|

03-20-2009, 07:55 AM
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
5 posts, read 3,536 times
Reputation: 12
|
|
SA Metro area at 2,031,000 million (U.S. Census 2008-estimates)
According to the latest estimates released by the U.S. Census Bureau our metro area broke the 2 million mark during 2008. You can look it up on their website Census Bureau Home Page . We added about 47,000 people to our population in the year of 2008.
|
|

03-20-2009, 08:28 AM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas
6,410 posts, read 3,929,744 times
Reputation: 2335
|
|
Couple of related threads in other forums here:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/gener...-over-2-a.html
San Antonio is the 28th largest MSA.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/texas...xas-isn-t.html
In rate of growth, San Antonio's MSA ranks 7th out of the 25 Texas MSAs. We're no longer growing as fast as the larger MSAs, Austin, Laredo or the RGV.
__________________
Moderator: El Paso, General US, Madison and San Antonio.
Temporarily Moderating: Texas
When I post a whole sentence in bold, that's moderator action. The TOS says you can discuss moderator action only via Direct Message.
Everything else I post is OK to discuss/question/disagree with in the forum.
|
|

03-20-2009, 01:54 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
30 posts, read 12,689 times
Reputation: 17
|
|
We're no longer growing as fast as the larger MSAs, Austin, Laredo or the RGV.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure there's an Austin exit off the 101 in Cali 
|
|

03-20-2009, 11:05 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
989 posts, read 451,675 times
Reputation: 384
|
|
|
Bowie, your wording is wrong. None of those MSA's are larger than SA, they just have a larger growth rate.
Though SA's 2.3% isn't too shabby.
|
|

03-20-2009, 11:11 PM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas
6,410 posts, read 3,929,744 times
Reputation: 2335
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemonfresh
Bowie, your wording is wrong. None of those MSA's are larger than SA, they just have a larger growth rate.
|
Your reading of my punctuation is wrong. If I'd typed "larger MSAs : Austin, Laredo or the RGV" that would have implied Austin, Laredo and the RGV were larger. Since I typed "larger MSAs , Austin, Laredo or the RGV" that means that the list included Dallas and Houston, the only two MSAs larger than this one.
__________________
Moderator: El Paso, General US, Madison and San Antonio.
Temporarily Moderating: Texas
When I post a whole sentence in bold, that's moderator action. The TOS says you can discuss moderator action only via Direct Message.
Everything else I post is OK to discuss/question/disagree with in the forum.
|
|

03-20-2009, 11:16 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
989 posts, read 451,675 times
Reputation: 384
|
|
|
You're right. My fault.
Though wouldn't it have been better to write: We're no longer growing as fast as Houston, Dallas, etc.
|
|

03-20-2009, 11:42 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western Bexar County
3,150 posts, read 3,225,156 times
Reputation: 1041
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffutsa2001
According to the latest estimates released by the U.S. Census Bureau our metro area broke the 2 million mark during 2008. You can look it up on their website Census Bureau Home Page . We added about 47,000 people to our population in the year of 2008.
|
Based on our increased traffic, I think those 47,000 people moved to the North, Northwest, and Western areas of SA! 
|
|

03-21-2009, 12:20 AM
|
|
m. Sons of the Republic of Texas
Status:
"Member SRT, New Braunfels"
(set 7 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Juan Seguin, Texas
2,564 posts, read 1,701,167 times
Reputation: 1004
|
|
|
I ran some numbers (nothing better to do!):
Dallas Metro: 6,300,006 net growth since 2007 146,532
Houston Metro: 5,728,143 net growth since 2007 130,185
San Antonio Metro: 2,031,445 net growth since 2007 46,524
Austin Metro: 1,652,602 net growth since 2007 60,012
The four metros combined for 15,582,011
Texas population--2008---24,326,974----2007---23,843,420---net increase 483,554 (.019877)
Cal. population 2008-----36,756,666----2007---36,377,534---net increase 379,132 (.010314)
NY --population 2008-----19,490,297----2007---19,429,316---net increase 60,981 (.003128)
FL --population 2008-----18,328,340----2007---18,199,526---net increase 128,814 (.007028)
Now out West:
CO population --2008-----4,939,456-----2007---4,842,770---net increase 96,686 (.019574)
[not much different from Texas]
AZ population --2008-----5,303,632-----2007---5,166,810---net increase 136,822 (.025797)
UT population --2008-----2,736,424-----2007---2,668,925---net increase 67,499 (.024666)
NV population --2008-----2,093,973-----2007---2,018,244---met increase 75,729 (.036165)
What this is saying is that California is moving East to Nevada (3.6%)and Arizona and Utah(2.5%)
Colorado and Texas are increasing at 2 per cent.
California is gaining 1% so they are slowing down. Love to see the projections for 2009 and 2010. California might even dip to negative territory.
Regards,
gy2020
|
|

03-21-2009, 12:28 AM
|
|
m. Sons of the Republic of Texas
Status:
"Member SRT, New Braunfels"
(set 7 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Juan Seguin, Texas
2,564 posts, read 1,701,167 times
Reputation: 1004
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steel Man
Based on our increased traffic, I think those 47,000 people moved to the North, Northwest, and Western areas of SA! 
|
Steelman: I think you are wrong. They moved to the northeast (Guadalupe and Comal Counties were big gainers) Both have populations exceeding 100,000. Comal--109,635 and Guadalupe--117,172.
Kendall 32,866; Medina 44,275 Down south Wilson 40,398 and Atascosa 43,877. 
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|