The US Census Bureau thread

[PHL10]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

BTW, where the 2020 Census numbers?!?!?!?!?!?!

According to this source, September 30.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/redist...637261879.aspx

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by PHL10

According to this source, September 30.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/redist...637261879.aspx

That’s horrible. I’m anxious here.

[mhays]

In Mexico, a disproportionate number of women are in the childbearing age range, so they'll grow even if they hit 2.0.

I'm seeing 2.072 btw. It's a big improvement. https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...fertility-rate

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by mhays

In Mexico, a disproportionate number of women are in the childbearing age range, so they'll grow even if they hit 2.0.

I'm seeing 2.072 btw. It's a big improvement. https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...fertility-rate

Indeed. It usually take 30 years for a country/region starting losing population when it falls below 2.0. Brazil for instance, got there in the mid-2000's and it's posed to decline only in the late 2030's, early 2040's.

Obviously, if TFR reaches extremely low levels, this process speeds up or if the country gets lots of immigrants, keeping population young, natural growth might be positive indefinitely, even with TFR below 2. That's the case of big, attractive metropolises.

[proghousehead]

Some official 2020 census numbers for cities and counties released tonight midnight right? Or are these just the estimates?

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by proghousehead

Some official 2020 census numbers for cities and counties released tonight midnight right? Or are these just the estimates?

Just the 2020 estimates. We won't get 2020 Census numbers for local areas until August.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

Just the 2020 estimates. We won't get 2020 Census numbers for local areas until August.

Municipalities AND counties, or just counties?

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Municipalities AND counties, or just counties?

The Census Bureau isn't exactly clear:

By August 16, 2021: States will receive the data they need to begin redistricting in August. The Census Bureau will also share this information with the public. However, the data will be in a format that requires additional handling and software to extract familiar tables. COVID-19-related delays and prioritizing the delivery of the apportionment results delayed our original redistricting data delivery plan.

[wwmiv]

https://www.census.gov/programs-surv...estimates.html

1. New York City: 8,253,213 / MSA: #1. 19,124,359
2. Los Angeles: 3,970,219 / MSA: #2. 13,109,903
3. Chicago: 2,677,643 / MSA: #3. 9,406,638
4. Houston: 2,316,120 / MSA: #5. 7,154,478
5. Phoenix: 1,708,127 / MSA: #10. 5,059,909
6. Philadelphia: 1,578,487 / MSA: #8. 6,107,906
7. San Antonio: 1,567,118
8. San Diego: 1,422,420
9. Dallas: 1,393,266 / MSA: #4. 7,694,138 / MSA Division: 5,171,934
10. San Jose: 1,013,616 / CSA: 9,608,006

That is the second YOY decline in estimates from 2018 peak of 1,034,877 for San Jose.

... 11. Austin: 995,484
... 12. Fort Worth: 927,720 / MSA: #4. see above / MSA Division: 2,522,204
... 13. Jacksonville: 920,570

The metropolitan areas for the others are significantly smaller at 3,332,427 (San Diego, #17), 2,590,732 (San Antonio, #24), 2,295,303 (Austin, #29), and 1,971,161 (San Jose, #35). All these are the same rank as prior. A notable shift is that Vegas metro has surpassed Pittsburgh metro, switching numbers 27 and 28. Austin is just behind that, while Nashville metro is poised to overtake San Jose. Jacksonville metro brings up the rear at #39, outgrowing Milwaukee metro: 1,587,892.

As far as city propers, Jacksonville has been outgrown by Fort Worth in the last year. Ha. So many jokes. Austin is poised to overtake San Jose as the most populated tech city, Dallas is poised to leapfrog San Diego, and San Antonio is poised to leapfrog Philadelphia. How long until Houston overtakes Chicago? Until Fort Worth overtakes San Jose? That’s some major advancement for a selection of cities all in one state at the same time.

5 of the 13 American municipalities which are already at or could plausibly soon reach one million are in Texas alone and another 3 are in California (with a smattering of more Texan and Californian cities scattered throughout the list of largest municipalities just beneath that). When metro areas and cities are viewed in composite like above, both California and Texas stand out even more.

