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.
You can compare both raw numbers AND percentage of population. I really think you are trying to make an argument about something that I'm not. I don't know how many more times I can say this: Columbus has more in numbers, Cleveland has more as a percentage of population. In the next decade or so, this will all be moot, as Columbus will most likely have the largest as a percentage of population as well given its growth rates of minority populations. You can look at the numbers yourself, you don't need me to tell you that.
How hard is it for you to understand Columbus has twice the population of Cleveland in city proper, therefore you bringing up the number of minorities compared to Cleveland means little to nothing?
And seeing as you say in the same sentence that Columbus will have more minorities as a percentage as well within a decade, you must be talking about in the city proper, and for that I will laugh at you again.
Cleveland is 67% minority, Columbus is 41% minority. So no, you are wrong. And you also seem to be ignoring the fact that Clevelands minority population is growing fast as well, not quite as fast as Columbus' but it's growing. The reason the Cleveland city/MSA/CSA is losing population is due to the white population leaving in large numbers, the minority population is actually growing in percentage AND number. The black population only saw a large drop in the city, but they are only moving to the surrounding suburbs. For the city, in the 2000 census Cleveland was 61% minority and Columbus was 33% minority. So if that rate stays the same, Cleveland would be 73% minority for the 2020 census and Columbus would be 49% minority, nowhere close.
As far as MSA, Clevelands is 28% and Columbus' is 24%. CSA, Clevelands is 25% and Columbus' is 22%. Obviously the raw numbers of minorities are much higher in the Cleveland metro and MSA as well (using your method). Cleveland has 588,000 minorities in MSA compared to 443,000 in Columbus MSA. And for CSA, Cleveland is at 720,000 and Columbus is at 462,000. And if the rate stays the same, Clevelands MSA will be 31.5% minority in 2020 compared to 29% for Columbus, and even though the current rate says Columbus MSA will have a higher population than Clevelands' in 2020, Cleveland will still have more minorities in number and percentage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81
Wait, so now we're going to change the argument again? We weren't debating the CSA to begin with, and I was told repeatedly that using raw numbers is bad. Why is it suddenly okay to use a different regional size and different criteria?
LOL, it's hilarious seeing you arguing with his post. He was using your own method to prove you wrong. So only you can use it when it benefits you?
Only difference is that Clevelands CSA isn't twice the size of Columbus' LOL!
There's even a larger percentage difference when you compare it by metro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by west336
Want urbanized area instead? I don't have the racial breakdown handy, as the info I provided came from the U.S. Census. Do you have ANY information that shows Columbus is more racially diversified than Cleveland?
No, he doesn't.
He's been twisting 1 stat to make Columbus look more diverse. Saying that Columbus has more minorities because it has a few thousand more Blacks and Hispanics in the city proper, when Columbus has double the population of Cleveland in the city proper, lol. That's not the correct way to compare, and every way you look at it Cleveland is more diverse.
Whenever the topic of ranking cities comes up on this site, there are always people who rely upon subjective opinions and incorrect assumptions to make their rankings. This is frustrating to those of us who rely upon objective statistics to rank cities. For the most part, cities can be ranked entirely based on objective statistics that are available to all of us. And because these statistics are rooted in objective, fact-based data, when presented with these statistics, we should all be able to agree on the ranking. At least, those of us who believe in objective facts and data should be able to agree.
There was a recent thread about ranking cities in the Midwest, wherein some people made some pretty outrageous claims, severely under-ranking or over-ranking certain cities. I don't know if this is due to sheer ignorance of the data or whether people are aware of the data, but choose to ignore it due to their own subjective opinions. Whatever the case may be, I thought that I would create a thread to rank the top 10 cities in the Midwest based on objective, fact-based statistical data, so that people who care about facts and data can have a thread showing how the major cities of the Midwest really do rank compared to each other.
I love the Midwest. I've lived here all of my life. It's the region of the country that I know the most about. Therefore, I feel confident in my ability to rank the major cities of the Midwest. I don't really need confidence, since I'm relying on statistical data, but I nevertheless feel confident that I understand this region well enough to write about it.
