Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,032,687 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberAzeneth
So DANNYY, these are the official 2010 census bureau numbers correct?
Yes, those idiots from the US Census Bureau are completely unreasonable. They didn't do some of the simplest things like indicating the size of Metropolitan Areas and stuff. People actually have to go, figure out what counties a MSA or CSA has and do the additions manually. The reason I think these people Census people are idiots is because they don't release these states periodically.
They randomly pick like 4 states from whatever corner of the country and release them. For example, they gave Indiana, but they should have released Wisconsin and Illinois with it, that would help getting Chicago MSA & CSA populations faster because Chicago's Metropolitan Area goes into IN & WI as well as in IL. Same thing with Washington DC here.
Heck, I hope they release Georgia & Alabama together, Atlanta's CSA goes into AL too. And when they release Pennsylvania, I can figure out Pittsburgh easily its only in PA. But Philadelphia is in PA, MD, DE, & NJ. They released NJ & MD already, so when they release PA, I'm good, but they'll probably release Delaware much later so that would put that one on handicap too.
But yeah these are the official numbers, and this thread is just following up with the US Census as they release other states and stuff.
Man their data isn't even worth it, their information is just a disappointment, in my opinion. It's from April 2010, not even from December 2010, to some cities, that makes a HUGE difference, for Dallas/Fort Worth or Houston, that is about 95,000 people less (in their MSA's & CSA's) in just a 8 month difference.
Why didn't the census bureau use the entire year of 2010? April is only the fourth month of the year and does not lead to an accurate and complete census data finding.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,032,687 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberAzeneth
Why didn't the census bureau use the entire year of 2010? April is only the fourth month of the year and does not lead to an accurate and complete census data finding.
Probably 7 months to compile the data and get information sorted our or something for district rezonings and demographics and stuff, they do it in April every deadline for a Census. Total idiots I tell you.
And their website, pretty awful too, I was able to do better layout coding in 8th grade for a more easy navigational page and more attractive format. What a total disappointment: 2010 Census
Probably 7 months to compile the data and get information sorted our or something for district rezonings and demographics and stuff, they do it in April every deadline for a Census. Total idiots I tell you.
And their website, pretty awful too, I was able to do better layout coding in 8th grade for a more easy navigational page and more attractive format. What a total disappointment: 2010 Census
Lol, 8th grade. I have always thought that their website was horrible to navigate. You would think that their website would be more thorough with less time spent searching for answers.
Was Indy supposed to grow by 4% (not bad)? Should New Orleans be recounted because the estimates are too low?
When looking at Indy's numbers, it seems clear that either the estimates the last decade were way off or more counties were added to the MSA for 2010. From the 2000 census, the estimates had steady growth of about 22,000-26,000 people each year. Then for the 2010 census, it shows a growth from 2009 to 2010 being at +91,014. Highly unlikely that the MSA grew that much in a single year. Does anyone know if more counties were added? If not, the estimates were pretty bad.
Indy's 2010 MSA was 1,834,672, a difference of +303,516 from 2000. This would be an average growth rate per year of +30,352, quite a bit higher than estimated growth rate.
Marion County (Indy's county) saw a population of 903,393 for 2010 vs. 860,972 in 2000, a growth of +29,907. So clearly, the population growth was not centered in the Indy area itself, but the surrounding MSA counties.
It makes me wonder if the data for Columbus will come up similar. Columbus' growth rate for the city has been faster than Indy's, but for the MSA, a bit slower, according to estimates.
The estimated MSA for Columbus in 2009 was 1,801,848 and had an estimated growth rate per year of about +20,230.
Franklin County (containing Columbus) had an estimated 2009 population of 1,150,122. The estimates had it growing +77,815 from 2000-2009.
[quote=DANNYY;17833510]Indianapolis MSA:
- Brown County, IN: 15,242
- Marion County, IN: 903,393
- Boone County, IN: 56,640
- Shelby County, IN: 44,436
- Morgan County, IN: 68,894
- Johnson County, IN: 139,654
- Hamilton County, IN: 274,569
- Hancock County, IN: 70,002
- Hendricks County, IN: 145,448
- Putnam County, IN: 37,963
Total: 1,756,241
quote]
The counties I saw listed for Indy's MSA were Marion, Boone, Shelby, Johnson, Hamilton, Hendricks, Hancock, Morgan, and Madison Counties. I did not see either Brown or Putnam Counties being included in the MSA, but Madison was. The number I got with those was 1,834,672.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,032,687 times
Reputation: 4047
^^ But that's not possible though, that would mean the MSA gained 100,000 people in a year from the last estimates and that's just a bit too much to take in. The number I added up seemed to be where Indianapolis was headed. I know FOR SURE, that the CSA number for Indianapolis is right, I got all 15 counties in the CSA but the MSA got tricky, I added it up at first with Madison and it seemed way to high compared to the previous year estimates. Madison County, on their article states that it's apart of some other micropolitan area or something. I don't know, its a weird case. I didn't have that issue when tallying up Washington DC, Baltimore, or New Orleans, those were pretty straight forward and defined precisely but Indianapolis has a few hiccups at MSA level that I don't quite understand yet. The CSA for sure, I know is done and tallied for correctly but MSA level, I don't know which articles to go by.
The inclusion of Brown & Putnam came from this map that defines MSA (dark blue) & CSA (dark blue + sky blue):
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
