U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2022, 05:59 AM
 
1,020 posts, read 336,333 times
Reputation: 1112

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus View Post
Your figures include foreign imigrants, so do not accurately depict what SF residents are doing.

The best way is to look at domestic migration only, then find ot why they are leaving, or arriving.

I miss what San Fran once was, & that comes from my heart....believe what you want...I can't change that.

I've already said the word "exodus" doesn't describe the steady domestic immigration outflows....take a deep breath....relax.
I'm very relaxed. Poking holes in flawed arguments actually does that for me, despite your continual efforts to try and recharacterize the conversation and imply a doom and gloom scenario.

2nd verse same as the first. Run for the hills... it's an exodus....people are leaving in droves. You guys never give up

Last edited by blameyourself; 11-21-2022 at 06:43 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2022, 08:13 AM
 
Location: Unplugged from the matrix
4,571 posts, read 2,418,871 times
Reputation: 4817
you havent poked holes in the people are leaving argument at all. the data is there for everyone to see. It's disingenuous to post just the overall metro pop and say "see look some growth". just be honest about it. seems like many of the things people were saying anecdotally about neighbors/coworkers leaving, etc., is turning out to be true based on the hard numbers coming out. there were many denying it was happening, and even with census data now to back it up, are still denying.

Again, have folks here never heard of labor and delivery units? That used to be the only way California grew because the international immigration was cancelled out by the domestic out migration. Now with the sharp birth decline in CA (along with rising deaths), the state is now losing people overall. You would think people would be happy about this with the way they talk about traffic and too many people everywhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus View Post
Your figures include foreign imigrants, so do not accurately depict what SF residents are doing.

The best way is to look at domestic migration only, then find ot why they are leaving, or arriving.

I miss what San Fran once was, & that comes from my heart....believe what you want...I can't change that.

I've already said the word "exodus" doesn't describe the steady domestic immigration outflows....take a deep breath....relax.
The definition of exodus is just a mass departure of people. There is no number on it. So 100,000k+ people leaving from one metro area in one year can be seen as an exodus. It's a strong word that has folks in their feelings but it is what it is. A steady stream of people leaving is just another way of saying exodus.

Last edited by DabOnEm; 11-21-2022 at 08:22 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2022, 01:47 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,518 posts, read 30,524,380 times
Reputation: 12753
Quote:
Originally Posted by blameyourself View Post
Yawn. Your quote talks about the last 5 years so clearly it's hogwash. Yeah it does matter who's buying homes because lower and middle income earners aren't buying million+ dollar homes.

Same question posed to you since you're dancing now. How is it that the population of CA is still at 39 million and according to you, there have been no change in the amount of rich people but lower and middle income people have left? Maybe you should email Hans?

Blogs, op eds, and pretty little charts that make no sense (but people believe them anyway).
Why does it matter who's buying these homes? It doesn't change the data. Are you trying to use this weak angle to dismiss the data or something?

I literally just answered that question in the last paragraph of my previous post; international immigration. Do you not make it to the end of posts and articles? Probably births over deaths as well.

I never posted a blog or op-ed. The chart makes sense if you understand it, seeing as you seem to forget about international immigration and natural increase perhaps that's why you're having such a tough time with it?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 04:55 AM
 
Location: Unplugged from the matrix
4,571 posts, read 2,418,871 times
Reputation: 4817
lets take a look at the numbers broken out since 2010 for the SF-Oak MSA. all data is coming from the census:

2010 population: 4,335,391
2021 population: 4,623,264
change: +287,873

but of course, that doesn't tell the whole story. breaking the numbers down some more since 2010 by first looking at migration:

international immigration: 277,680
domestic migration: -178,276
change: +49,404

and all of that positive domestic migration came during the ground floor of the most recent tech boom between 2011-2015.