Why Top 10 cities?
The Midwest is unique in that there are exactly 10 cities that dominate the region. These 10 cities are:
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbus
Detroit
Indianapolis
Kansas City
Milwaukee
Minneapolis
St. Louis
(listed in alphabetical order)
These ten are the only Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the Midwest that are over 1 million in population. There are other cities that include parts of the Midwest in their metro area, but are based in another region. Louisville, KY, for example, is based in the South but has portions of its metro area in the Midwest. I am only including metro areas that are based in the Midwest.
I also chose these 10 cities because these are the only cities in the Midwest that are classified as national business centers in Rand McNally's Ranally city rating system. The Ranally city rating system is a well-regarded city rating system that is used by Rand McNally to classify U.S. cities based on their economic function. In the Ranally city rating system, Chicago is ranked 1-AAA, which is the highest ranking of any Midwest city. Cleveland, Detroit, Minneapolis, and St. Louis are ranked 1-AA. Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City, and Milwaukee are ranked 1-A.
For the definition of the Midwest, I use the U.S. Census Bureau's official definition of the region, which is the 12-state region stretching from Ohio on the east to Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota on the west. The region includes the states of Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas.
Not only is this the official Census Bureau definition of the Midwest, but I can tell you as a Midwesterner, it is also the best and only real definition of the true "cultural" Midwest. Border states like Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana might have portions that are influenced by the Midwest, but none of them are truly Midwestern in character. The Census Bureau's 12-state Midwest region is the best, and in my opinion, the only true definition of the Midwest.
Ranking Criteria
To rank the top 10 cities in the Midwest, I am going to use data that shows the economic and population influence of each metro area. The population data that I will be using are Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas. Metropolitan areas show the population of the core city, or cities, and its suburbs and exurbs. Combined Statistical Areas show the population of the metropolitan area plus adjacent metropolitan and/or micropolitan areas that are strongly tied to the larger metro area.
The economic data that I will be using are Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by Metropolitan Area and Total Personal Income by Metropolitan Area. GDP by metropolitan area shows the total economic output of the metropolitan area's goods and services. Total Personal Income by metropolitan area shows the sum of all income of all persons in the metropolitan area.
This is a list of the ten cities ranked in order of their CSA population in 2010:
1. Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI CSA: 9,686,021
2. Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI CSA: 5,218,852
3. Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI CSA: 3,615,902
4. Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH CSA: 2,881,937
5. St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL CSA: 2,878,255
6. Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN CSA: 2,172,191
7. Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS CSA: 2,104,853
8. Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN CSA: 2,080,782
9. Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH CSA: 2,071,052
10. Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI CSA: 1,751,316
Population Analysis
Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis are the top three in both the MSA and CSA categories. After that, the ranking is different for the MSA and CSA. The Cleveland CSA is significantly larger than the Cleveland MSA, due to the Akron MSA being included in the Cleveland CSA. Akron functions essentially as part of the Cleveland metro area, but technically it has its own metro area. The St. Louis, Cincinnati, and Kansas City MSA's are similar in population to their CSA's, since none of the three cities has an adjacent metro area of considerable size (Dayton is close to Cincinnati, but not close enough to be part of Cincinnati's CSA). Indianapolis, Columbus, and Milwaukee increase quite a bit more in their CSA as compared to their MSA. Indianapolis, in particular, adds over 320,000 people in its CSA that are not present in its MSA. That brings Indianapolis' CSA to nearly the same size as Kansas City's and Cincinnati's CSA's, even though Indianapolis' MSA lags Kansas City's and Cincinnati's MSA's by a considerable margin.
Looking at the population numbers more broadly, we can see a few basic themes.
1. The top three are, in order of their population: Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis-St. Paul.
2. There is a considerable gap between Minneapolis-St. Paul at #3 and the #4 spot, which is occupied by St. Louis in the MSA list and Cleveland in the CSA list.
