U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 03-17-2011, 09:06 PM
 
4,473 posts, read 4,862,166 times
Reputation: 1099

Advertisements

Atlanta's numbers are startling. How much did the MSA grow from 2000? Perhaps much of the growth did go to the burbs and not necessarily the core county of Fulton. If the populations figures are correct then Fulton is not that much more populated than my home county of Mecklenburg (the county that Charlotte is in). I find this hard to except. Fulton feels more dense and more populated than Mecklenburg. This will be an interesting development.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2011, 09:44 PM
 
Location: The City
19,217 posts, read 16,330,141 times
Reputation: 5675
Quote:
Originally Posted by adavi215 View Post
Atlanta's numbers are startling. How much did the MSA grow from 2000? Perhaps much of the growth did go to the burbs and not necessarily the core county of Fulton. If the populations figures are correct then Fulton is not that much more populated than my home county of Mecklenburg (the county that Charlotte is in). I find this hard to except. Fulton feels more dense and more populated than Mecklenburg. This will be an interesting development.

I really think the city may have a neighborhood by neighborhood phenomenon - many grew a lot and then many more may have seen modest declines. Overall it really may not be a bad thing. Vibrant neighborhoods continue to grow and get better, more crime ridden areas may have declined. In the end Atlanta proper may be building toward a better ballance and overall greater vibrancy. As the core neighborhoods expand so may Atlanta proper.

On the MSA - a million is a million people
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Funky Town, Texas
3,596 posts, read 4,257,046 times
Reputation: 1372
Atlanta be happy the metro is growing. There is a article out the NY-Times that highlights the city of Dallas and why it is barely growing. I am sure a similar situation is happening in Atlanta. Atlanta can challenge but I doubt they will win. Houston for some odd reason is also challenging and I am sure the census will just ignore there dispute.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/us/27ttdallas.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 09:55 PM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,831 posts, read 19,728,327 times
Reputation: 6680
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdogg817 View Post
Atlanta be happy the metro is growing. There is a article out the NY-Times that highlights the city of Dallas and why it is barely growing. I am sure a similar situation is happening in Atlanta. Atlanta can challenge but I doubt they will win. Houston for some odd reason is also challenging and I am sure the census will just ignore there dispute.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/us/27ttdallas.html
It's much more than simply just accepting whatever the data give us; if it can be challenged; than do so. Don't just ignore because these underwhelming numbers affect development and funding for these cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:01 PM
 
4,473 posts, read 4,862,166 times
Reputation: 1099
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
It's much more than simply just accepting whatever the data give us; if it can be challenged; than do so. Don't just ignore because these underwhelming numbers affect development and funding for these cities.
That is definitely the premise behind Atlanta's challenge. GA, for some odd reason, likes to stick it to Atlanta whenever it can. The feds are Atlanta's only hope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:08 PM
 
Location: Funky Town, Texas
3,596 posts, read 4,257,046 times
Reputation: 1372
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
It's much more than simply just accepting whatever the data give us; if it can be challenged; than do so. Don't just ignore because these underwhelming numbers affect development and funding for these cities.

You see the trend just like I do...burbs grew....inner city slow growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:16 PM
 
Location: ITP - City of Atlanta Proper
6,533 posts, read 6,775,268 times
Reputation: 3690
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
It's much more than simply just accepting whatever the data give us; if it can be challenged; than do so. Don't just ignore because these underwhelming numbers affect development and funding for these cities.
Exactly, especially when the idea that they were so woefully wrong with the data they were producing. For instance, I went and looked up the estimates for each year for the city.

Remember, this is the Bureau's estimates and the city had nothing to do with it:

April 1, 2000 (Census 2000) 416,474

April 1, 2000 (Estimates Base) 418,109
July 1, 2000 420,624
July 1, 2002 442,538
July 1, 2003 456,919
July 1, 2003 456,919
July 1, 2004 468,725
July 1, 2005 483,108
July 1, 2006 498,496
July 1, 2007 520,368
July 1, 2008 537,958

For 10 years, growth of about 10k or so on average is not out of the question and seems reasonable given the amount of development. Which makes this shocking:

April 1, 2010 420,003

Is it plausible that Atlanta proper didn't grow as high as 540,000? Sure.

Is it plausible that there were high growth in certain central districts while districts in other districts was declining? Sure.

Is it plausible that everyone from the Federal government, City government, to residents just didn't notice 100,000 people left the city in 10 years? Not bloody likely.

At this point though it is likely that, officially at least, the city of Atlanta will go down in the record books as having 420,000 residents for 2010. It's pretty unlikely the Census Bureau will acknowledge any sort of discrepancy with the results for any of the cities as it will appear as if they don't know what they are doing (thus putting their existence in jeopardy due to them looking like morons) and there is a serious flaw with the way they collect data.

Instead when they release the city estimates for July 1st 2010 in a few weeks, most of the cities that saw an undercount will magically have all of the residents magically reappear. Of course it will do no good as far as Federal funding goes or the deciding of new congressional districts. That last point definitely screws Atlanta and neighboring Dekalb county (which also saw a massive undercount to the tune of ~200,000 residents less than estimates) as we will not gain one of the new congressional seats due to Georgia. Not to throw out any conspiracies, but it is worth noting the two most heavily Democratic party areas of all of Georgia is Atlanta and Dekalb County. Coincidence I am sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:17 PM
 
Location: St Paul, MN - NJ's Gold Coast
5,262 posts, read 7,681,449 times
Reputation: 2906
WOOOOOOOOW @ Atlanta.
No one should really be disappointed, some of the ATL posters past arguments may have been flushed down the toilet though. Just kidding, I still love you ATL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
25,094 posts, read 32,552,653 times
Reputation: 10656
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
Not to throw out any conspiracies, but it is worth noting the two most heavily Democratic party areas of all of Georgia is Atlanta and Dekalb County. Coincidence I am sure.
The thought has crossed my mind.

In California the deficit btwn the Census Bureau and the State's own estimates is a whopping 1.5 Million.

The Census says we grew by 3.5 Million, CAs Dept of Finance says we grew by 5 Million.

That's massive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2011, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
3,910 posts, read 3,501,535 times
Reputation: 1869
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Wowsers! Atlanta was projected to grow by 125,000 since 2000....and it ended up growing by less than 4,000. That has to be the largest messup % wise.

I've got to wonder about NYC and Boston. I believe Arizona, Georgia and New York were the states that were overstated in the 2009 estimates by over 200,000 compared to the actual census. Phoenix and Atlanta have already come in heavily under the estimates. Curious if NYC will follow suit. I'm assuming it will be under the estimates, just by how much...
St Louis was another city that did horribly with a population gain expected but loss a lot of population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top