Here are the populations of some other major metropolitan areas (up to 13, like I did with cities):

#6. Washington: 6,324,629 / City: #20. 712,816
#7. Miami: 6,173,008 / City: #42. 471,525
#9. Atlanta: 6,087,762 / City: #37. 512,550
#11. Boston: 4,878,211 / City: #21. 691,531
#12. San Francisco: 4,696,902 / City: #17. 866,606 / CSA: 9,608,006
#13. Inland Empire: 4,678,371

These metro areas retain the same rank, but there is some churn for their anchor cities: Indianapolis (#16, 887,756) has grown larger than San Francisco but not Charlotte (#15, 900,350). Atlanta is nipping on the heels of Sacramento (#36, 512,818). No one city in Inland Empire predominates, although Riverside is first among equals (#58, 330,786).

Feel free to add more detail. Seattle, Detroit, Twin Cities, etc.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

https://www.census.gov/programs-surv...estimates.html

1. New York City: 8,253,213

I get that they can't just change methodologies for consistency's sake, but this would be a 90k drop from the 2019 number of 8,342,925. Given that NYS was nearly a million higher than estimates, I think it's safe to say this is quite the underball.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

I get that they can't just change methodologies for consistency's sake, but this would be a 90k drop from the 2019 number of 8,342,925. Given that NYS was nearly a million higher than estimates, I think it's safe to say this is quite the underball.

yeah, the responsible thing would be to include a large disclaimer though. Waiting for the negative article from the Trib to drop.

[Steely Dan]

So the 2020 bureau estimate has Chicago down 17,955 (-0.66%) from it's official 2010 figure of 2,695,598.

Given that the 2020 estimate for IL was low by 225K, if even just 10% of that underestimate was in Chicago, then the city might not have lost any people at all. And considering the city of Chicago is ~21% of IL's population, and considering the CB's awful track record of estimating big messy urban cities, that's not a far-fetched proposition.

Here's to hoping!

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

So the 2020 bureau estimate has Chicago down 17,955 (-0.66%) from it's official 2010 figure of 2,695,598.

Given that the 2020 estimate for IL was low by 225K, if even just 10% of that underestimate was in Chicago, then the city might not have lost any people at all. And considering the city of Chicago is ~21% of IL's population, and considering the CB's awful track record of estimating big messy urban cities, that's not a far-fetched proposition.

Here's to hoping!

Another hopeful undercount is St. Louis. The 2020 estimate is 297,645 -- it would be nice to see the city actually remain above 300k.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

https://www.census.gov/programs-surv...estimates.html

1. New York City: 8,253,213 / MSA: #1. 19,124,359
2. Los Angeles: 3,970,219 / MSA: #2. 13,109,903
3. Chicago: 2,677,643 / MSA: #3. 9,406,638
4. Houston: 2,316,120 / MSA: #5. 7,154,478
5. Phoenix: 1,708,127 / MSA: #10. 5,059,909
6. Philadelphia: 1,578,487 / MSA: #8. 6,107,906
7. San Antonio: 1,567,118
8. San Diego: 1,422,420
9. Dallas: 1,393,266 / MSA: #4. 7,694,138 / MSA Division: 5,171,934
10. San Jose: 1,013,616 / CSA: 9,608,006

That is the second YOY decline in estimates from 2018 peak of 1,034,877 for San Jose.

... 11. Austin: 995,484
... 12. Fort Worth: 927,720 / MSA: #4. see above / MSA Division: 2,522,204
... 13. Jacksonville: 920,570

The metropolitan areas for the others are significantly smaller at 3,332,427 (San Diego, #17), 2,590,732 (San Antonio, #24), 2,295,303 (Austin, #29), and 1,971,161 (San Jose, #35). All these are the same rank as prior. A notable shift is that Vegas metro has surpassed Pittsburgh metro, switching numbers 27 and 28. Austin is just behind that, while Nashville metro is poised to overtake San Jose. Jacksonville metro brings up the rear at #39, outgrowing Milwaukee metro: 1,587,892.

As far as city propers, Jacksonville has been outgrown by Fort Worth in the last year. Ha. So many jokes. Austin is poised to overtake San Jose as the most populated tech city, Dallas is poised to leapfrog San Diego, and San Antonio is poised to leapfrog Philadelphia. How long until Houston overtakes Chicago? Until Fort Worth overtakes San Jose? That’s some major advancement for a selection of cities all in one state at the same time.

5 of the 13 American municipalities which are already at or could plausibly soon reach one million are in Texas alone and another 3 are in California (with a smattering of more Texan and Californian cities scattered throughout the list of largest municipalities just beneath that). When metro areas and cities are viewed in composite like above, both California and Texas stand out even more.