3. Cleveland's CSA is significantly larger than its MSA.
4. Cincinnati, Kansas City, Indianapolis, and Columbus are fairly close in population in both lists, but Cincinnati and Kansas City are ahead of Indianapolis and Columbus in both lists as well.
5. Milwaukee is #10 in both lists.
The question of how to deal with Cleveland is a complicated one. Cleveland's MSA is very small in area, therefore its population is only 2,077,240. This puts Cleveland below Cincinnati in MSA population. But the Greater Cleveland region, which includes the Akron MSA as well as nearby cities like Canton and Youngstown, is much bigger than 2 million. It is really not fair to Cleveland, and it's not even accurate geographically, to compare Cleveland's MSA to the other cities' MSA's. The Akron MSA is undoubtedly part of the Cleveland metro area, even if it is not technically part of Cleveland's MSA. But the Akron MSA is included in the Cleveland CSA, which is why the Cleveland CSA has a population of 2.8 million. I believe that it is more accurate to use the Cleveland CSA number as a proxy for Cleveland's true metro area. The Cleveland MSA number is simply a deceiving number that doesn't really tell you how big the Cleveland metro really is.
More broadly, just using the example of Cleveland's MSA vs. CSA population, it is clear that the CSA population numbers are a better indication of a metro area's true population. Therefore, when ranking these cities, I'm going to give more importance to the CSA population numbers than the MSA population numbers, although I will take both the MSA and CSA numbers into account.
The following is a list of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in current dollars for all ten metro areas, from 2006-2009. For Cleveland, I also included the GDP for the Akron, OH MSA and the GDP for the combined Cleveland-Akron metro.
Since these numbers have fluctuated between 2006 and 2009 due to the economy, I believe that the most fair thing to do to compare the cities' economies to each other is take an average of all four years for each metro area and compare those averages. Each metro area's GDP numbers were added for all four years and divided by four. This is the resulting average GDP for each metro area from 2006-2009, listed in order from highest to lowest:
The following is a list of the Total Personal Income for all ten metro areas, from 2008-2010. For Cleveland, I also included the Total Personal Income for the Akron, OH MSA and the Total Personal Income for the combined Cleveland-Akron metro. Total personal income is the sum of all income of all persons in the metropolitan area.
Just as with the GDP by metropolitan area numbers, I am going to calculate the average Total Personal Income for each metro area for the years 2008-2010. I will do this by adding up all of the totals for each year for each metro area and dividing by three. This is the resulting Average Total Personal Income for each metro area from 2008-2010, listed in order from highest to lowest:
As with the population numbers, the top three metro areas for GDP and Total Personal Income are the same: Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis, in that order. And once again, as with the population numbers, there is a considerable gap between Minneapolis at the #3 position and the #4 position, which is occupied by St. Louis in both the GDP and Total Personal Income categories.
Milwaukee is once again at #10 in both economic categories, just as it was in both population categories.
Cleveland, as was discussed earlier, has a very small MSA area. Therefore, the GDP and Total Personal Income of the Cleveland MSA is smaller than what it should be compared to peer cities like St. Louis. That is why I included the Akron MSA GDP and Total Personal Income and created a combined category for Cleveland-Akron. When looking at the combined Cleveland-Akron category, which has about the same population as the St. Louis metro area, the GDP of the Cleveland-Akron metro is slightly larger than the GDP of the St. Louis metro, but the Total Personal Income of the Cleveland-Akron metro is smaller than the Total Personal Income of the St. Louis metro.
Some people are going to question creating a separate category for Cleveland that includes the Akron MSA. But I already stated the reason for doing that. It is because if you ONLY compare MSA's, it short-changes Cleveland significantly. Adding the Akron MSA to the Cleveland MSA gives a more accurate representation for what the true population of the Cleveland metro really is, and allows one to compare Cleveland's metro area population and economic data to that of other MSA's like St. Louis, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Columbus, all of which have much larger MSA's in geographic area than the Cleveland MSA.
