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.
The thing is it does matter. Because let say you are a planning commission in Massachusetts.
If you draw a straight line from the 2013 estimates to the 2022 estimates for about 8 years things are been plodding along at a pretty consistent pace (ignoring the actual census
If you take the census as true then you were seeing really robust growth that slammed to a halt and reverse between 2020 and 2022.
So whether or now Massachusetts population was 7,029,000 in April 2020 and went down 50,000 or it’s population was 6,870,000 in 2020 (according to their post census adjustment) and is now 6,982,000 or up 112,000 makes a difference. Since the latter is just roughly continuing the trend of the 2010s
This goes away if the annual growth is 2.5x higher last decade than this decade that error is lost in the overall trend. Not so anymore
But while the census matters for Congress and federal funding (and therefore is the primary source over estimates and over/under-counting), Massachusetts will have their own internal data driving their decision-making. Private businesses won’t be making decisions based solely on raw government data. It’s all fascinating, but life goes on regardless.
The city of Atlanta had one of the worst estimates in 2009 leading to lots of angry people when the census came out. What happened was complicated, but in essence Fulton county demographers pushed back on mid-decade census estimates with an array of stats like building permits and mobile home sales and dorm headcounts. The census took that in as evidence at face value (most challenges to estimates were routinely accepted) and their next estimate went up 90,000. But when the 2010 did their census count, they found both household size had shrunk from 2000, but also the vacancy rate had skyrocketed. The 2009 estimate for the city was off over 20%. The original mid-decade estimate was actually close to capturing the slowing population, but the challenges forced the estimates up.
All that drama, and the trajectory of the Atlanta metro remained growing. Slower than the 90s, faster than most other major metros. Whatever will be will be, so take the census numbers, estimates, revisions, whatever as simply an imperfect piece of the puzzle that makes more sense with time and the awareness of all the other things that make a metro healthy:
Biggest surprises on this map for me are Eastern TN, the FL Panhandle, and apparently all of DE getting lots of people. I guess it’s also surprising how IL didn’t gain at all in comparison to its neighbors.
I guess it’s also surprising how IL didn’t gain at all in comparison to its neighbors.
This has been happening for a while now --- if anything I'm more surprised at the sharp turn toward negative growth Indy and Columbus have taken over the past couple years.
I also wonder what's up with southwest Oregon (Medford, Ashland, Grants Pass, etc.) It has all the characteristics of a place that would be growing right now: rural, beautiful scenery, low cost of living (at least by western standards), not in a high-tax state (like CA to the south). What's going on there?
This has been happening for a while now --- if anything I'm more surprised at the sharp turn toward negative growth Indy and Columbus have taken over the past couple years.
Urban counties all across the country have had weak growth or decline in the most recent estimates. Their loss is being offset by the growth of outlying counties in the same metro areas, which are still outperforming most others in the Midwest region.
I think much, if not most, out-migration from large urban counties can be at least somewhat attributed to one major factor: the lack of sufficient affordable housing, or generally higher COL compared to outlying counties within metro areas.
That's the most plausible explanation when you see negative domestic migration even in places like Indianapolis and Columbus core counties.
I think much, if not most, out-migration from large urban counties can be at least somewhat attributed to one major factor: the lack of sufficient affordable housing, or generally higher COL compared to outlying counties within metro areas.
That's the most plausible explanation when you see negative domestic migration even in places like Indianapolis and Columbus core counties.
One thing that changed significantly is even as late as last year a lot of places were closing at like 10pm even after COVID restrictions were lifted.
There was a big drop in the social usefulness of living in center cities. They were not worth he premium.
I was a bit curious about media markets so I calculated based off some old maps (Couldn't find a newer map with counties easily listed; that said, the markets haven't really changed too much from what I can tell).
These "media markets" are a joke. Literally, every house in the USA is in one of these markets. Some are exactly coterminous with a single county, like Victoria. Others, Traversse Cty, center on a town of 25k and sprawl over half a state. They were defined as areas reached by local Tv station allotments.
These "media markets" are a joke. Literally, every house in the USA is in one of these markets. Some are exactly coterminous with a single county, like Victoria. Others, Traversse Cty, center on a town of 25k and sprawl over half a state. They were defined as areas reached by local Tv station allotments.
That's the point. Every house is counted (other than parts of Alaska). It's more about social reach of a location. Despite becoming more and more urban, the US still has a sizeable rural population, and normal statistical areas don't really reflect the weight they can have. Paducah is a micropolitan area, but it has a media market of almost a million because it represents a highly rural area. If you have a business catering to rural needs, it's a great location because its reach still hits a large population, unlike Bozeman which is also rural, but a much lower population.
Similarly, Mobile and Pensacola don't have the commuter traffic that would merge the metros, but they're close enough that they share some market services, and there's a notable interconnectedness that's missed by normal statistical areas. There aren't any major metros on the gulf coast between New Orleans and Tampa, but Mobile-Pensacola together service an area about on par with New Orleans. If looking at the Alabama metros, Mobile and Huntsville aren't that much bigger than Montgomery when looking at MSAs. CSAs sorta hint how far behind Montgomery is, but media markets show how much it really lags in real life feel. Montgomery just doesn't have the tag team with any major areas around it. Mobile has Baldwin County (CSA) and Pensacola. Huntsville has Decatur (CSA), the Shoals and NE Alabama. Birmingham has Talladega (CSA), Tuscaloosa, Anniston and Gadsden. Selma just doesn't compare (And Alexander City isn't the most loyal of buddies. Birmingham actually took it into its CSA for a year). Cities like Savannah or Roanoke look tiny statistical area-wise in comparison to how they feel like they should be, but media markets better reflect their influence.
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.
