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.
Washington State was at an estimated 7,170,000 in 2015. I would expect an additional 200K in 2016. Not enough to move up in rank, as Virginia is too far ahead to catch. Arizona is also nipping at Washington's heels.
That would be shocking and unprecedented by a longshot. My guess is 110,000.
Washington State was at an estimated 7,170,000 in 2015. I would expect an additional 200K in 2016. Not enough to move up in rank, as Virginia is too far ahead to catch. Arizona is also nipping at Washington's heels.
200,000(!)? That would be growth for the ages. Not seeing it.
Yeah if Washington was growing by 200k a year, then Seattle must be going under a hyperboom where the metro is growing at rates of around 140k a year. Nothing suggests that is happening currently.
Depends on your definition of a "hyperboom". Seattle is booming in a very hyper-like level if you have not noticed.
This from the Washington State Office Of Financial Management: (2016)
"The state’s population will increase by 1 million people in the next 10
years, and surpass 9 million by 2040."
That said, admittedly my guess of 200,000 is too high. If the State is correct, obviously it would be about 100,000 per year.
However, WA's population growth for single years has been as high as 3.85%, and many years above 2.0%, over a 35 year period. Taking a conservative approach (2.0% for boom years) that would work out to about 140,000 for the next year. If it was at a less conservative rate (3.0%) that would mean 214,000 for the next year based on the current estimate of 7,140,000. Source: Washington State Office Of Financial Management document title: "2016 Population Projections"
Depends on your definition of a "hyperboom". Seattle is booming in a very hyper-like level if you have not noticed.
This from the Washington State Office Of Financial Management: (2016)
"The state’s population will increase by 1 million people in the next 10
years, and surpass 9 million by 2040."
That said, admittedly my guess of 200,000 is too high. If the State is correct, obviously it would be about 100,000 per year.
However, WA's population growth for single years has been as high as 3.85%, and many years above 2.0%, over a 35 year period. Taking a conservative approach (2.0% for boom years) that would work out to about 140,000 for the next year. If it was at a less conservative rate (3.0%) that would mean 214,000 for the next year based on the current estimate of 7,140,000. Source: Washington State Office Of Financial Management document title: "2016 Population Projections"
Hyperboom levels of growth to me is 120k+ growth in the metro area so right now only Dallas and Houston are going under hyperboom levels of growth. Basically, Chinese level growth.
Seattle is going under a boom, but a not a hyperboom....about 65k a year...solid, but nothing outstanding. Austin has similar metro growth numbers, but it's almost 2x as small as the Seattle area.
OK, if that is your definition. I will say Seattle has much more construction underway than Austin, and the State will continue to add 100k+ overall, as they have for the past few years.
PA probably pretty stable. As of 2015 --- 12,802,503. My guess is that it increased by 25,000 over the past year, with small losses in the northern/western (non Pgh metro counties) part of the state, and small gains in the south central/ south eastern part. PA is pretty cool the way it is though, a very complete state IMO.
Do you think we'll overtake Illinois to become the nation's fifth-most-populous state again?
1. It is pretty improbable that Washington (State) will post 200,000 in population growth for the 2015-2016 census estimates. Given that it has never done that before in its history and as recent as last year was posting half of 200,000 people per year. Last year (2014-2015) the state went + 107,000 people. The largest numeric increase that the state of Washington has ever recorded in its history was in 1990-1991 when the state went + 158,955 according to the census bureau. Even that's not impressive since 1990-1991 is a 15 month cycle, meaning the population growth was an estimate from April 1, 1990 to July 1, 1991.
2. I agree with Ant's post, minus one thing; China's major metropolitan areas like Beijing and Shanghai actually went off for 6 million people in population growth each from 2000 to 2010. That's about 600,000 people per year on average for 10 years (almost all other major Chinese metropolises went over 200,000 people per year population growth at the most minimum amount from 2000 to 2010). None of America's fast growing cities could be categorized as superbooming to that extent. Actually a population gain of 100,000 people per year in China's major metropolises would be considered quite slow and stagnant. This decade, there is evidence that China's largest metropolises are on pace for 8 million for the decade, each. For a Chinese city to grow as slowly as 100,000 people per year range, something is epically wrong with it.
3. Here is the multifamily delivery totals expectation for 2016, since construction has somehow crept into this conversation as well (this is not a projects and construction thread). Seattle MSA and Austin MSA are pretty much the same here, as they are with raw population growth. No surprises.
4. Here is the actual census provided data for Austin MSA, Seattle MSA, the states of Washington and Texas from 2000 to present day. Just for good measure (curtesy of the United States census bureau).
Seattle MSA Population Growth by year from 2000 to 2015:
2000-2001: + 49,049 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2001)
2001-2002: + 25,375
2002-2003: + 14,719
2003-2004: + 25,946
2004-2005: + 39,298
2005-2006: + 58,816
2006-2007: + 47,386
2007-2008: + 50,575
2008-2009: + 59,755
2009-2010: + 25,012 (9 month growth cycle; July 1, 2009 to April 1, 2010)
2010-2011: + 58,553 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011)
2011-2012: + 55,669
2012-2013: + 58,931
2013-2014: + 59,904
2014-2015: + 60,714
2015-2016: ???? (results have not been released)
Austin MSA Population Growth by year from 2000 to 2015:
2000-2001: + 71,533 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2001)
2001-2002: + 26,506
2002-2003: + 28,208
2003-2004: + 34,028
2004-2005: + 43,300
2005-2006: + 62,127
2006-2007: + 62,371
2007-2008: + 56,014
2008-2009: + 48,468
2009-2010: + 33,951 (9 month growth cycle; July 1, 2009 to April 1, 2010)
2010-2011: + 65,120 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011)
2011-2012: + 53,889
2012-2013: + 49,141
2013-2014: + 59,026
2014-2015: + 57,395
2015-2016: ???? (results have not been released)
Washington (State) Population Growth by year from 2000 to 2015:
2000-2001: + 91,601 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2001)
2001-2002: + 66,627
2002-2003: + 51,766
2003-2004: + 74,530
2004-2005: + 78,660
2005-2006: + 113,448
2006-2007: + 90,834
2007-2008: + 100,644
2008-2009: + 105,195
2009-2010: + 57,114 (9 month growth cycle; July 1, 2009 to April 1, 2010)
2010-2011: + 98,689 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011)
2011-2012: + 74,063
2012-2013: + 75,989
2013-2014: + 89,885
2014-2015: + 107,185
2015-2016: ???? (results have not been released)
Texas Population Growth by year from 2000 to 2015:
2000-2001: + 467,802 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2001)
2001-2002: + 370,703
2002-2003: + 340,606
2003-2004: + 363,092
2004-2005: + 384,100
2005-2006: + 581,457
2006-2007: + 472,403
2007-2008: + 477,056
2008-2009: + 492,722
2009-2010: + 343,800 (9 month growth cycle; July 1, 2009 to April 1, 2010)
2010-2011: + 508,903 (15 month growth cycle; April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011)
2011-2012: + 435,277
2012-2013: + 410,933
2013-2014: + 478,404
2014-2015: + 490,036
2015-2016: ???? (results have not been released)
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 12-18-2016 at 06:34 PM..
The Washington State Department of Finance provides different (higher) figures than the census. And who is arguing Texas vs. Washington total population? I don't think that was ever brought up, but thanks for the obvious.
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.
