CHICAGO population grows 2%, remains 3rd largest city (Cicero, Evanston: foreclosure, cheap home)

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Yeah. Annexation hasnt been an issue in years. Despite what you read on these boards, almost no one in Houston cares whether or not it passes Chicago in population.

Houston will no doubt surpass Chicago in population within the next 15 years or so. In about 25-30 years giver or take, the Houston Metro will likely surpass Chicago's metro population.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Not really no. The last census was pretty off. The ACS is probably as accurate right now. Covid and Trump really messed up the census count. The ACS doesnt have those political hurdles.

The ACS is actually pretty good when it comes to the counts of ethnicities and the foreign born. Chicago's foreign born population has stagnated but that actually makes a lot of sense. A lot of the foreign born Eastern Europeans that came to Chicago after WWII are dying off and immigration from Mexico is net negative.

The major groups coming to the US now are Indians, Chinese, Filipinos, Central Americans (Hondurans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans), Venezuelans, Colombians, Dominicans, Cubans, Vietnamese, and Africans. While Chicago is on the radar for Indian, Chinese, and Filipino immigration, its really not a destination for the other groups. That isnt helping the numbers go back up.

Yes, really. The 2010 and 2020 census showed how terrible the ACS is at predicting population. The ACS may get % of ethnic make up close, but I haven't looked at it.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yes, really. The 2010 and 2020 census showed how terrible the ACS is at predicting population. The ACS may get % of ethnic make up close, but I haven't looked at it.

No, it was pretty close.

Remember the ACS has a disclaimer margin of error of 5%. The ACS estimate for Greater Chicago for 2020 was 9,478,982. The Census was 9,618,502. That means that the ACS predicted the population within a 1.5% margin of error. For Houston, the ACS predicted a population of 6,979,613. The Census had us at 7,122,240. Thats within 2.1%. Thats actually really good.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

No, it was pretty close.

Remember the ACS has a disclaimer margin of error of 5%. The ACS estimate for Greater Chicago for 2020 was 9,478,982. The Census was 9,618,502. That means that the ACS predicted the population within a 1.5% margin of error. For Houston, the ACS predicted a population of 6,979,613. The Census had us at 7,122,240. Thats within 2.1%. Thats actually really good.

I thought we were discussing Chicago, not the metro area. This is a city of Chicago forum and the subject is the city's growth. The ACS has been terrible at predicting the city's population.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I thought we were discussing Chicago, not the metro area. This is a city of Chicago forum and the subject is the city's growth. The ACS has been terrible at predicting the city's population.

Still wrong.

The ACS predicted Chicago's population at 2,699,347. The census had it at 2,746,388. Thats a margin of error of 1.7%.

I might also add that those margins of error are lower than the Census' disclaimed margin of error.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Still wrong.

The ACS predicted Chicago's population at 2,699,347. The census had it at 2,746,388. Thats a margin of error of 1.7%.

I might also add that those margins of error are lower than the Census' disclaimed margin of error.

Predicting a loss of 100,000 when there was a gain of 50,000 is bad. It was even worse in 2010 when the ACS estimated a gain decent gain and the city lost nearly 200,000.

that's why I take ACS estimates with a huge grain of salt

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by chicagogeorge

Houston will no doubt surpass Chicago in population within the next 15 years or so. In about 25-30 years giver or take, the Houston Metro will likely surpass Chicago's metro population.

Crazy as it sounds, its never been something I cared about. City limits populations are very misleading anyway. We can look at a city like Atlanta vs. Oklahoma City. Atlanta very much qualifies as a big, urban, internationally known city with lots of amenities. I dont mean to hate on OKC, but it isnt that at all except for the big part (600 square miles). Yet, Atlanta is technically a bigger city.

If or when Houston does pass Chicago, nothing really changes. The fabric of the cities are still going to be the same and their strengths/weaknesses are going to be the same. Houston doesnt magically gain anything and Chicago doesnt magically lose anything.

