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.
Embargoed information released to major media outlets will be released at any point on March 22nd, whereas official census bureau report and information will come out on March 23rd.
Keep News.Google.com (key words: "2016 metropolitan area population growth by the census") handy.
Again, looking forward to seeing the growth rates for metropolitan areas in states that posted declines. Curious to see if those metropolitan areas were the reasons their state declined or were the antithesis of their state as it declined. Just to point out an odd fact, the 2016 census results for states showed a significant number of American states posting population decline. I believe 2016 was one of the worst years on record in that sense. So a lot of questions regarding decline should be answered at some point this week, including what are the main culprits.
They can't release the news sadly until 12:01 A.M. EDT March 23rd.
My expectation is that the estimates are going to show a lot of counties and metropolitan areas where the population is declining. As the nation ages the rate of natural increase is going down, which is compounded by adults having fewer children, and at a later age, than in the past. There certainly aren't as many locations with extremely high growth rates as in past decades either.
I'm guessing that most of the nation's growth is in metropolitan areas, but not necessarily in the very largest urban centers. For example, I doubt Illinois' recent population loss is exclusively a downstate phenomenon - metro Chicago has the majority of the state's population and the combination of a harsh climate, weak job growth and relatively high cost of living and taxes have incentivized many to move elsewhere. But four years from now this board will probably be discussing how the 2020 census proved many of the estimates wrong one way or another.
My expectation is that the estimates are going to show a lot of counties and metropolitan areas where the population is declining. As the nation ages the rate of natural increase is going down, which is compounded by adults having fewer children, and at a later age, than in the past. There certainly aren't as many locations with extremely high growth rates as in past decades either.
I'm guessing that most of the nation's growth is in metropolitan areas, but not necessarily in the very largest urban centers. For example, I doubt Illinois' recent population loss is exclusively a downstate phenomenon - metro Chicago has the majority of the state's population and the combination of a harsh climate, weak job growth and relatively high cost of living and taxes have incentivized many to move elsewhere. But four years from now this board will probably be discussing how the 2020 census proved many of the estimates wrong one way or another.
The 2010 Census particularly showed that Atlanta was grossly overestimated in the years leading up to it. Many cities and metros were pretty close and a few others were underestimated if I am remembering correctly. I cannot help but wonder how the great recession messed up the last few years of this past decade's growth. American mobility came to a screeching halt and many cities/metros that weren't in Texas saw a hit to their growth rates.
Sort of unrelated, but what is the point of the government or the CB withholding the data? I mean, it is "just" data, not like a product that a company is afraid might be stolen by its competitors. Does the data provide income because news agencies pay to receive the numbers a day earlier or is there some other reason?
Sort of unrelated, but what is the point of the government or the CB withholding the data? I mean, it is "just" data, not like a product that a company is afraid might be stolen by its competitors. Does the data provide income because news agencies pay to receive the numbers a day earlier or is there some other reason?
I think they give media time to put their news stories( graphs, charts, analyses etc)together so the release is accompanied with as much coverage as possible.
Also, this is the data used to determine federal spending by gwographic area so maybe they give the OMB time to apply these numbers toward budgets.
Just a few thoughts.
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.