Kansas City's MSA GDP and Total Personal Income is higher than Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Columbus. When looking at the population data earlier, Kansas City was in the middle of the pack between Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Columbus. But the economic data clearly distinguishes Kansas City and puts it a notch ahead of those three other peer cities. Kansas City was already ahead of Indianapolis and Columbus in both MSA and CSA population numbers, but the fact that it is ahead in both GDP and Total Personal Income as well makes it clearly stand out.
Conclusion
So after all of this discussion, after laying out all of the data, we can finally make a determination about how to rank these ten cities one though ten. Remember, there are four criteria: two population metrics and two economic metrics. The four criteria are MSA population, CSA population, GDP by metro area, and Total Personal Income by metro area.
It is obvious that the top three are, in order: Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis-St. Paul. The population and economic data confirms this. This is not up for debate. Chicago is head-and-shoulders above the rest at #1. Detroit, while lagging economically, is still much larger in both its MSA and CSA than Minneapolis, and still has a larger GDP by metro area and a larger Total Personal Income by metro area than Minneapolis. The ONLY statistic here in which Minneapolis beats Detroit is GDP by metro area for the year 2009. For 2006, 2007, and 2008, Detroit had a higher GDP by metro area than Minneapolis. Detroit also had a significantly higher Total Personal Income by metro area for 2008, 2009, and 2010 than Minneapolis. Probably the main reason why Minneapolis had a higher GDP by metro area for the year 2009 was due to the downturn in the auto industry in 2009, which affected Detroit much more than Minneapolis. One year's GDP is not enough to put Minneapolis ahead of Detroit. All the metrics show Detroit being more dominant than Minneapolis.
The #4 position in the ranking is VERY difficult to determine. By MSA, it is St. Louis. By CSA, it is Cleveland. By GDP, it is St. Louis, unless you include the combined Cleveland-Akron metro. If you include the combined Cleveland-Akron metro, then by GDP it is Cleveland. By Total Personal Income, it is St. Louis. Even the combined Cleveland-Akron metro doesn't beat St. Louis in this category.
I said that I would give more importance to CSA population than MSA population, but Cleveland's CSA is only 3,682 people larger than St. Louis' CSA, which is hardly enough to distinguish it. On the economic metrics, they seem to balance each other out. Cleveland-Akron has a larger GDP, but St. Louis has a larger Total Personal Income. The gap between St. Louis' Total Personal Income and Cleveland-Akron's Total Personal Income is $6,910,666. The gap between Cleveland-Akron's GDP and St. Louis' GDP is $6,047,750.
I may also be understating the Cleveland metro area's true GDP and Total Personal Income, because I am only including the Akron MSA with the Cleveland MSA. My data does not include the Ashtabula micropolitan area, which is also part of the Cleveland CSA, and which contributes to the Cleveland economic region. It should also be pointed out that the Greater Northeast Ohio region, which contains not only Cleveland and Akron, but also Canton, Youngstown, and surrounding areas, has a population of over 4 million, which is much larger than the population of the region around St. Louis.
As it pertains to the economic metrics, I believe that the GDP data is more important than the Total Personal Income data. Total Personal Income includes things like investment income and Social Security income. GDP, on the other hand, shows the total economic output of the metropolitan area's goods and services.
Therefore, because the Cleveland CSA is slightly larger than the St. Louis CSA, and because Cleveland-Akron's GDP is larger than St. Louis' GDP, I am going to rank Cleveland as #4 and St. Louis as #5. But no matter what they are ranked, the gap between these two cities is not very large at all.
We already know that #10 is Milwaukee, since Milwaukee was ranked #10 in all four categories. So that leaves Kansas City, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Columbus to fill numbers 6, 7, 8 and 9.
Once again, we find a group of cities that are very close in population and economic numbers. Of these four cities, Cincinnati has the largest MSA and CSA. But Kansas City has the largest GDP and Total Personal Income. #6 is going to be either Cincinnati or Kansas City. But which one?