Here are the populations of some other major metropolitan areas (up to 13, like I did with cities):

#6. Washington: 6,324,629 / City: #20. 712,816
#7. Miami: 6,173,008 / City: #42. 471,525
#9. Atlanta: 6,087,762 / City: #37. 512,550
#11. Boston: 4,878,211 / City: #21. 691,531
#12. San Francisco: 4,696,902 / City: #17. 866,606 / CSA: 9,608,006
#13. Inland Empire: 4,678,371

These metro areas retain the same rank, but there is some churn for their anchor cities: Indianapolis (#16, 887,756) has grown larger than San Francisco but not Charlotte (#15, 900,350). Atlanta is nipping on the heels of Sacramento (#36, 512,818). No one city in Inland Empire predominates, although Riverside is first among equals (#58, 330,786).

Feel free to add more detail. Seattle, Detroit, Twin Cities, etc.

Cool so according to their estimates, Atlanta city proper still grew about 6k. Not bad considering Covid.

[iheartthed]

I looked at some numbers based on the state population growth to make a prediction about where some cities will land once the actual census numbers are released. I'm not going to put actual numbers to many of them to avoid that type of conversation, but here are my general guesses.

The Good

NYC looks in good shape. I'd be surprised if the actual population is below 8.5M. My official guess is 8.71M for NYC.

Texas - Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio will probably come in close to the ACS estimates. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Austin is a slight miss. I think it's certainly not going to hit 1m this census.

Miami - Prospects for growth are good. Like Austin, the ACS estimates might be a little too rosy, but growth seems certain.

Possible surprises in the older midsize cities - Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Milwaukee might actually pulled out of their decades long population declines.

Pacific Northwest - The major cities in the Northwest, Seattle and Portland, both appear to continue to grow.

The Bad

I think the slower than usual growth in the Sun Belt is going to introduce a few surprises at the city level. North Carolina's cities (Raleigh and Charlotte) probably didn't grow as fast as projected. Ditto for Nashville. And, I wouldn't be surprised to see a small population drop in Atlanta.

The Ugly

Chicago and California. Especially L.A. and Chicago. L.A. seems on track for a first ever population loss. I see a small loss for San Francisco as well, but it's close enough that it could also be a small increase.

Chicago will also probably show a loss, which shouldn't be too controversial considering that Illinois was the only state to lose population. But Chicago's population losses might be as bad as what happened last decade. Or worse. And Houston might have overtaken it as America's third largest city.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I looked at some numbers based on the state population growth to make a prediction about where some cities will land once the actual census numbers are released. I'm not going to put actual numbers to many of them to avoid that type of conversation, but here are my general guesses.

The Good

NYC looks in good shape. I'd be surprised if the actual population is below 8.5M. My official guess is 8.71M for NYC.

Texas - Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio will probably come in close to the ACS estimates. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Austin is a slight miss. I think it's certainly not going to hit 1m this census.

Miami - Prospects for growth are good. Like Austin, the ACS estimates might be a little too rosy, but growth seems certain.

Possible surprises in the older midsize cities - Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Milwaukee might actually pulled out of their decades long population declines.

Pacific Northwest - The major cities in the Northwest, Seattle and Portland, both appear to continue to grow.

The Bad

I think the slower than usual growth in the Sun Belt is going to introduce a few surprises at the city level. North Carolina's cities (Raleigh and Charlotte) probably didn't grow as fast as projected. Ditto for Nashville. And, I wouldn't be surprised to see a small population drop in Atlanta.

The Ugly

Chicago and California. Especially L.A. and Chicago. L.A. seems on track for a first ever population loss. I see a small loss for San Francisco as well, but it's close enough that it could also be a small increase.

Chicago will also probably show a loss, which shouldn't be too controversial considering that Illinois was the only state to lose population. But Chicago's population losses might be as bad as what happened last decade. Or worse. And Houston might have overtaken it as America's third largest city.

Not at all obvious to me that Chicago will show a loss. It could, but I think downstate places like Danville or Decatur are more likely to account for a larger share of the Illinois population loss. The 2020 estimate has both of them 9% down in population from 2010, while Chicago is "only" 0.7% down, so relatively speaking, they ought to do worse. I think most likely Chicago will be effectively flat, maybe gaining or losing a few tenths of a percent.

Keep in mind that the 2020 estimate has Illinois losing 243,000 people while in actuality only 18,000 people were lost in the actual 2020 census. Given how wrong the estimate was, I'm not sure we can trust the relative numbers in the estimate too much either.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Not at all obvious to me that Chicago will show a loss. It could, but I think downstate places like Danville or Decatur are more likely to account for a larger share of the Illinois population loss. The 2020 estimate has both of them 9% down in population from 2010, while Chicago is "only" 0.7% down, so relatively speaking, they ought to do worse. I think most likely Chicago will be effectively flat, maybe gaining or losing a few tenths of a percent.

