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.
You're using 1950 municipal populations and 2010 metropolitan populations. You can't calculate accurate growth rates that way, although it's easy enough to see that St. Louis hasn't been a boomtown for a very long time now.
The definition of metropolitan population was first used in 1910. The data was based on the definition of the metropolitan at the time of the census. I offer the following as my source of attribution:
The definition of metropolitan population was first used in 1910. The data was based on the definition of the metropolitan at the time of the census. I offer the following as my source of attribution:
Even then, the growth rates are still skewed because in 2010, there are counties that are included in the metropolitan area that were not in 1950. That artificially inflates the growth rates across the board, but especially for cities that experienced significant growth in the post-war era like Indianapolis. There's a footnote included in the second link that acknowledges this:
Note 1: Some of the metropolitan growth occurred as residents in counties that were not metropolitan in 1950 were added to metropolitan areas as their borders were defined outward. The current boundaries of the major metropolitan areas would have increased their 1950 population by 17 percent.
Yes it does. Indianapolis is not a legacy city, St. Louis has a history as one of the leading cities throughout most of American history. St. Louis just so much more urban feeling in every way.
I agree that St. Louis has a rich history. I stated such. Newport, RI, Salem, MA, Norfolk, Va, Albany, NY, Gloucester, MA, Richmond, Va, Buffalo, NY and Newark, NJ all were at one time in U.S. history top 10 cities. However, TODAY ... not yesterday, St. Louis is not head and shoulders above Indianapolis.
Even then, the growth rates are still skewed because in 2010, there are counties that are included in the metropolitan area that were not in 1950. That artificially inflates the growth rates across the board, but especially for cities that experienced significant growth in the post-war era like Indianapolis. There's a footnote included in the second link that acknowledges this:
Note 1: Some of the metropolitan growth occurred as residents in counties that were not metropolitan in 1950 were added to metropolitan areas as their borders were defined outward. The current boundaries of the major metropolitan areas would have increased their 1950 population by 17 percent.
I get your point, however, that 17 percent skew would apply to both metropolitan areas would it not? Still it doesn't change 66% vs 242% growth rates in the metropolitan areas because the same methodology applies to both.
I get your point, however, that 17 percent skew would apply to both metropolitan areas would it not? Still it doesn't change 66% vs 242% growth rates in the metropolitan areas because the same methodology applies to both.
That 17% skew is not true of all of those metro areas individually; it appears to be an average. And yes this can affect the growth rates; it simply depends on the pattern of growth in the time since 1950. I'm sure Indianapolis's growth is still a bit higher than St. Louis's in that time frame, but those wouldn't be accurate figures.
That 17% skew is not true of all of those metro areas individually; it appears to be an average. And yes this can affect the growth rates; it simply depends on the pattern of growth in the time since 1950. I'm sure Indianapolis's growth is still a bit higher than St. Louis's in that time frame, but those wouldn't be accurate figures.
The Census figures are never exact but you have to have an accepted baseline and the U.S. Census is usually acceptable. That's where the numbers came from. You have a better source?
The Census figures are never exact but you have to have an accepted baseline and the U.S. Census is usually acceptable. That's where the numbers came from. You have a better source?
I'm not disputing the source of the data. I'm simply saying that the metropolitan delineations need to be consistent in both years to yield an accurate growth rate. But again, I'm more than certain that Indianapolis still outstripped St. Louis in growth from 1950-2010 by a good bit.
I'm not disputing the source of the data. I'm simply saying that the metropolitan delineations need to be consistent in both years to yield an accurate growth rate. But again, I'm more than certain that Indianapolis still outstripped St. Louis in growth from 1950-2010 by a good bit.
I agree that St. Louis has a rich history. I stated such. Newport, RI, Salem, MA, Norfolk, Va, Albany, NY, Gloucester, MA, Richmond, Va, Buffalo, NY and Newark, NJ all were at one time in U.S. history top 10 cities. However, TODAY ... not yesterday, St. Louis is not head and shoulders above Indianapolis.
St. Louis is still head and shoulders above Indianapolis when it comes to infrastructure, transportation, urbanity, history and culture. Period.
St. Louis is still head and shoulders above Indianapolis when it comes to infrastructure, transportation, urbanity, history and culture. Period.
What you can't understand is that what you want is not what everyone else wants. If you think St. Louis wins in all of those categories that's fine. In fact, I'd even agree that when it comes to history and urbanity, St. Louis would win based on fact. But when you talk about infrastructure, transportation, or culture, that is entirely subjective and based on people preferences.
One fact that is undeniable is that Indianapolis has been growing significantly faster than St. Louis for a long time now. If someone considers numbers more important than opinions, then Indianapolis is the better city.
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.
