U.S. Census reduces Pittsburgh region's latest population estimate (Washington: real estate, lofts)

[rickms]

What bothers me is that we have been eclipsed by Tulsa and Wichita! Does it really matter how big Pittsburgh is,

Pittsburgh is what 55 square miles?

Tulsa is about 200 and Wichita is +160

City populations much be looked at in context of their political boundaries...

[trackstar13]

Originally Posted by rickms

Pittsburgh is what 55 square miles?

Tulsa is about 200 and Wichita is +160

City populations much be looked at in context of their political boundaries...

Sounds great, can you convince the media and general public to only compare city populations by city boundary? Houston is over 600 square miles, yet the media and general public like to compare it to Chicago (234 square miles) and Philadelphia (142 square miles). I recently read an article about how Houston may surpass Chicago in population because Chicago's population continues to decline. Of course the article was ridiculous as Chicago is geographically much smaller than Houston and Houston is nowhere close to surpassing Chicago in population anytime soon, but the media loves to cover the "doom and gloom."

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

I'm inclined to agree. However, MOST Americans look at a city and think "population growth = city must be doing something right" vs. "population decline = city must be doing something wrong".

If Pittsburgh is going to continue to lose overall population, but the population that remains will be progressively higher-earning and better-educated via gentrification, then is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Probably both. For one thing, I have a problem with the idea of "better" people living in Pittsburgh or any city. For another, federal funding is often based on population, so more people is inherently better by that metric. OTOH, people who can pay more taxes to the city and spend more money in the city is a good thing.

Originally Posted by xdv8

Explain why anyone other than Pittsburghers or Columbus and Colorado trolls care about the population dropping below 300k?

Did you two have someone in mind?

[pwduvall]

Hi Pittsburgh. Just checking from Baltimore in regarding population loss. I took some time to analyze Baltimore's 2016 population loss by Zip Code and determined that the areas losing large amount of population aren't generally its well documented slums. Instead, the losses are in lower middle class and not unusually troubled areas. The slummy areas did have some very modest losses. Thriving areas near the Johns Hopkins University campus had nearly 10% yearly declines. It was also interesting that fast growing (in terms of new apartment buildings) harbor adjacent areas are showing very little population growth. All in all, I am puzzled by the population loss statistics in Baltimore. I wouldn't be surprised if Pittsburgh also has some counter intuitive patterns.

In general, it seems that Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis are all in a strange pattern where resident incomes are growing at surprising rates while population losses are showing cities in a downward spiral.

[ColdAilment]

Why are people always making excuses for Pittsburgh's population loss? I keep hearing it's going to increase next year, and every year it's lost people. Pittsburgh defenders are very adamant about their population, more so than almost any other city

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by pwduvall

Hi Pittsburgh. Just checking from Baltimore in regarding population loss. I took some time to analyze Baltimore's 2016 population loss by Zip Code and determined that the areas losing large amount of population aren't generally its well documented slums. Instead, the losses are in lower middle class and not unusually troubled areas. The slummy areas did have some very modest losses. Thriving areas near the Johns Hopkins University campus had nearly 10% yearly declines. It was also interesting that fast growing (in terms of new apartment buildings) harbor adjacent areas are showing very little population growth. All in all, I am puzzled by the population loss statistics in Baltimore. I wouldn't be surprised if Pittsburgh also has some counter intuitive patterns.

In general, it seems that Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis are all in a strange pattern where resident incomes are growing at surprising rates while population losses are showing cities in a downward spiral.

When I looked at the Pittsburgh numbers by census tract, I concluded they were total garbage when you drilled down that far. I mean, I saw things like population increases in historically blighted neighborhoods like the Hill District, yet 20%+ projected declines in Oakland (which has seen substantial new construction, and IIRC hasn't lost population since the 1960s).

The bottom line is the numbers were ridiculous for Pittsburgh, so I'm not bothering to analyze them. I'm guessing the same is true for Baltimore.

[gladhands]

Originally Posted by ColdAilment

Why are people always making excuses for Pittsburgh's population loss? I keep hearing it's going to increase next year, and every year it's lost people. Pittsburgh defenders are very adamant about their population, more so than almost any other city

I couldn’t care less about the population of Pittsburgh, but I also place very little faith in census estimates. I’ll discuss population numbers when the results of the 2020 census are in.

[Mtl-Cns]

Originally Posted by ColdAilment

Why are people always making excuses for Pittsburgh's population loss? I keep hearing it's going to increase next year, and every year it's lost people. Pittsburgh defenders are very adamant about their population, more so than almost any other city

What kind of nightmare are you stuck living in where you are "always" hearing excuses and "keep hearing" the population of Pittsburgh is going to increase? You need a new job, new hobbies, new friends or something if this discussion plagues your existence so.

Anyway Pittsburgh is a great city and doesn't need "defenders," as you say and count me in on the list of resident posters who couldn't care less about population.

[ColdAilment]

Originally Posted by gladhands

I couldn’t care less about the population of Pittsburgh, but I also place very little faith in census estimates. I’ll discuss population numbers when the results of the 2020 census are in.

People on this same forum were saying what you're saying now just before the 2010 census, where the city lost 29,000 people over 10 years. Maybe you're right, but it sure isn't looking that way.

[ColdAilment]

Originally Posted by Mtl-Cns

What kind of nightmare are you stuck living in where you are "always" hearing excuses and "keep hearing" the population of Pittsburgh is going to increase? You need a new job, new hobbies, new friends or something if this discussion plagues your existence so.

Anyway Pittsburgh is a great city and doesn't need "defenders," as you say and count me in on the list of resident posters who couldn't care less about population.

You seem pretty offended by my remark. Half the comments on this thread are excuses for the city's loss in population, have you been reading the comments at all???