The gap between the Cincinnati MSA and the Kansas City MSA is only 94,817 residents. The gap between the Cincinnati CSA and the Kansas City CSA is even smaller, at 67,338 residents. Cincinnati beats Kansas City on both counts. But the economic numbers look better for Kansas City. Even though the Kansas City MSA is smaller than the Cincinnati MSA, Kansas City MSA's average GDP from 2006-2009 is $4.8 million larger than Cincinnati's. Kansas City's Average Total Personal Income from 2008-2010 is also larger than Cincinnati's.
Therefore, I am going to rank Kansas City slightly ahead of Cincinnati. If Cincinnati's GDP was the same (or larger) than Kansas City, I would rank Cincinnati ahead of Kansas City. The slightly lower MSA and CSA population of Kansas City relative to Cincinnati is made up for by Kansas City's higher GDP relative to Cincinnati. So Kansas City is #6, and Cincinnati is #7.
That leaves Indianapolis and Columbus to battle for #8 and #9. Amazingly, it is another case of two cities that are almost identical in population and economic numbers. Columbus' MSA is larger than Indianapolis' MSA, but Indianapolis' CSA is larger than Columbus' CSA. Indianapolis' GDP is larger than Columbus' GDP, but Columbus' Total Personal Income is larger than Indianapolis' Total Personal Income. Because I'm giving more importance to CSA population than MSA population (because CSA gives a better representation of a metro area's true population), and more importance to GDP than Total Personal Income (because GDP is a better reflection of the true economic might of a metro area), the edge in this analysis goes to Indianapolis. Indianapolis has a larger CSA and a larger GDP than Columbus. Indianapolis' GDP, in particular, is significantly larger than Columbus' GDP, by about $8 million dollars.
So there it is. The top ten cities in the Midwest ranked by their economic and population influence.
Final Ranking
Top 10 Midwest Cities Ranked by Economic and Population Influence
1. Chicago
2. Detroit
3. Minneapolis-St. Paul
4. Cleveland
5. St. Louis
6. Kansas City
7. Cincinnati
8. Indianapolis
9. Columbus
10. Milwaukee
Fun Factoids
The five cities in the Midwest that have Federal Reserve Banks (Chicago, Minneapolis, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Kansas City) make up five of the top six cities in my list.
The top three cities in my list (Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis-St. Paul) are the only Midwest cities that have sports franchises in all four major sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL).
Good job man! I'm not surprised these ten are the big dogs in the Midwest by any stretch of the imagination though I would have imagined the rankings to be somewhat different in the lower half - though definitely I agree Chicago is the TOP DOG of the region and Detroit and Minneapolis-St. Paul being the other two cities in the top three! And Cleveland and St. Louis filling the last two slots in the Top 5!
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,872,410 times
Reputation: 2501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Around
It's apples & oranges. I-75's 8 lanes are between the northern beltway of Cinci and the southern beltway of Dayton. The 10 miles of I-94 you speak of is within the dense core of the Twin Cities, not the outer burbs and rural areas the 8 laned I-75 traverses. Consider that east west traffic on I-94 can take alternate routes that are about the same length, i.e., 494 and 694, and local traffic is further dispersed on parallel freeways like 36 and 62. No such alternatives to the I-75 stretch.
Okay.....how about Minneapolis to Chicago, hell, Madison to Chicago? I've driven that route oh.....50+ times now and it's RARE if I don't get caught in some congestion, yet it's 2 lanes in each direction 90% of the way outside of the two metro areas (there are 3 lanes in each direction when I-39 joins I-90/94 near Mauston, WI). You could make an argument for expansion along this entire route, and especially between Madison and Chicago, but so far the only expansion is the private toll lanes between Rockford, IL and Chicago, IL.
Same thing for I-94 between Detroit and Chicago, I-55 between St. Louis and Chicago, and I-80/90 between Cleveland and Chicago. SUPER SUPER SUPER congested freeways just like I-75 but most don't have the extra lane (or two) of capacity that I-75 gets.
My thinking is that I-75 is a major NAFTA freeway and they want to ensure that the highest-priority freeways have 0 congestion, so this stretch in particular was expanded well past its current capacity. I realize I-75 has very high traffic volumes, but nothing leaps and bounds higher than the other routes I mentioned.
