroit took the lead nationally in auto centric urban planning back in the 40s-60s as a result the nature of suburban and exurban growth is somewhat unique.

You have a ring of older dense satellite cities from Port Huron to Flint in the north then Lansing in the North west, Ann Arbor or Jackson if you want to use US 127 to 223 coming south out of Lansing through to Toledo as the aprox outer ring (I-69) is too distant after Lansing).

However in between especially in the north and west there is a large body of sprawl in what we’ll call the greater Irish Hills or lakes region from south of Lapeer down through Oakland County into Livingston and northern Washtenaw County. While the connection of Detroit and Lansing is tenuous but at best its strong with Livingston county a piece of Metro Detroit at the crux of Flint, Lansing and Ann Arbor.



Now I’m not making the argument that the csa should be extended to include Lansing let alone Toledo by its standards the definition isn’t met but by geographical boundaries set up due to the coastline of the lakes Detroit’s influence is magnified.

Then there’s Canada too add in the SW Ontario peninsula falls into Detroit’s influence too we can draw the line when we get to London. Which is where it is at the confluence of two of Canada’s most important trade routes 401 and 402 carrying the equivalent of all US - Japanese trade on edge of the peninsula under Detroit’s influence about half way between Toronto and Detroit. Though these days with Toronto’s burgeoning growth it’s probably 75% in Toronto’s influence to 25%
Detroit.




The city of Detroit itself being diminished while being the center of a massive region with the legacy institutions of its world class days makes for an interesting situation. I only use the Philadelphia - Detroit comparison because if you add up the population in the region within about an hours drive of Detroit you get to ~7.1 million using pre 2020 numbers bit less than Philly Metro its former place.

So to wrap up my spiel the Detroit region is historically in a similar position to where it has been for the most part except for its brief surpassing of Philly in the 50s. The weight of the region is still here but the weight of the city center has been hollowed out yes overall the proportions can be said to be similar but until Detroit completes its turnaround bringing widespread vibrancy to the inner city the national and international draw of Detroit won’t be in the same league as say Philly.

What can I say I find geography interesting along with Detroit I had been thinking about this nugget for a bit but havn’t had the proper opportunity to broach the subject.

I mean, sure, but you could also expand Philadelphia's sphere of influence to include Vineland, Atlantic City, Ocean City, Dover, Trenton, Reading, Allentown, Lancaster, etc and that could give Philadelphia's sphere of influence 10m+. I agree if you're talking about cultural and economic pull, it makes more sense to look at metro/regional population, but I'd say Philadelphia is still bigger by those metrics.

[insidediamond]

Originally Posted by Thirteen Mile

Detroit is a strange case as always and yes if your talking about within city boundaries but if you compare regional populations then they are actually where they have historically been. The greater Detroit region when taken as a whole can be counted as having ~7.1 million if you stretch the boundaries of the defined metro area. I know this is an argument that may seem trivial or reaching but with the unique geography of Michigan and the broader region as a whole it has to be given some weight.

Let me set up my argument.

There’s a dichotomy of the type city Detroit is a Great Lakes city yes not as dense as east coast but not a sunbelt sprawler. However as the motor city Detroit took the lead nationally in auto centric urban planning back in the 40s-60s as a result the nature of suburban and exurban growth is somewhat unique.

You have a ring of older dense satellite cities from Port Huron to Flint in the north then Lansing in the North west, Ann Arbor or Jackson if you want to use US 127 to 223 coming south out of Lansing through to Toledo as the aprox outer ring (I-69) is too distant after Lansing).

However in between especially in the north and west there is a large body of sprawl in what we’ll call the greater Irish Hills or lakes region from south of Lapeer down through Oakland County into Livingston and northern Washtenaw County. While the connection of Detroit and Lansing is tenuous but at best its strong with Livingston county a piece of Metro Detroit at the crux of Flint, Lansing and Ann Arbor.



Now I’m not making the argument that the csa should be extended to include Lansing let alone Toledo by its standards the definition isn’t met but by geographical boundaries set up due to the coastline of the lakes Detroit’s influence is magnified.

Then there’s Canada too add in the SW Ontario peninsula falls into Detroit’s influence too we can draw the line when we get to London. Which is where it is at the confluence of two of Canada’s most important trade routes 401 and 402 carrying the equivalent of all US - Japanese trade on edge of the peninsula under Detroit’s influence about half way between Toronto and Detroit. Though these days with Toronto’s burgeoning growth it’s probably 75% in Toronto’s influence to 25%
Detroit.




The city of Detroit itself being diminished while being the center of a massive region with the legacy institutions of its world class days makes for an interesting situation. I only use the Philadelphia - Detroit comparison because if you add up the population in the region within about an hours drive of Detroit you get to ~7.1 million using pre 2020 numbers bit less than Philly Metro its former place.

