The US Census Bureau thread

[Emprise du Lion]

Originally Posted by DetroitMan

Although it's just a one year estimate, its nice to see Detroit growing again.

'Detroit is a vibrant and growing city again'; population grows for first time since 1957

https://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...s/73701788007/

I honestly wish the City of St. Louis had sued as well. We suffer from much of the same issues that Detroit has, especially in terms of demolition of long vacant properties hurting the estimates.

Right now the estimates have St. Louis' population loss accelerating, but this is in spite of there being more active water service accounts in the city now than 6 years ago, more housing and apartments going up, more jobs currently available across the city and metro, etc. The only way it can make sense to me as someone on the ground is if all of North City decided they were hitting the exit right now.

I guess we'll see in 2030.

[iheartthed]

I trust what Kurt Metzger says about Detroit's population much more than Mike Duggan, so if he's saying it's growing then he at least has good data to back up that claim. I don't think there are areas of Detroit that are still experiencing rapid abandonment, so as long as births + new residents are outpacing deaths it is plausible that the city is at least stable, if not slowly growing.

I don't think the USCB estimates consider birth and death records though, if I'm not mistaken. I think those estimates are leaning on housing units. If they are using the same formulas as last year then that means the city of Detroit has demolished far fewer units this past year than it does in a typical year.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by Emprise du Lion

I honestly wish the City of St. Louis had sued as well. We suffer from much of the same issues that Detroit has, especially in terms of demolition of long vacant properties hurting the estimates.

Right now the estimates have St. Louis' population loss accelerating, but this is in spite of there being more active water service accounts in the city now than 6 years ago, more housing and apartments going up, more jobs currently available across the city and metro, etc. The only way it can make sense to me as someone on the ground is if all of North City decided they were hitting the exit right now.

I guess we'll see in 2030.

Seems to me, the census is quite aggressively lowering the household sizes for most cities.

So if a city didn’t badger the Census Bureau to correct the housing this year, it resulted in a population loss.

Ironically, they gave most of the losses in the Chicago area to the suburbs, because the city figures are on the verge of not computing even by census standards.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

If the Census estimates are accurate, and the Homeland Security migrant counts are accurate, that would mean that absent the migrant surge, NYC lost around 250,000 people in one year.

So that would be basically three times the population losses of the worst years of the 1970's, when the city was burning down, vacancies were at all-time highs, and you could snag a coop on Fifth Ave. for 70k. Assuming rates stay constant, it would mean the city population would be 0 in most of our lifetimes.

When the Census comes out with a population of 0, and vacancy rates are still at record lows, will they then maybe bother to look at their methodology?

I'd love to know what area of the city they estimate these NYC population losses to have come from, because it's certainly not coming from the part of Brooklyn where I live. New apartment buildings are sprouting like weeds in my area and they all get leased out faster than they can put up the "for lease" sign.

[UrbanImpact]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'd love to know what area of the city they estimate these NYC population losses to have come from, because it's certainly not coming from the part of Brooklyn where I live. New apartment buildings are sprouting like weeds in my area and they all get leased out faster than they can put up the "for lease" sign.

Maybe "The Hole" on the Brooklyn Queens border? https://maps.app.goo.gl/m2LxE8R49MWCtUBb8

[north 42]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

cleveland finally stopped the bleeding people too, so thats good.

Is the census bureau showing the city of Cleveland actually growing this year? Or is it just the feeling in the city right now?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

Seems to me, the census is quite aggressively lowering the household sizes for most cities.

Yeah, that must be the case.

otherwise, how does Chicago end up with an estimate of an 8K loss when other agencies report that the city took in 40K migrants last year?

Or does the CB simply ignore the migrant influx data?


Either way, per usual, the CB seems to have no ability to accurately estimate big messy urban cities like NYC and Chicago. The more things change.......

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by The North One

Detroit officially seeing growth is not surprising at all. It's had that trend for a long time now so it tracks. It's probably been in the positive since about 2019, the busted census just finally picked up on it. Most neighborhoods saw lots of vacant land bank homes renovated and occupied in 2020, which is well documented. And now new construction infill is starting to be seen in most of the city.

that is seriously awesome news. i went back for the first time since living there (05-08) a few years ago and the differences were massive. brush park, where i had sublet in a house, was unrecognizable.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

otherwise, how does Chicago end up with an estimate of an 8K loss when other agencies report that the city took in 40K migrants last year?

Or does the CB simply ignore the migrant influx data?

So maybe Chicago is then (disregarding migrant influx) losing nearly 50k per year. At least better than NYC.

[muertecaza]

Strange feeling as a Zonie to get to complain about the census yearly estimates. These estimates have Phoenix and most of its inner suburbs with near zero yearly growth, and even have Mesa, the country's biggest suburb, losing a few hundred people. This is definitely not in keeping with my perception and experience living here. The only places showing substantial growth are exurbs like Queen Creek and Surprise.

With that said, I don't personally have a theory as to why they would be wrong, so I guess something to monitor. It could be that Phoenix is moving into its "mature" growth phase. Given the extreme housing inflation we've experienced, I guess it's not surprising that we would experience a slowdown in population increase. According to these estimates Maricopa County built housing units over this year period at Texas levels, 36,000, which does comport with my perception and experience. So hopefully that filters through to keep the housing inflation in check.

[azliam]

Originally Posted by muertecaza

Strange feeling as a Zonie to get to complain about the census yearly estimates. These estimates have Phoenix and most of its inner suburbs with near zero yearly growth, and even have Mesa, the country's biggest suburb, losing a few hundred people. This is definitely not in keeping with my perception and experience living here. The only places showing substantial growth are exurbs like Queen Creek and Surprise.