next let's look at natural increase (births minus deaths):

births: 534,644
deaths: 319,177
change: +215,467

as we can see, clearly natural increase is why the Bay Area is growing. International immigration assists barely but has dropped like a rock (and the Bay's share of the international immigration is less now than it was in 2010...so despite the overall nationwide drop in immigration) and domestic migration is negative still.

numbers are worse for the San Jose MSA:

2010 population: 1,836,911
2021 population: 1,952,185
change: +115,274

international immigration: 151,032
domestic migration: -185,483
change: -34,451

births: 246,157
deaths: 109,959
change: +136,198

SF-Oak: https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/p...Berkeley%2C_CA
San Jose: https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/p...ta_Clara%2C_CA

hopefully this false notion of so many people moving to California dies down because that isn't the case at all and hasn't been since the 80s. what is happening is native Californians are growing up. right now we're seeing the Zoomers (Gen Z) become adults and they need places to live.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 04:44 PM
 
Location: California
1,235 posts, read 795,883 times
Reputation: 1939
Quote:
Originally Posted by DabOnEm View Post
lets take a look at the numbers broken out since 2010 for the SF-Oak MSA. all data is coming from the census:

2010 population: 4,335,391
2021 population: 4,623,264
change: +287,873

but of course, that doesn't tell the whole story. breaking the numbers down some more since 2010 by first looking at migration:

international immigration: 277,680
domestic migration: -178,276
change: +49,404

and all of that positive domestic migration came during the ground floor of the most recent tech boom between 2011-2015.

next let's look at natural increase (births minus deaths):

births: 534,644
deaths: 319,177
change: +215,467

as we can see, clearly natural increase is why the Bay Area is growing. International immigration assists barely but has dropped like a rock (and the Bay's share of the international immigration is less now than it was in 2010...so despite the overall nationwide drop in immigration) and domestic migration is negative still.

numbers are worse for the San Jose MSA:

2010 population: 1,836,911
2021 population: 1,952,185
change: +115,274

international immigration: 151,032
domestic migration: -185,483
change: -34,451

births: 246,157
deaths: 109,959
change: +136,198

SF-Oak: https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/p...Berkeley%2C_CA
San Jose: https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/p...ta_Clara%2C_CA

hopefully this false notion of so many people moving to California dies down because that isn't the case at all and hasn't been since the 80s. what is happening is native Californians are growing up. right now we're seeing the Zoomers (Gen Z) become adults and they need places to live.
For what its worth during the pandemic most of our office staff ranging from software engineers to accountants, HR etc went remote. A lot of them immediately left the area and moved to other parts of the state (usually less locked down parts with open public schools) or left the state outright.

Some had to return and are back though many just relocated permanently and quit. Others were given exemptions.

I had to work the entire time as an essential worker. I wanted to leave but family ties, a high salary, owning a house etc kept me here.

I'm not sure the Bay is going to have more drops in overall population like during the pandemic for a while. But I expect population growth to slow to a crawl far below other states and regions of the state. It's basically untenable to live here if you don't make 100k+ as a single person and 200k+ as a family. And even if you pass the first income test school quality, traffic, crowdedness is still a problem for most. Though admittedly there's excellent weather and top employers to lure people in--though primarily younger people come and leave when they start families.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 08:17 PM
 
1,020 posts, read 336,333 times
Reputation: 1112
I see the cast of characters are still at it with their dishonest information (no need to waste any time on them).

For those that care, the last Census was in 2020 (there are estimates for 2021)

San Francisco population 2010 805,235
San Francisco population 2020 873,965
The estimate for 2021 is 815, 201

Both numbers of course are higher than 2010

Other nearby areas:

San Jose population 2010 945,942
San Jose population 2020 1,013,240

San Mateo population 2010 97,207
San Mateo population 2020 105,661

The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2010 is 1,848,384
The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2020 is 1,992,866

Even the combined estimates for 2021 are higher than 2010 at 1,900,890

The Bay Area population estimates were already listed in a previous post.

