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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-26-2015, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Terramaria
665 posts, read 728,224 times
Reputation: 783

Advertisements

Baltimore lost 611 people in 2014. It will be interesting to see how the recent events could potentially make this drop futher, despite the "support" of DC and Philly nearby. Even Baltimore County's rate of growth continues to drop, barely crossing 3,000 in 2014 after growing by 8,000 in 2011 and 5,000 in 2012 and 2013. Its possible that 2015 could have a decline from both the city/county (maybe not the county by itself, but combined) I'm affraid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2015, 03:00 PM
 
5,805 posts, read 8,332,284 times
Reputation: 3051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewcifer View Post
I think Pittsburgh's issue is its demographic profile. The Pittsburgh MSA has so many old people that it is the only metro in the US that is experiencing natural decline (more deaths than births). Given those demographic headwinds, stagnation in Pittsburgh means that there is some underlying growth going on. I just wont be reflected in the numbers for another generation until the city has a more normal age breakdown.
This is correct Pittsburgh MSA has the 2nd highest concentration of Elderly folks in the Nation. Because of the Steel Collapse in the 70's and 80's with a mass exodus of youth/working age population this left a huge hole in Demographics for Pittsburgh. Now with Pittsburgh having the 2nd highest elderly population and still very low birth rates, only Migration can offset the deaths. There's not enough Migration to both offset and increase population.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
I have seen a few posters throw this card out there before, suggesting Pittsburgh has such an incredibly high senior citizen population that the deaths are outweighing the births and new movers...I'm not sure where this data comes from or if there is any proof of it.
Here's what you really need to look at to see how the Burgh is changing rather significantly.

Quote:
Not sure on the rules regarding linking this, but a contributor to "another forum" has compiled some very interesting statistics and rankings on household income trends from 2010 to 2013. Specifically, for metro areas of at least 1 million in population, he looked at household income above versus below $75,000--to help calibrate, I think in 2013 median household income for the U.S. was around $52,000, and $75,000 would put you right at the edge of top 1/3rd.

Anyway, here is what he found:

Quote:
Between 2010 and 2013 (the most recent year of income data available from the Census Bureau), Pittsburgh lost 30,496 households earning less than $75,000, which was more than any other major metropolitan area. That was shocking enough, but equally shocking was the fact that Pittsburgh gained 34,290 households earning $75,000 or more, which was the 13th-most of any major metropolitan area. Those 34,290 high-income households gained are more than Atlanta, Austin, Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Las Vegas, Miami, Nashville, Orlando, Phoenix, Portland or Tampa gained in that same period of time.

Percentage-wise, Pittsburgh ranked 7th in growth of high-income households, behind only Charlotte, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Austin, Nashville and San Antonio. Also percentage-wise, Pittsburgh ranked 1st in growth of the share of high-income households. It grew its share of high-income households by 11.7% between 2010 and 2013, which was a higher rate than any other metropolitan area with at least 1,000,000 population. Only Oklahoma City joined it above 10%.
You have to be careful with things like percentage changes in shares, and some of this is going to be the same households changing their income. But nonetheless, big picture all this confirms what we have repeatedly noted--the composition of the population in the Pittsburgh area is changing far more rapidly than the total population numbers reveal, perhaps as rapidly as any major metro area in the country. And the overall trend is a rapid shift from older, less-educated, lower-income households to younger, better-educated, higher-income households. And it is the rapidly growing population in the second category that will continue to fuel the sorts of development patterns we have seen recently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 04:32 PM
MPC
 
692 posts, read 938,250 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borntoolate85 View Post
Baltimore lost 611 people in 2014. It will be interesting to see how the recent events could potentially make this drop futher, despite the "support" of DC and Philly nearby. Even Baltimore County's rate of growth continues to drop, barely crossing 3,000 in 2014 after growing by 8,000 in 2011 and 5,000 in 2012 and 2013. Its possible that 2015 could have a decline from both the city/county (maybe not the county by itself, but combined) I'm affraid.
I thought Baltimore was no longer in a county?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:52 PM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
12,999 posts, read 17,164,786 times
Reputation: 14313
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
I wouldn't call those numbers a loss. It's virtual stagnation from the last properly recorded census. If anything the census guessers probably don't know exactly what Pittsburgh is doing which is why they've left the population mostly unchanged.

Any revised information on the metro area population? If that is still increasing that would explain the increased activity and construction IN Pittsburgh.
The metropolitan population is estimated to be down by about 300. What's interesting, though, is that the 2012 and 2013 estimates for the city of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County were revised upward with the data dump for 2014. In fact, the 2013 estimate for the city was revised upward by nearly 1,000, which swung the year-over-year population trend from a slight loss to a slight gain between 2012 and 2013.