It is interesting to have this conversation because these two cities, IMO, are the single two best values for the money in the US. They both have so much to do and offer with top notch culinary and cultural institutions. I dont know another city in the US, other than Houston and Chicago, that offers as much as they do for the price tag they have.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Predicting a loss of 100,000 when there was a gain of 50,000 is bad. It was even worse in 2010 when the ACS estimated a gain decent gain and the city lost nearly 200,000.

that's why I take ACS estimates with a huge grain of salt

Not sure where youre getting your numbers, but they arent correct.

In 2010, the ACS predicted Chicago's population at 2,703,466. The Census showed Chicago's population at 2,695,588. Thats almost perfect. I dont know what more you could possibly ask for.

You can take ACS numbers with a grain of salt if you wish, but when they are within a margin of error of 2% (which the ACS absolutely has been), then they are doing a damn good job.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Crazy as it sounds, its never been something I cared about. City limits populations are very misleading anyway. We can look at a city like Atlanta vs. Oklahoma City. Atlanta very much qualifies as a big, urban, internationally known city with lots of amenities. I dont mean to hate on OKC, but it isnt that at all except for the big part (600 square miles). Yet, Atlanta is technically a bigger city.

If or when Houston does pass Chicago, nothing really changes. The fabric of the cities are still going to be the same and their strengths/weaknesses are going to be the same. Houston doesnt magically gain anything and Chicago doesnt magically lose anything.

It is interesting to have this conversation because these two cities, IMO, are the single two best values for the money in the US. They both have so much to do and offer with top notch culinary and cultural institutions. I dont know another city in the US, other than Houston and Chicago, that offers as much as they do for the price tag they have.

I agree with you. Some city limits like Houston Phoenix and LA are massive while others are much smaller. Long gone are the days where cities dominated the metro areas. Now the vast majority of residents in a metro area live outside the city limits. As for price tags, Chicago was inexpensive at one point but imo city gov leaders are trying hard to make this city unaffordable for lower and middle income earners. Chicago ranks second in most expensive state and local sales taxes. Add all the additional fees as well as the property taxes and there you have it.

Chicago tied with four other major cities as imposing the nation’s second highest sales tax burden (10.25%) on residents as of July 1. Seattle and California cities Fremont, Long Beach and Oakland rounded out the second-place spot.

Chicago Cost of Living Index
How much does it cost to live in Chicago? A good place to start is looking at the city’s cost of living index. This compares the cost of living in a metro area to the national average based on a comparison of prices for a representative sample of items.

The Chicago cost of living index is 120. That makes it 20% more expensive than the national average.

Groceries and healthcare are right at the national average and transportation is about 26% higher than average. This includes gas, car insurance, car purchase, and maintenance.

Chicago utilities are the only category lower than average, although that’s changing. In 2019, residents faced the third installment of a 30% increase in sewer and water taxes. The cost for water increased from $2.01 per 1,000 gallons from $1.28 per 1,00 gallons. The full hike won’t take effect until 2022.

Housing is the biggest expense you’ll face, and it’s the biggest factor driving up the cost of living in Chicago. The city’s housing index is 154.

Still cheaper than some other major cities though.

What about other major metro areas? Here’s a quick look at other metro areas more expensive than the Windy City.

20% higher cost of living in Los Angeles vs Chicago
15% higher cost of living in Washington, DC compared to Chicago
22% higher living costs in Boston vs Chicago
49% higher cost of living in San Francisco
27% higher living costs in Seattle

https://federalcos.com/blog/chicago-cost-of-living/

[personone]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Not sure where youre getting your numbers, but they arent correct.

In 2010, the ACS predicted Chicago's population at 2,703,466. The Census showed Chicago's population at 2,695,588. Thats almost perfect. I dont know what more you could possibly ask for.

You can take ACS numbers with a grain of salt if you wish, but when they are within a margin of error of 2% (which the ACS absolutely has been), then they are doing a damn good job.

Agree. That's a very good "estimate." They will never be able to predict perfectly, but in terms of an estimate, that's about as close as you can reasonably expect.