How hard is it for you to understand Columbus has twice the population of Cleveland in city proper, therefore you bringing up the number of minorities compared to Cleveland means little to nothing?
One more time: There are 2, count them 2, different ways to look at population stats. Either hard numbers or percentages. I have said over and over and over that Cleveland has a larger percentage of minorities for its population. I repeat, CLEVELAND, and NOT COLUMBUS, has a larger PERCENTAGE minority population. Are we clear on this point??? I don't even think we're arguing different things here. I'm not sure what the issue is. I honestly just think you are trying to have an argument with me.
And seeing as you say in the same sentence that Columbus will have more minorities as a percentage as well within a decade, you must be talking about in the city proper, and for that I will laugh at you again.
Cleveland is 67% minority, Columbus is 41% minority. So no, you are wrong. And you also seem to be ignoring the fact that Clevelands minority population is growing fast as well, not quite as fast as Columbus' but it's growing. The reason the Cleveland city/MSA/CSA is losing population is due to the white population leaving in large numbers, the minority population is actually growing in percentage AND number. The black population only saw a large drop in the city, but they are only moving to the surrounding suburbs. For the city, in the 2000 census Cleveland was 61% minority and Columbus was 33% minority. So if that rate stays the same, Cleveland would be 73% minority for the 2020 census and Columbus would be 49% minority, nowhere close.
I was talking about city proper, yes. I'll use the breakdown that the Dispatch/Wiki used for the 2000-2010 Census:
Cleveland 2010
Total Population: 396,815
Population by Race
White: 132,710 or 33.44%
Black: 208,208 or 52.47%
Latino: 39,534 or 9.96%
Asian: 7,213 or 1.82%
Native American/Alaska Native: 997 or 0.25%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 70 or 0.02%
Columbus 2010
Total Population: 787,033
Population by Race
White: 466,615 or 59.29%
Black: 217,694 or 27.66%
Latino: 44,359 or 5.64%
Asian: 31,734 or 4.03%
Native American/Alaska Native: 1,643 or 0.21%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 462 or 0.06%
Columbus 2000
Total Population: 711,470
Population by Race
White: 483,301 or 67.93%
Black: 174,096 or 24.47%
Latino: 17,502 or 2.46%
Asian: 24,474 or 3.44%
Native American/Alaska Native: 2,063 or 0.29%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 355 or 0.05%
Cleveland 2000
Total Population: 478,403
Populatioin by Race
White: 198,510 or 41.49%
Black: 243,939 or 50.99%
Latino: 34,728 or 7.26%
Asian: 6,444 or 1.35%
Native American/Alaska Native: 1,458 or 0.30%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 178 or 0.04%
And Cleveland % change by race 2000-2010
White: -33.15%
Black: -14.65%
Latino: +13.84%
Asian: +11.93%
Native American/Alaska Native: -31.62%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: -60.67%
So you really want to argue that Cleveland's minority population is growing as fast if not faster than Columbus'? Cleveland saw population drops in whites, blacks and all asian islander groups. The latino growth in Cleveland was less than 1/10th of the Columbus rate, and the asian growth was less than half.
Now, if you extended these same percentage increases/decreases out until 2020, here is what they would look like for Cleveland and Columbus assuming the same rates of overall population growth/decline.
