The US Census Bureau thread

[Urbanguy]

tablemtn, it will be released some time early next year for Guam, CNMI, American Samoa & USVI. I'm interested in seeing the numbers for the Northern Marianas especially since they've lost a lot of their foreign-born population over the past decade with the decline in the garment industry. The foreign-born population there was at 58% in 2000!

[fflint]

What the hell happened to this thread? Train wreck!

[hudkina]

Are you really surprised a thread discussing the populations of various entities would take such a turn?

[Raining Inside]

Just wait until we start discussing the new city and metro population counts.

[LMich]

The reaction has nothing to do with the subject matter, and everything to do with one particular poster who has displayed himself to be completely disconnected from reality, and then when met with said reality, both unwilling and unable to engage anyone in this thread in any kind of sensible way. Not sure if anyone noticed, but the thread was going relatively well and was quite informative until Onn unwittingly ambled his way in with his nonesense BSing. This is exactly the kind of stuff that degrades the quality of these forums, and why this place is becoming less enjoyable than it used to be.

[mhays]

Much of that family-group social structure was due to needs that don't exist now. Small groups worked because a few experienced men and a few experienced women could produce everything they neeed. Small groups were necessary because hunting and gathering produced very limited quantities of food in a given area, and it was counterproductive to have more people in that area.

In places where hunting/gathering were more productive, people could live in larger communities. In places where necessary activities required more people, or were more specialized, again larger groups tended to live together.

[hudkina]

There are plenty of things that we've evolved that are no longer necessary, but are still very much a part of us. Just because we have no use for our tailbone, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. The same is true for the hardwiring in our brains. We may not necessarily need to form small family groups to survive, but that trait is still hardwired into our brain.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by hudkina

There are plenty of things that we've evolved that are no longer necessary, but are still very much a part of us. Just because we have no use for our tailbone, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. The same is true for the hardwiring in our brains. We may not necessarily need to form small family groups to survive, but that trait is still hardwired into our brain.

You should read some Desmond Morris.

And no form of modern living corresponds with what is hardwired in our brains, least of all suburban living...

[mhays]

I really doubt that.

Personality traits can be "hard wired" in the sense that certain conditions can create chemical responses, and certain traits can help us live long enough and procreate. The desire for companionship is like that.

But even big communities can provide companionship. I doubt or bodies have a reaction to small family groups that's not replicatable in modern cities, for example by having a family and a group of friends, or by simply retaining the extended family.

[plinko]

uggghhh...and the legal bitching is soon to begin...

source

California says census missed 1.5 million residents
If true, the discrepancy could cost the state billions of dollars in federal money and perhaps an additional seat in Congress. A court battle may be possible.

By Seema Mehta, Los Angeles Times

December 23, 2010, 8:39 p.m.

California officials estimate that the U.S. Census Bureau failed to count 1.5 million of the state's residents, a discrepancy that if true could cost the state billions of dollars in federal aid over the next decade and perhaps an increase in its representation in Congress.

On Tuesday, the Census Bureau released national and state population figures that declared California to have 37.3 million residents, 10% more than in 2000. That growth — based on mailed-in surveys and door-to-door interviews by census takers — roughly mirrored the nation's, but meant that for the first time since California became a state in 1850 it did not grow enough to add another member to its congressional delegation.

But according to the state Department of Finance, the state's population was 38.8 million on July 1. That figure is drawn from birth and death statistics, school-enrollment data, driver's license address changes, tax returns and Medicare enrollment, a set of data points that provides a "more refined" picture of the population, according to H.D. Palmer, a finance department spokesman.

This is likely true across the board nationally, but it'll be really interesting to see if any states take up legal challenges given how many of them are in desperate need of dollars from any source (particularly the federal government).

[hudkina]

On the contrary, suburbs offer a fairly good balance between the economic needs of our modern culture (i.e. cities), and the small group social behaviors hardwired into our brains. That's not to say humans aren't adapting to urban living, but it's such a new concept that we're still not fully adapted.

[hudkina]

I don't think people necessarily become politically assimilated... While not always true, I would say most people tend to have political views that are similar to their parents. Also, the more urban a state becomes, the more liberal it tends to become, so as the southern states become more and more urbanized, they'll become more and more liberal. There's a reason Virginia, North Carolina and Florida went to Obama while states like Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina we're solidly behind McCain. There's a reason why Colorado went to Obama while Wyoming went to McCain.

