U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-28-2014, 07:29 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,006 posts, read 102,606,536 times
Reputation: 33064

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Many DOES NOT MEAN most. You even said yourself in the post just before this one that big city dense growth fell short of growth compared to suburb growth.





Notice how the top two are almost equal, that looks like a "many" to me.

Why is it so hard for you to admit that many, not most, boomers are populating urban districts? There is plenty of proof that has been provided to you that says this is a fact.
So now I have to "admit" something?

Like many, you can't even interpret simple statistics. Let me try to educate you. "Quartile" means quarter, as in 25%. The graph doesn't talk about moving at all, just where Boomer population is increasing. Now I find this hard to understand, b/c there aren't any more of us being born. There are all the Boomers on the earth that ever will be, but I'll play along. The first three quartiles added together (b/c that's how we do this type of statistical problem) equal roughly 5.1%. The "big city" quartile is ~2.1%. That's a 7.2% growth of Boomers altogether, which is impossible, but I'll continue the fantasy. The "big city" growth is approximately 29% of the total. Now, it's entirely possible that some of this growth is from one "big, dense city" to another. We don't know that it's all suburb to city. In fact, we don't know anything, b/c the Boomer population is not increasing at all, it's decreasing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-28-2014, 07:31 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,523,816 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
So now I have to "admit" something?

Like many, you can't even interpret simple statistics. Let me try to educate you. "Quartile" means quarter, as in 25%. The graph doesn't talk about moving at all, just where Boomer population is increasing. Now I find this hard to understand, b/c there aren't any more of us being born. There are all the Boomers on the earth that ever will be, but I'll play along. The first three quartiles added together (b/c that's how we do this type of statistical problem) equal roughly 5.1%. The "big city" quartile is ~2.1%. That's a 7.2% growth of Boomers altogether, which is impossible, but I'll continue the fantasy. The "big city" growth is approximately 29% of the total. Now, it's entirely possible that some of this growth is from one "big, dense city" to another. We don't know that it's all suburb to city. In fact, we don't know anything, b/c the Boomer population is not increasing at all, it's decreasing.
Fine, I am tired of this, all boomers live in the suburbs or where ever it is you think they all live. Clearly they don't live in any urban area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 07:33 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,006 posts, read 102,606,536 times
Reputation: 33064
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Fine, I am tired of this, all boomers live in the suburbs or where ever it is you think they all live. Clearly they don't live in any urban area.
When did I ever say that?

Actually, in thinking about that quartile bit, it doesn't make sense to use it in the way it was used in the graph. Quartiles are usually equal. These four are not equal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 07:40 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,523,816 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
When did I ever say that?

Actually, in thinking about that quartile bit, it doesn't make sense to use it in the way it was used in the graph. Quartiles are usually equal. These four are not equal.
Okay, well then you tell me what is true and we will just go with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 07:50 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,006 posts, read 102,606,536 times
Reputation: 33064
^^Most seniors want to retire in place. Right back where we started. Note that I have never used the words "all" or "none". You're the one trying to prove something that is not true; that seniors are flocking to live in the Pearl District.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 08:01 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
So now I have to "admit" something?

Like many, you can't even interpret simple statistics. Let me try to educate you. "Quartile" means quarter, as in 25%. The graph doesn't talk about moving at all, just where Boomer population is increasing. Now I find this hard to understand, b/c there aren't any more of us being born.
Yes, they are from immigration. Seems a bit high, but would have to check before assuming. Otherwise, the total of all quartiles would have to be slightly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,523,816 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
^^Most seniors want to retire in place. Right back where we started. Note that I have never used the words "all" or "none". You're the one trying to prove something that is not true; that seniors are flocking to live in the Pearl District.
Okay, then whatever you say is true. Seniors aren't moving to urban districts. I will remember that next time I am in the Pearl District and see a number of empty nesters going into condo buildings, they must not live there because no one lives in those buildings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 09:55 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,006 posts, read 102,606,536 times
Reputation: 33064
I take it this group has sufficient Urbanist credentials
Seniors

This is an interesting article. Here are a few excerpts:
**Much has been written about the growing number of seniors who have moved from the suburbs to the cities; much of this is true and some of it is hyperbole. The “empty-nester phenomenon”—the couple who sells their suburban home after the kids have moved out and buys a condo in the city—is real and has been occurring, though it is hard to quantify.

It is also hard to quantify how many seniors have moved into one of the growing number of suburban town centers developing around the country. In other words, urban living is no longer confined to the central city. Seniors who moved into these towns are counted by the U.S. Census in the regional metropolitan numbers, not those of the central city Nonetheless, they are voting with their feet and their dollars for a more urban lifestyle. . . That said, there are still more empty nesters who have stayed put in the suburbs—“aging in place,” as it is now called. There also are many who moved elsewhere, generally to a southern or western city or suburb. So, despite an increase in urban living among seniors, other moves (or nonmoves) by seniors over the past decade have been more significant. **
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 10:10 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,523,816 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I take it this group has sufficient Urbanist credentials
Seniors

This is an interesting article. Here are a few excerpts:
**Much has been written about the growing number of seniors who have moved from the suburbs to the cities; much of this is true and some of it is hyperbole. The “empty-nester phenomenon”—the couple who sells their suburban home after the kids have moved out and buys a condo in the city—is real and has been occurring, though it is hard to quantify.

It is also hard to quantify how many seniors have moved into one of the growing number of suburban town centers developing around the country. In other words, urban living is no longer confined to the central city. Seniors who moved into these towns are counted by the U.S. Census in the regional metropolitan numbers, not those of the central city Nonetheless, they are voting with their feet and their dollars for a more urban lifestyle. . . That said, there are still more empty nesters who have stayed put in the suburbs—“aging in place,” as it is now called. There also are many who moved elsewhere, generally to a southern or western city or suburb. So, despite an increase in urban living among seniors, other moves (or nonmoves) by seniors over the past decade have been more significant. **
That is all I am saying, there are empty nesters migrating to urban districts. I am not saying all or most or anything like that, just that they are and there are many who have done this and are doing this, even if that means most are "staying put."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2014, 10:16 PM
 
Location: The New England part of Ohio
18,677 posts, read 23,252,262 times
Reputation: 48862
I am a mid-boomer. Born in the late 50s. Yes. After college I wet through a time where I thought that the "burbs were the devil's domain.

Later, I made peace.

A few years ago, I tired of the burbs again. I realized after that my preferences.
Living i a small city, I realized that I like to be further apart from others than most cities permit.

We how have 1/3 rd acre. We have room and a close city.

The suburbs are not for everyone. However, for families? The "burbs do it best.
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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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