Cleveland 2020
Total Population: 329,159
White: 88,717 or 26.95%
Black: 177,706 or 53.99%
Latino: 45,005 or 13.67%
Asian: 8,074 or 2.45%
Native American/Alaska Native: 682 or 0.21%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 28 or 0.01%
Columbus 2020
Total Population: 870,638
White: 450,517 or 51.74%
Black: 270,027 or 31.01%
Latino: 112,427 or 12.91%
Asian: 41,146 or 4.73%
Native American/Alaska Native: 1,309 or 0.15%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 601 or 0.07%
So what it looks like to me is that I'm just a bit too fast on the time frame. If everything stayed the same, Columbus would pass Cleveland in percentage of latinos by 2021-2022 instead of 2020, and like now, already would have more asians, islanders, and whites. The only reason Cleveland's percentages stay up in minorities is because the overall population is dropping, and that ends up giving a greater percentage. The black population is a good example of that. Even though it is also falling, the % of population goes up because it's not shrinking as fast as say, the white population. This is not exactly something to make headlines over and actually indicates a completely different (and negative) dynamic than Columbus. So yes, in 2020, a larger percentage of Cleveland's overall population will be minority, but only because the overall population continues to crash. So it looks like we both had valid points, but I'd sure as hell rather be in Columbus' shoes on this one.
LOL, it's hilarious seeing you arguing with his post. He was using your own method to prove you wrong. So only you can use it when it benefits you?
What's hilarious is that I never argued that way. You are the one who went apesh*t over something I never did.
He's been twisting 1 stat to make Columbus look more diverse. Saying that Columbus has more minorities because it has a few thousand more Blacks and Hispanics in the city proper, when Columbus has double the population of Cleveland in the city proper, lol. That's not the correct way to compare, and every way you look at it Cleveland is more diverse.
No, actually I didn't say Columbus was more diverse. Yes I said that, in sheer numbers, Columbus is ahead. I also said that Cleveland comes out better in percentages. I ask again, how the f*ck is that controversial? Again, this seems to be just you trying to start something from nothing.
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA (MSA) 61666
Madison, WI (MSA) 55612 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI (MSA) 52974
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN (MSA) 50471 Cedar Rapids, IA (MSA) 48342 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI (MSA) 48256 Bloomington-Normal, IL (MSA) 48144 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI (MSA) 47973 Columbus, IN (MSA) 46050 Columbus, OH (MSA) 45963
Kansas City, MO-KS (MSA) 45542 Rochester, MN (MSA) 44309
Iowa City, IA (MSA) 43634
Green Bay, WI (MSA) 42476
Decatur, IL (MSA) 42363 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (MSA) 40829
Oshkosh-Neenah, WI (MSA) 40645
Peoria, IL (MSA) 40348
Springfield, IL (MSA) 40234
Evansville, IN-KY (MSA) 39977 St. Louis, MO-IL (MSA) 39631
Dubuque, IA (MSA) 39552
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL (MSA) 39188
Sioux City, IA-NE-SD (MSA) 39132
Ames, IA (MSA) 39130 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI (MSA) 38497
Elkhart-Goshen, IN (MSA) 38073
Fort Wayne, IN (MSA) 37613
Sheboygan, WI (MSA) 37001
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI (MSA) 36840
La Crosse, WI-MN (MSA) 36424
St. Cloud, MN (MSA) 36087
Wausau, WI (MSA) 35921
Lansing-East Lansing, MI (MSA) 35845
Dayton, OH (MSA) 35729
Lima, OH (MSA) 35171
Champaign-Urbana, IL (MSA) 35167
Columbia, MO (MSA) 35063
Lafayette, IN (MSA) 34790
Akron, OH (MSA) 34644
Jefferson City, MO (MSA) 34534
Toledo, OH (MSA) 34125
Sandusky, OH (MSA) 33184
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI (MSA) 33169
Kokomo, IN (MSA) 32597
Kalamazoo-Portage, MI (MSA) 31817
Battle Creek, MI (MSA) 31294
St. Joseph, MO-KS (MSA) 29932
Duluth, MN-WI (MSA) 29789
Bloomington, IN (MSA) 29725
Niles-Benton Harbor, MI (MSA) 29322
Rockford, IL (MSA) 29307
Holland-Grand Haven, MI (MSA) 28842
Terre Haute, IN (MSA) 28652
Racine, WI (MSA) 27960
Canton-Massillon, OH (MSA) 27875
Joplin, MO (MSA) 27818
Mansfield, OH (MSA) 27293
Janesville, WI (MSA) 27246
Michigan City-La Porte, IN (MSA) 27037
Danville, IL (MSA) 26854
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV (MSA) 26725
Muncie, IN (MSA) 25739
Jackson, MI (MSA) 25589
Kankakee-Bradley, IL (MSA) 24074
Flint, MI (MSA) 23642
Bay City, MI (MSA) 23441
Springfield, OH (MSA) 23336
Monroe, MI (MSA) 20387
A bunch of people I grew up with moved to Des Moines after school. It's pretty crazy the standard of living you can get there right out of school in your early to mid 20's. I have friends with crazy ass houses, tons of toys and they go on vacation multiple times a year - and they're like 25 years old.