In fact, if you look at the 23 most urbanized states (where generally at least 75% of the people live in urbanized areas), 3 of those states went for McCain, while the remaining 20 went for Obama. Utah, Arizona, and Texas all voted for McCain. Utah is dominated by an extremely conservative religious group, so despite the highly urbanized nature of the population, it's no surprise it went for the Republican. Arizona too isn't a surprise considering it was the home state of McCain. Surprisingly, Arizona had the weakest support for McCain among the three, and if the Republican nominee had hailed from somewhere else, it's possible that Obama could have carried Arizona. That leaves Texas as the only other highly urbanized state that voted for the Republican.

[mhays]

DC's growth is also a lot of diversification, even while the military, etc., have added people. Also the lobbyist economy has presumably exploded.

[Chase Unperson]

Informed discussion about redistricting rather than what is stated above.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/25/us...strict.html?hp

[M II A II R II K]

As the South and West Grow, the Urban Agenda Should Adjust Accordingly


Dec 23rd, 2010

By Yonah Freemark



Read More: http://americancity.org/columns/entry/2812/

American cities are doing better than they have been for a long time. In many places, inner city household incomes are increasing more rapidly than those of suburban or exurban households. After decades of declining population, new Census data reveal that Washington, D.C. is growing for the first time since 1950. But those trends largely reflect changes within America’s dense older metropolitan areas along the coasts. What about reorganizations in relative population between cities and regions?

- Florida is now almost as populous as New York State. The Empire State was more than five times bigger in 1950. In sum, this means less representation at the federal level for states that have traditionally been the biggest supporters of policies aimed towards central cities and more representation for places better known for their exurbs. Does this mean a difficult period ahead for urbanites, at least when it comes to funding from Washington?

- Not necessarily. For one, in many of the states that are growing quickly, cities are also doing well: Houston, Las Vegas, and Phoenix—among others—are all quickly densifying in their downtown cores. Between 2000 and 2009, for example, the City of Atlanta grew by 125,000 individuals: That’s a 30% increase. And urban areas in the South and West need good public transportation and affordable housing subsidies just as much as do those in the Northeast and Midwest.

- But in order to secure long-term policies that benefit cities across the country, the discussion clearly must be broadened: The refusal of the governors of Ohio and Wisconsin to accept federal high-speed rail dollars is illustrative of a failure to understand why such a project could benefit those states’ cities. The new members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in the now Republican-led House of Representatives has a surprisingly rural and suburban bent, indicating little support for urban needs.

- The truth is that though cities in the South and West are becoming more vibrant, the majority of the population of those states lives in suburban or exurban communities. They vote for their own needs, not on behalf of urban interests. To pursue an effective agenda, advocates need to make a stronger argument for the importance of maintaining public service provision and funding for city-level needs. Some of that will come naturally, as center cities in those states attain an increasing prominence in the local discourse.

Downtown Atlanta Credit: Flickr user Mike Johnston (cc)

[novawolverine]

Originally Posted by mhays

DC's growth is also a lot of diversification, even while the military, etc., have added people. Also the lobbyist economy has presumably exploded.

That's true, but with the military and contractors, most of the jobs are in the suburbs. Many lobbyists working downtown live in the nicer suburbs. Most of the growth has occurred through younger people moving into the city. There are more reverse commuters than ever before on top of conventional commuters.

It's a process that started in the late 90's when the city had its first good mayor in a while who did a lot of things to lower crime and attract business to the city and that process just continued into the last decade.

[vid]

And you call yourselves a democracy.

Redistricting in Canada is done by a neutral body. It hates cities, but its still politically neutral.

[the urban politician]

Part of the problem is that in the south, you're considered a good southerner if you hate cities and like driving your pickup truck.

That makes you a good Christian. Apparently, Jesus hates buildings that don't have ample parking and are more than one story tall. I read it in the Bible once.

As long as this is so, Americans in the south and west will continue to impair urban development elsewhere, because they are the only people left in America who still listen to Jesus.

[jtk1519]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Part of the problem is that in the south, you're considered a good southerner if you hate cities and like driving your pickup truck.

That makes you a good Christian. Apparently, Jesus hates buildings that don't have ample parking and are more than one story tall. I read it in the Bible once.

As long as this is so, Americans in the south and west will continue to impair urban development elsewhere, because they are the only people left in America who still listen to Jesus.

Wow, what a bigoted and hate-filled post. If only those ignorant Southerners shared your open-mindedness and tolerance.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by jtk1519

Wow, what a bigoted and hate-filled post. If only those ignorant Southerners shared your open-mindedness and tolerance.

^ I'm trying to out-bigot the bigots. It's part of my new strategy called "Whoever said 'two wrongs don't make a right' was probably cleaning peoples' driveways for a living"