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.
That's what I'm saying. I see right through that bull. If you want to start a Chicago thread, go do so, this is a St. Louis thread. And THIS is why I have a bias against Chicago residents. Some of their residents are so egotistical. They think their crap don't stink, and everyone else should just shut up and die.
LOL, finally some honesty on city-data. I laughed out loud when I read this un-PC post because it's 100% true.
Enough of the "awwws". I'm surprised the population drop was that low.
LOL? Excuse me? This is positively the most offensive post in this thread. To find humor in the misfortune of a great American city-- to relish in that city's struggles-- is beyond belief and absolutely pathetic.
In the future, please don't bother posting unless you can have something worthwhile to contribute.
According to just-released 2010 Census results, the city of St. Louis experienced an unexpected loss in population from 348,000 in 2000 to 319,000 in 2010. This was surprising since the latest population estimate was 357,000 (2009). The new population figure however provided exoneration for the Census Bureau, which had been challenged six separate times during the decade on its city of St. Louis population estimates. The higher 2009 population estimate was the cumulative effect of those six successful challenges. In fact however, without the challenges the city of St. Louis population would have been 311,000, much closer to the final count of 319,000 people.
Among the world's municipalities that have ever achieved 500,000 population non-have lost so much as the city of St. Louis. The new figure of 319,000 people is 63 percent below the 1950 Census peak of 857,000 people. Indeed, the 2010 population is nearly as low as the population in the 1870 census.
That's a pretty big gap between the estimations and official census count..Makes me wonder about the validity of all these city estimates.. Does anybody have the demographic breakdown on St. Louis population?
Last edited by brother's keeper; 03-03-2011 at 09:03 PM..
That's a pretty big gap between the estimations and official census count..Makes me wonder about the validity of all these city estimates.. Does anybody have the demographic breakdown on St. Louis population?
Actually you should question the validity of the census bureau because they do the city estimates as well ACS
According to the ACS in 2009 the racial breakdown was
48% Black
46% White
3% Hispanic
2% Asian
Actually you should question the validity of the census bureau because they do the city estimates as well ACS
According to the ACS in 2009 the racial breakdown was
48% Black
46% White
3% Hispanic
2% Asian
In any large American metro in 2010, I would seriously question only a 3% Hispanic breakdown. Besides being the fastest growing minority group in the nation, didn't the national percentage of Hispanics eclipse the percentage of African Americans recently?
Why is this surprising? St. Louis sucks.
It's old and has been dying for decades. The infrastructure is crumbling, its extremely un-diverse. The crime is some of the highest in the nation, as is the poverty rate.
The only great thing about STL is women outnumber men there in droves. Theirs only 82 males for every 100 females, because so many men are dead or in prison.
Well, that was an overstatement. STL has other great qualities. The old school architecture and culture is cool, and the food is good, but other than that it's mostly a cesspool.
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.