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.
Osito thinks the population was 2.7 million in 2005. The 2008 Census estimates say it is 2.853 million. That would mean, according to Osito, that Chicago has GAINED 153,000 people in 3 years! That is A LOT of population growth.
Osito thinks the population was 2.7 million in 2005. The 2008 Census estimates say it is 2.853 million. That would mean, according to Osito, that Chicago has GAINED 153,000 people in 3 years! That is A LOT of population growth.
Close, but no cigar.
The population was 2.7 million in 2004, and there is no more recent estimate in the PACE report.
Based on what we know prior to 2004, Chicago's population probably currently sits around 2.55 million (and falling), so it's probably about to be surpassed by Houston.
While I don't think anyone will be surprised to see Houston ahead of Chicago, I think it may raise some eyebrows once Phoenix surpasses the former "Second City".
And when San Antonio tops it, that will really turn people on to the disaster that's been brewing this past half-century on Lake Michigan!
No one's boosting Chicago, we're just telling you what Chicago is. The only person on this thread as of now thats "facts" are dictated by their biases is you. Easy to criticize the world when you live your life behind a computer screen.
Is there even such thing as a fact dictated by bias? And I can only assume you were referring to yourself in the last sentence.
The population was 2.7 million in 2004, and there is no more recent estimate in the PACE report.
Based on what we know prior to 2004, Chicago's population probably currently sits around 2.55 million (and falling), so it's probably about to be surpassed by Houston.
While I don't think anyone will be surprised to see Houston ahead of Chicago, I think it may raise some eyebrows once Phoenix surpasses the former "Second City".
And when San Antonio tops it, that will really turn people on to the disaster that's been brewing this past half-century on Lake Michigan!
The population was 2.7 million in 2004, and there is no more recent estimate in the PACE report.
Based on what we know prior to 2004, Chicago's population probably currently sits around 2.55 million (and falling), so it's probably about to be surpassed by Houston.
While I don't think anyone will be surprised to see Houston ahead of Chicago, I think it may raise some eyebrows once Phoenix surpasses the former "Second City".
And when San Antonio tops it, that will really turn people on to the disaster that's been brewing this past half-century on Lake Michigan!
No, but until the Census comes out with their official estimates in 2010, I would trust Chicago regional agencies with having a pretty good sense of what's going on between decennial counts.
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.