Keep in mind that the 2020 estimate has Illinois losing 243,000 people while in actuality only 18,000 people were lost in the actual 2020 census. Given how wrong the estimate was, I'm not sure we can trust the relative numbers in the estimate too much either.

I guess it's possible that Chicago managed to not show a loss, but in order for Chicago to not have lost population it would need to do something it has never done before: add more people than the state of Illinois. However, this is the state of Illinois's first ever population loss, so we're in uncharted territory. But, in general, the a state's major city/cities tend to feel most acutely the effects of a statewide population loss.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I looked at some numbers based on the state population growth to make a prediction about where some cities will land once the actual census numbers are released. I'm not going to put actual numbers to many of them to avoid that type of conversation, but here are my general guesses.

The Good

NYC looks in good shape. I'd be surprised if the actual population is below 8.5M. My official guess is 8.71M for NYC.

Texas - Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio will probably come in close to the ACS estimates. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Austin is a slight miss. I think it's certainly not going to hit 1m this census.

Miami - Prospects for growth are good. Like Austin, the ACS estimates might be a little too rosy, but growth seems certain.

Possible surprises in the older midsize cities - Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Milwaukee might actually pulled out of their decades long population declines.

Pacific Northwest - The major cities in the Northwest, Seattle and Portland, both appear to continue to grow.

The Bad

I think the slower than usual growth in the Sun Belt is going to introduce a few surprises at the city level. North Carolina's cities (Raleigh and Charlotte) probably didn't grow as fast as projected. Ditto for Nashville. And, I wouldn't be surprised to see a small population drop in Atlanta.

The Ugly

Chicago and California. Especially L.A. and Chicago. L.A. seems on track for a first ever population loss. I see a small loss for San Francisco as well, but it's close enough that it could also be a small increase.

Chicago will also probably show a loss, which shouldn't be too controversial considering that Illinois was the only state to lose population. But Chicago's population losses might be as bad as what happened last decade. Or worse. And Houston might have overtaken it as America's third largest city.

So you think Atlanta dropped in population from 2010? Why would you believe that? It would mean Atlanta's black population has cratered and white people are the new plurality which based on eyes still doesn't seem to be the case. Georgia was underestimated by a small bit in the estimate(which is opposite of most sunbelt states which were overestimated from the estimates according to the census numbers). I think they were very careful with Atlanta this decade after what happened in 2010 and even our own regional commission shows Atlanta growing which didn't happen in the 2000s.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

So you think Atlanta dropped in population from 2010? Why would you believe that? It would mean Atlanta's black population has cratered and white people are the new plurality which based on eyes still doesn't seem to be the case. Georgia was underestimated by a small bit in the estimate(which is opposite of most sunbelt states which were overestimated from the estimates according to the census numbers). I think they were very careful with Atlanta this decade after what happened in 2010 and even our own regional commission shows Atlanta growing which didn't happen in the 2000s.

To be honest, I was surprised by it too. But Georgia's population expansion slowed substantially this past decade from the two decades prior. For the city to have grown, Atlanta would have needed to capture far more of the statewide population growth than it has in recent decades. It's possible that it happened, but it seems unlikely.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

So you think Atlanta dropped in population from 2010? Why would you believe that? It would mean Atlanta's black population has cratered and white people are the new plurality which based on eyes still doesn't seem to be the case. Georgia was underestimated by a small bit in the estimate(which is opposite of most sunbelt states which were overestimated from the estimates according to the census numbers). I think they were very careful with Atlanta this decade after what happened in 2010 and even our own regional commission shows Atlanta growing which didn't happen in the 2000s.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ajc...outputType=amp

The same factors apply to the city of Austin and it’s MSA as applied to Atlanta in 2010. This tracks with the idea that a disproportionate share of the Texas overestimation may be in the Austin area. Dallas (city and county) may also experience this problem to a lesser degree.

There is also an alternative argument that an additional factor is at play this census that was not in 2010: citizenship. If response rates were depressed in immigrant communities, Houston, San Antonio, and Fort Worth will suffer as well and the distribution of where the “missing” people are will be more equitable. Dallas may actually suffer the most estimate vis-a-vis count vis-a-vis population size.

There is also the issue of the panhandle and its rapid demographic changes with respect to immigrant communities (many of these counties are majority Hispanic now in reality). IE Did a depressed response rate also affect rural west Texas?