So to wrap up my spiel the Detroit region is historically in a similar position to where it has been for the most part except for its brief surpassing of Philly in the 50s. The weight of the region is still here but the weight of the city center has been hollowed out yes overall the proportions can be said to be similar but until Detroit completes its turnaround bringing widespread vibrancy to the inner city the national and international draw of Detroit won’t be in the same league as say Philly.

What can I say I find geography interesting along with Detroit I had been thinking about this nugget for a bit but havn’t had the proper opportunity to broach the subject.

excellent points, if only msa's could include foreign countries, the Detroit MSA could be seen in its more accurate size.

[subterranean]

Originally Posted by memph

I mean, sure, but you could also expand Philadelphia's sphere of influence to include Vineland, Atlantic City, Ocean City, Dover, Trenton, Reading, Allentown, Lancaster, etc and that could give Philadelphia's sphere of influence 10m+. I agree if you're talking about cultural and economic pull, it makes more sense to look at metro/regional population, but I'd say Philadelphia is still bigger by those metrics.

Philadelphia is bigger, always will be. I think in Detroit's case, a lot of people forget how big the region really is just because of the issues it's endured. At very least Windsor is closer than most of its suburbs and there's another 300k right there within sight of the CBD - but can't be counted in the census for obvious reasons. Ann Arbor has also always had super close ties to Detroit (it's a half hour drive to DTW from Ann Arbor) and there's another 300k there. As an urban agglomeration it is rather enormous. The lower half of Michigan is just medium size city after medium size city. Hell, south of the US-10 is almost 9 million people and that's just 1/3 the state geographically.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by memph

Map of growth in Houston's 610 Loop.



Overall

2010: 479,133
2020: 520,576
Change: +41,443 (+8.65%)

The 610 loop is ~96 square miles, so inside the loop has reached an average density of ~5400 people/square mile, about the same as Sacramento (and about the same population as Sacramento too...).

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by insidediamond

excellent points, if only msa's could include foreign countries, the Detroit MSA could be seen in its more accurate size.

El Paso and San Diego as well. Brownsville and Laredo to a lesser degree, Eagle Pass and Mexicali are smaller still, and McAllen and Buffalo to an even smaller degree in a more multipolar sense.

Are there others?

[insidediamond]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

El Paso and San Diego as well. Brownsville and Laredo to a lesser degree, Eagle Pass and Mexicali are smaller still, and McAllen and Buffalo to an even smaller degree in a more multipolar sense.

Are there others?

I wonder if Seattle's influence reaches to the Canadian border, for a Seattle-Vancouver urban agglomeration.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

El Paso and San Diego as well. Brownsville and Laredo to a lesser degree, Eagle Pass and Mexicali are smaller still, and McAllen and Buffalo to an even smaller degree in a more multipolar sense.

Are there others?

Sault Ste. Marie? But it's tiny.

[craigs]

I did not initiate the comparison between the municipalities of Detroit and Philadelphia, but I did respond: the two cities proper are now quite disparate in terms of population and density. And I will now add that their respective MSAs and CSAs are also disparate in size.

Even if we arbitrarily start monkeying with the data to make Detroit homers feel better about themselves by adding the Windsor metro to the Detroit CSA (which does include Ann Arbor), Philly's CSA would still have 1.5 million more residents. Seventy years ago they may have been more similar, but in 2021 Philadelphia is significantly more populous than Detroit, no matter how you define them.

[insidediamond]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Philadelphia is bigger, always will be. I think in Detroit's case, a lot of people forget how big the region really is just because of the issues it's endured. At very least Windsor is closer than most of its suburbs and there's another 300k right there within sight of the CBD - but can't be counted in the census for obvious reasons. Ann Arbor has also always had super close ties to Detroit (it's a half hour drive to DTW from Ann Arbor) and there's another 300k there. As an urban agglomeration it is rather enormous. The lower half of Michigan is just medium size city after medium size city. Hell, south of the US-10 is almost 9 million people and that's just 1/3 the state geographically.

As an A2 resident, I wonder if the greenbelt never existed, how the sprawl between A2 and Detroit would look like.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by memph

Map of growth in Houston's 610 Loop.



Overall

2010: 479,133
2020: 520,576
Change: +41,443 (+8.65%)

Interesting. Why did the east side drop while the west increased? I know nothing about Houston btw

[mhays]

Originally Posted by insidediamond

I wonder if Seattle's influence reaches to the Canadian border, for a Seattle-Vancouver urban agglomeration.

Both Washington and British Columbia have policies to limit sprawl. The latter is especially effective, but Washington is pretty good too. It's also 140 miles from center to center, and the border is a hurdle. We'll stay separate for the forseeable future.