At some point, perhaps there will be an honest conversation and the fake 'exodus' nothing burger posts will cease. Admittedly I doubt it as people seem to want to continue with their disingenuous arguments with the main purpose to disparage.

Obviously no one should waste their time taking any of their arguments as gospel because most are dishonest and it's very easy to check the actual numbers.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...ycalifornia,US

If any of them truly wanted to help, rather than post their disingenuous information, they could actually work to find a solution on how to reduce population in the Bay Area and the state which simply don't seem to ever drop by any significant numbers. It would also be helpful to figure out a way to stop all these businesses from coming in since the standard conservative talking point claiming business are running for the hills because of all the taxes appears to be hogwash since it's not stopping anyone from coming in. Most people don't give a damn about outflows only. That has no impact on traffic, infrastructure, housing prices, etc. if they're merely being replaced. California will always have more outflows because they have significantly more people (it's simply a dumb argument and not breaking news as this has been going on for decades). Most people understand this.

Last edited by blameyourself; 11-22-2022 at 08:35 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 09:51 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,518 posts, read 30,524,380 times
Reputation: 12753
Quote:
Originally Posted by blameyourself View Post
I see the cast of characters are still at it with their dishonest information (no need to waste any time on them).

For those that care, the last Census was in 2020 (there are estimates for 2021)

San Francisco population 2010 805,235
San Francisco population 2020 873,965
The estimate for 2021 is 815, 201

Both numbers of course are higher than 2010

Other nearby areas:

San Jose population 2010 945,942
San Jose population 2020 1,013,240

San Mateo population 2010 97,207
San Mateo population 2020 105,661

The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2010 is 1,848,384
The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2020 is 1,992,866

Even the combined estimates for 2021 are higher than 2010 at 1,900,890

The Bay Area population estimates were already listed in a previous post.

At some point, perhaps there will be an honest conversation and the fake 'exodus' nothing burger posts will cease. Admittedly I doubt it as people seem to want to continue with their disingenuous arguments with the main purpose to disparage.

Obviously no one should waste their time taking any of their arguments as gospel because most are dishonest and it's very easy to check the actual numbers.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...ycalifornia,US

If any of them truly wanted to help, rather than post their disingenuous information, they could actually work to find a solution on how to reduce population in the Bay Area and the state which simply don't seem to ever drop by any significant numbers. It would also be helpful to figure out a way to stop all these businesses from coming in since the standard conservative talking point claiming business are running for the hills because of all the taxes appears to be hogwash since it's not stopping anyone from coming in. Most people don't give a damn about outflows only. That has no impact on traffic, infrastructure, housing prices, etc. if they're merely being replaced. California will always have more outflows because they have significantly more people (it's simply a dumb argument and not breaking news as this has been going on for decades). Most people understand this.
So you agree it's births and international immigration driving population growth in CA correct?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Unplugged from the matrix
4,571 posts, read 2,418,871 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by blameyourself View Post
I see the cast of characters are still at it with their dishonest information (no need to waste any time on them).

For those that care, the last Census was in 2020 (there are estimates for 2021)

San Francisco population 2010 805,235
San Francisco population 2020 873,965
The estimate for 2021 is 815, 201

Both numbers of course are higher than 2010

Other nearby areas:

San Jose population 2010 945,942
San Jose population 2020 1,013,240

San Mateo population 2010 97,207
San Mateo population 2020 105,661

The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2010 is 1,848,384
The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2020 is 1,992,866

Even the combined estimates for 2021 are higher than 2010 at 1,900,890

The Bay Area population estimates were already listed in a previous post.

At some point, perhaps there will be an honest conversation and the fake 'exodus' nothing burger posts will cease. Admittedly I doubt it as people seem to want to continue with their disingenuous arguments with the main purpose to disparage.