It's a white collar city with a lot of finance and insurance jobs, but you can still score a cute little starter home for $200K
Last edited by Chicago60614; 08-25-2011 at 06:01 PM..
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,872,410 times
Reputation: 2501
That "cute little starter home" picture CAN'T be $200K, right? That looked like a "new" Victorian or something! I wonder if GDP per population is a decent measure of quality of life, or "bang for your buck"??
BTW, as an-almost 30 year old finance dude I ENVY people my age/younger who can go on vacation at all -- let alone several times a year! Last time I had a real vacation was my honeymoon!!
That "cute little starter home" picture CAN'T be $200K, right? That looked like a "new" Victorian or something! I wonder if GDP per population is a decent measure of quality of life, or "bang for your buck"??
BTW, as an-almost 30 year old finance dude I ENVY people my age/younger who can go on vacation at all -- let alone several times a year! Last time I had a real vacation was my honeymoon!!
It's a 3 bedroom, 3 bath restored Victorian in a northern suburb of Des Moines on the market for $205,000. I live in Chicago and it kills me what you can get there as far as housing prices - especially since the professional wages in Des Moines are actually really nice. It was listed as the #1 "bang for your buck" city in the country as far as how much you earn compared to how much things cost.
Greater Des Moines Ranks #1 Best City for Young Professionals - Forbes, July 2011
Des Moines ranks #2 Best Place for Business. - Forbes, June 2011
Des Moines is the #1 richest metro in the nation. - US News & World Report, June 2011
Des Moines is the #1 city in the US for home renters. - Time Magazine, June 2011
Iowa ranks #9 for best state for business. - CNBC, June 2011
Des Moines is the #4 city in the nation for doing business. - MarketWatch
Des Moines ranks in the top 10 "Best Cities for the Next Decade." - Kiplinger
Des Moines ranks #5 for best cities for families. Based on great schools, affordable homes, low crime rates, jobs, and parkland. - Parenting Magazine, June 2011
Des Moines ranks #1 as the "Best Place for Business and Careers." – Forbes 2010
Des Moines is one of the 20 strongest-performing metro areas. - Brookings
Des Moines living costs are 10 percent below the national average.
- The Council for Community and Economic Research
Growing up near there in the 1980's and 1990's it still dumbfounds me how the city has done a total 180 in the past 20 years. It went from a "whatever" nice little city to a pretty underrated and overlooked powerhouse as far as standards of living and quality of life. It's no wonder that in the past 20 years the Des Moines/Ames and Iowa City/Cedar Rapids areas (they're basically Des Moines version 2.0 as far as quality and opportunities) have gained 275,000, while the entire state of Iowa has only grown by 270,000. They're really consolidating their power within the state.
It's right near the top in the country of total downtown employment base compared to metro population. Over 85,000 people work downtown.
Last edited by Chicago60614; 08-25-2011 at 08:11 PM..
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,872,410 times
Reputation: 2501
^This is why I (and many many others) see Des Moines as one of the up-and-coming cities of this decade, and one of the major growth centers of the country (in its size category). Some include:
Souix Falls, SD
Des Moines, IA
Omaha, NE
Rochester, MN
Madison, WI
Fargo, ND
Tulsa, OK
Boise, ID
KC. A lot of potential, decent economy, good bones, not as cold as Mpls, good QOL unlike Chicago, more to do than Cbus or Indy.
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.