With that said, I don't personally have a theory as to why they would be wrong, so I guess something to monitor. It could be that Phoenix is moving into its "mature" growth phase. Given the extreme housing inflation we've experienced, I guess it's not surprising that we would experience a slowdown in population increase. According to these estimates Maricopa County built housing units over this year period at Texas levels, 36,000, which does comport with my perception and experience. So hopefully that filters through to keep the housing inflation in check.

I have a very hard time believing the city of Phoenix with all of its land didn't make the top 15 anywhere in numeric growth or at least increase in population by 7-8,000. That just doesn't sound realistic, especially considering what the initial estimates were and the influx of immigrants crossing the border.

[subterranean]

Seems to be a similar perception across the board. There's this attitude in the news that Portland is losing population and I don't buy it. Although we've suffered the national news cycle with all sorts of negative press, from the day of Antifa, to the graffiti, homelessness and drug use, we still have development all over the place. Central city may have slowed down and some big names in retail pulling up stakes, but not farther out. Much of it is medium to high density infill and SFH on non-existent lots.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Or does the CB simply ignore the migrant influx data?

Answering my own question here, but the answer appears to be "yes",

For comparison, Chicago is estimated to have lost 8,200 residents during the last year.

The Bureau cautions that data collected for 2023 does not include an influx of asylum-seekers who arrived in the city after the administration of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott began busing them northward to Chicago. According to data provided by city officials, Chicago has received more than 41,000 migrants since June 2023.

Source: https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/loca...3438933/?amp=1


So instead of reality-based headlines of "Chicago grew by 33,000 people last year", we get the tired old "Chicago still circling the drain in its never-ending doom loop death spiral nightmare".

All because the CB is fucking horrible at the one and only job that it's supposed to do and the national media is lazy as fuck.

[edale]

Here's how the Rust Belt/Rust Belt adjacent cities fared in this census update:

Chicago: 2,644,452 (-8,208)
Columbus: 913,175 (4,937)
Indianapolis: 879,293 (-1,104)
Detroit: 633,218 (1,852)
Baltimore: 565,239 (-3,868)
Cleveland: 362,656 (-150)
Cincinnati: 311,097 (1,692)
Pittsburgh: 303,255 (456)
St. Louis: 281,754 (-4,439)
Buffalo: 274,678 (-1,084)

Overall, I think the Rust Belt might be turning a corner. Detroit and Pittsburgh are showing growth, and Cleveland has come damn close to stopping the bleeding, which is all fantastic news. Cincinnati has continued its growth, and Columbus continues to be the Midwest Austin.

The losses for Indy and Buffalo are surprising. Indy is always grouped with Columbus, but there appears to be a bit of divergence taking place lately as Columbus continues to grow quickly while Indy is losing population. Buffalo was a real success story in the 2020 census, but they've posted losses for each of the past 3 estimates since. Also really shocking and sad to see STL at 281,000. It's continued to shrink at a good clip while most other rust belt cities have more or less stabilized. Chicago's large loss is also striking.

Of course, take this all for what its worth given the uncertainties and questionable methodology these estimates use. Even with that caveat, there's still a lot to feel good about if you care about the health of the Rust Belt!

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Answering my own question here, but the answer appears to be "yes",


Source: https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/loca...3438933/?amp=1


So instead of reality-based headlines of "Chicago grew by 33,000 people last year", we get the tired old "Chicago still circling the drain in its never-ending doom loop death spiral nightmare".

All because the CB is fucking horrible at the one and only job that it's supposed to do and the national media is lazy as fuck.

Aren't these migrants just temporarily being housed in Chicago as they await an asylum hearing? I don't see why they should be counted in a city's population if they're temporary. Even if they're granted asylum, I imagine a good number of them would disperse to other parts of the country once they're able to. That's not intended to be a knock on Chicago, it's just that immigrants tend to move to where family or friends already are.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Chicago's large loss is also striking.

See the post directly above yours.

CB estimates for Chicago have been hot garbage for over 3 decades now.

I know patience is eternally in short supply within our species, but we're just gonna have to wait until they actually go out and count the people in 2030 to get a real clue as to what's going on in the big messy urban cities like Chicago and NYC.

Because the estimates for these cities are fucked.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by edale

Aren't these migrants just temporarily being housed in Chicago as they await an asylum hearing?

Nope.

As one of the only true sanctuary cities in the Midwest, they're settling in and becoming part of the tapestry here.

And as more continue to come, Chicago increasingly becomes the place where their friends and family already are.

It's a lovely little virtuous cycle, played out by countless other immigrant groups before them.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Nope.

As one of the only true sanctuary cities in the Midwest, they're settling in and becoming part of the tapestry here.

And as more continue to come, Chicago increasingly becomes the place where their friends and family already are.

It's a lovely little virtuous cycle.

Hm, I'm not sure about that. These aren't immigrants who have snuck into the country-- those illegal immigrants are protected in sanctuary cities. The migrants that have been bussed to cities around the country from the Texas border are asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants. They have to have an asylum hearing, and if they are not granted asylum, they're deported. It's my understanding a pretty high percentage of these asylum seekers are actually denied and sent back to their country of origin.

[Altoic]

Cape Coral just had a category 5 hurricane hit it and yet the city is growing by 3.5%...Nothing will ever stop the growing tentacles of cape coral

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by edale

Hm, I'm not sure about that. These aren't immigrants who have snuck into the country-- those illegal immigrants are protected in sanctuary cities. The migrants that have been bussed to cities around the country from the Texas border are asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants. They have to have an asylum hearing, and if they are not granted asylum, they're deported. It's my understanding a pretty high percentage of these asylum seekers are actually denied and sent back to their country of origin.

And as one of the staunchest sanctuary cities in the nation, a lot of them will simply just end up staying here illegally, like thousands upon thousands of other Chicagoans.