One interesting thing that an urban research blogger noted is that the annual Census Bureau estimates rely on self-reported tallies of new residential construction in each city, and for some reason the city of Pittsburgh didn't bother tallying it between 2005 and 2013 even though there's been an obvious upswing in residential construction in the city during that period of time. Knowing this, it probably explains how the city of Pittsburgh ended up undercounted in the estimates last decade. Late last decade, the annual estimates had Pittsburgh's population dropping below 300,000, but the official 2010 count kept the population above 300,000. It probably also explains the upward revisions in the last few years as well, and it wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 estimates are revised upward with the 2015 data dump next year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewcifer View Post
I think Pittsburgh's issue is its demographic profile. The Pittsburgh MSA has so many old people that it is the only metro in the US that is experiencing natural decline (more deaths than births). Given those demographic headwinds, stagnation in Pittsburgh means that there is some underlying growth going on. I just wont be reflected in the numbers for another generation until the city has a more normal age breakdown.
That's exactly what it is. Old people don't get old forever. Eventually they die, and right now they're dying so fast that the birth rate can't keep up. One thing a lot of people don't realize is that the working-age population in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area (ages 20-64 for the sake of simplicity) actually increased by about 25,000 between 2000 and 2010, but it was offset by a decrease of 60,000 children and 30,000 elderly. The city of Pittsburgh got younger between 2000 and 2010, and recent estimates now have the city's median age below the national median age for the first time in generations. Allegheny County has also effectively stopped aging as well. The outlying metropolitan counties continue to age, though, which washes out the legitimate youth movement that's occurring in the urban core.

Likewise, the city and Allegheny County are becoming increasingly diverse, but the six outlying counties are all over 90% white and not really changing, which washes out the gradual diversification of the urban core. I know it's peanuts compared to California and the East Coast, but the city of Pittsburgh is now over 5% Asian, and Allegheny County is now over 3% Asian, and at the rate the shares are increasing, the city will be over 6% Asian by 2020, and Allegheny County will be over 4% Asian. That's not a huge percentage, but it's not negligible either. (There are no more than 7,000 Asian students at all higher learning institutions in Allegheny County combined, so there's much more to the Asian population growth than that.) The black population is still growing slowly in the metropolitan area as well, with nearly all of the growth in Allegheny County, though the city of Pittsburgh is slowly losing its black population. The growth in the metropolitan area sets it apart from other older industrial metropolitan areas like Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo, which all continue to lose their black populations. As for the Hispanic population, Pittsburgh will probably never have a huge one, but at least the city and Allegheny County are still a bit less "zebra" than before.

Allegheny County contains 52% of the total metropolitan population, but 60% of the college-educated population, and 78% of the non-white population. It pretty much behaves like its own metropolitan area of 1.2 million inside a larger metropolitan area of 2.4 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:03 PM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
12,999 posts, read 17,164,786 times
Reputation: 14313
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
I have seen a few posters throw this card out there before, suggesting Pittsburgh has such an incredibly high senior citizen population that the deaths are outweighing the births and new movers...I'm not sure where this data comes from or if there is any proof of it.
Is this enough proof for you?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:40 PM
 
3,806 posts, read 5,010,906 times
Reputation: 3284
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
Is that a true story!? That's quite hilarious. So when a town is annexed, does it cease to exist? Does The larger city assume control?
Yes, it has ceased to exist as a legal entity. Though the idea of an Elkton City Council and Mayor in Exile somewhere is pretty funny. As it is the actual "downtown" of Elkton is a bit outside the developed parts of Omaha so you have Omaha, a bunch of farmland annexed by Elkton and then Omaha, and then the former town of Elkton.

It really was an odd series of events as Omaha never had issues with any of its other smaller neighbors whose city limits abut those of Omaha while I was there, and it is really hard to see why Elkton decided Omaha had some secret plan to annex it when it was further From Omaha than these other towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Reseda (heart of the SFV)
273 posts, read 250,697 times
Reputation: 379
Pittsburgh should consider doing what Minneapolis has been doing for decades; bringing in a bunch of impoverished refugees from Somalia and Eritrea. Sure, they may not speak English, have trouble assimilating and will probably end up on welfare but at least Pittsburgh will get some much needed population growth plus these immigrants will add diversity to one of America's least diverse cities
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,244 posts, read 8,397,712 times
Reputation: 4657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Valencia View Post
Pittsburgh should consider doing what Minneapolis has been doing for decades; bringing in a bunch of impoverished refugees from Somalia and Eritrea. Sure, they may not speak English, have trouble assimilating and will probably end up on welfare but at least Pittsburgh will get some much needed population growth plus these immigrants will add diversity to one of America's least diverse cities
Much of the Minneapolis metro growth is not due to the refugee population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 10:56 PM
 
Location: Reseda (heart of the SFV)
273 posts, read 250,697 times
Reputation: 379
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
Much of the Minneapolis metro growth is not due to the refugee population.
I hear ya, but people in this thread are lamenting about Pittsburgh's stagnant population. I'm merely pointing out that a good way to kick start some population growth would be to bring in some refugees from war-torn countries like Somolia, Sudan, Syria and Lybia. It may be a bit difficult to assimilate these particular immigrants but they will provide a much needed population boost for Pittsburgh and other Rust Belt cities. Keep in mind that immigrants, regardless of where they come from, have a much higher birthrate than the native population so this will also contribute to some additional population growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2015, 09:08 AM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
12,999 posts, read 17,164,786 times
Reputation: 14313
Pittsburgh is already becoming a haven for Bhutanese refugees. Most of them are settling in the city's South Hills neiighborhoods like Carrick, Overbrook, Brookline and Bon Air. A few more are scattered throughout the North Side. Most people don't realize it, but Pennsylvania actually has the largest Bhutanese population in the United States, and only Texas comes close. Most of the Bhutanese in Pennsylvania have settled in Pittsburgh, Erie and Harrisburg, though there are some in every city. Basically, Pittsburgh is becoming for the Bhutanese what the Twin Cities are for the Hmong: an ultimate destination.
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 $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top