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.
Those growth rates are pathetic. You straight people need to start having more babies and we need to relax our immigration policies if we want to see this kind of the growth ever again:
I agree about relaxing out immigration policies but Im thrilled people are having less kids. Climate changes is a pressing issue and the number one thing we can all do to help solve it is have less children.
Agreed. I am highly, HIGHLY skeptical DC is anywhere near 684k. Its most likely in the range of 710-730k. Nothing adds up.. migration trends, apartment vacancy levels, new construction, etc
Could be possible it's a combination of people leaving SE DC and smaller household sizes. People thought Atlanta city proper grew a lot between 2000-2010, but it didn't because so many black residents left the west and south sides of the city.
Could be possible it's a combination of people leaving SE DC and smaller household sizes. People thought Atlanta city proper grew a lot between 2000-2010, but it didn't because so many black residents left the west and south sides of the city.
Is that what happened with Dallas? It surprised me seeing that it only grew 0.8% between 2000 and 2010, and Dallas doesn't have anywhere near the black population of Atlanta (maybe also white flight?)
Is that what happened with Dallas? It surprised me seeing that it only grew 0.8% between 2000 and 2010, and Dallas doesn't have anywhere near the black population of Atlanta (maybe also white flight?)
I know that’s what happened with Houston. In 2010, people thought the inner loop population with all the new apartments and such would surge to around 540k. When the census came out, it was only 469k. Interesting that the Houston city government always thought this would be the population of this section of Houston in 2010. I think more people need to pay attention to the local government population figures whether it is city or metro. It’s far more in line with census than people think.
For DC, I can see that happening. Many people still moved out of DC and into Maryland and Virginia. Those apartments are not all filled up yet. I still think of the sue and win, a population of closer to if not above 700k would be more correct.
Could be possible it's a combination of people leaving SE DC and smaller household sizes. People thought Atlanta city proper grew a lot between 2000-2010, but it didn't because so many black residents left the west and south sides of the city.
I also remember the census far underestimating how far Detroit city proper declined in that same time span. The 2009 estimate was 912k, then the official 2010 count found 713k residents living in the city.
Those growth rates are pathetic. You straight people need to start having more babies and we need to relax our immigration policies if we want to see this kind of the growth ever again:
California 1980-1990
Population Growth: +6,092,257
Population Growth Rate: +25.74%
Change in Congressional Seats: +7
CA growth was extremely strong from about 1950 to 1990. The 70’s and 80’s especially. 90’s were so-so and the 21st century has been lackluster. I think it is obvious why. Too crowded. Too expensive.
I also remember the census far underestimating how far Detroit city proper declined in that same time span. The 2009 estimate was 912k, then the official 2010 count found 713k residents living in the city.
It will be interesting to see what 2020 found.
It also coincided with the great recession which impacted Detroit and cities like it much deeper than their models would have considered. Conversely the 1990's were an economic boom for Michigan and Detroit's estimates in 1999 were lower than what the 2000 official census showed. The 2010s were again much kinder on Michigan(and certainly Detroit proper) than the 2000s were, it will definitely be interesting if the same phenomena follows the census estimates again.
Agreed. I am highly, HIGHLY skeptical DC is anywhere near 684k. Its most likely in the range of 710-730k. Nothing adds up.. migration trends, apartment vacancy levels, new construction, etc
I think most cities will take the 2020 census numbers with a grain of salt for a multitude of reason. The only real data anyone can use for accuracy in this digital climate is new housing construction, total housing units in your city, and vacancy rates. Household size is a really unscientific calculation that is impossible to use because of the inaccuracy of the numbers. You can't guess that and most minorities don't respond to the census. That is the case for all major cities in the country.
Looking at D.C. proper, here are the new net housing units delivered in the city by year:
Housing Unit Deliveries
2010: 1,909 units
2011: 1,943 units
2012: 3,925 units
2013: 4,545 units
2014: 6,309 units
2015: 3,355 units
2016: 5,682 units
2017: 7,035 units
2018: 6,135 units
2019: 6,044 units
2020: 9,150 units
Under Construction
Anticipated 2021 Deliveries: 6,724 units
Anticipated 2022 Deliveries: 6,596 units
DC is actually speeding up in development deals so the financial and capital markets must know something. The only way to actually grow a city (based on what we on city-data.com actually care about) is new construction which represent actual adults walking around the street, eating at restaurants, and adding to the vibrancy of your city. Births don't change a city at street level.
CA growth was extremely strong from about 1950 to 1990. The 70’s and 80’s especially. 90’s were so-so and the 21st century has been lackluster. I think it is obvious why. Too crowded. Too expensive.
Since 1980 California had gained 15M plus people but the black portion of that dropped from 8% to 5.5%.
The changes are even more shocking when you look at percentage losses from the major cities in California to other parts of California. For the Bay for example the black losses since the 80s near 50%.
Black people hear how diverse the Bay is and they get there and then ask where are the black folks?
Since 1980 California had gained 15M plus people but the black portion of that dropped from 8% to 5.5%.
The changes are even more shocking when you look at percentage losses from the major cities in California to other parts of California. For the Bay for example the black losses since the 80s near 50%.
Black people hear how diverse the Bay is and they get there and then ask where are the black folks?
In the East and somewhat the North Bay portions of the area. Some have moved further inland to Solano County as well.
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.