Obviously no one should waste their time taking any of their arguments as gospel because most are dishonest and it's very easy to check the actual numbers.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...ycalifornia,US

If any of them truly wanted to help, rather than post their disingenuous information, they could actually work to find a solution on how to reduce population in the Bay Area and the state which simply don't seem to ever drop by any significant numbers. It would also be helpful to figure out a way to stop all these businesses from coming in since the standard conservative talking point claiming business are running for the hills because of all the taxes appears to be hogwash since it's not stopping anyone from coming in. Most people don't give a damn about outflows only. That has no impact on traffic, infrastructure, housing prices, etc. if they're merely being replaced. California will always have more outflows because they have significantly more people (it's simply a dumb argument and not breaking news as this has been going on for decades). Most people understand this.
You are really cherry picking numbers here by including only the city limits of SF and SJ and then just one suburban county in San Mateo County. Why not just use the entire MSA or CSA? I understand why you are calling the census data I posted "dishonest" and thats because it blows up your entire argument.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2022, 10:19 PM
 
Location: California
1,235 posts, read 795,883 times
Reputation: 1939
Quote:
Originally Posted by blameyourself View Post
I see the cast of characters are still at it with their dishonest information (no need to waste any time on them).

For those that care, the last Census was in 2020 (there are estimates for 2021)

San Francisco population 2010 805,235
San Francisco population 2020 873,965
The estimate for 2021 is 815, 201

Both numbers of course are higher than 2010

Other nearby areas:

San Jose population 2010 945,942
San Jose population 2020 1,013,240

San Mateo population 2010 97,207
San Mateo population 2020 105,661

The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2010 is 1,848,384
The combined population estimates for all three areas for 2020 is 1,992,866

Even the combined estimates for 2021 are higher than 2010 at 1,900,890

The Bay Area population estimates were already listed in a previous post.

At some point, perhaps there will be an honest conversation and the fake 'exodus' nothing burger posts will cease. Admittedly I doubt it as people seem to want to continue with their disingenuous arguments with the main purpose to disparage.

Obviously no one should waste their time taking any of their arguments as gospel because most are dishonest and it's very easy to check the actual numbers.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...ycalifornia,US

If any of them truly wanted to help, rather than post their disingenuous information, they could actually work to find a solution on how to reduce population in the Bay Area and the state which simply don't seem to ever drop by any significant numbers. It would also be helpful to figure out a way to stop all these businesses from coming in since the standard conservative talking point claiming business are running for the hills because of all the taxes appears to be hogwash since it's not stopping anyone from coming in. Most people don't give a damn about outflows only. That has no impact on traffic, infrastructure, housing prices, etc. if they're merely being replaced. California will always have more outflows because they have significantly more people (it's simply a dumb argument and not breaking news as this has been going on for decades). Most people understand this.
This is far lower than other faster growing cities like Seattle, Raleigh or Austin. Is the Bay Area going to turn to Detroit? Not likely. But it's hardly a rapidly growing up and coming metropolis either.

The fact that CA actually lost congressional districts is pretty significant. The population is still growing overall albeit more slowly than other cities and states.

Because it's so darn expensive to live here it means a lot of people simply leave when they want to have families too. It's part of the reason the median age is well below the US median. Young people move to CA to work in Hollywood or tech and bail by middle age.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2022, 03:43 AM
 
1,020 posts, read 336,333 times
Reputation: 1112
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
This is far lower than other faster growing cities like Seattle, Raleigh or Austin. Is the Bay Area going to turn to Detroit? Not likely. But it's hardly a rapidly growing up and coming metropolis either.

The fact that CA actually lost congressional districts is pretty significant. The population is still growing overall albeit more slowly than other cities and states.

Because it's so darn expensive to live here it means a lot of people simply leave when they want to have families too. It's part of the reason the median age is well below the US median. Young people move to CA to work in Hollywood or tech and bail by middle age.
Any significant reduction of population would be a welcome relief to the residents of CA (neither CA or the Bay Area need to grow at this point). Unfortunately that simply hasn't happened. And of course, the number 1 reason people leave the Bay Area and CA is the COL. And yet those that leave are simply replaced so the status quo remains.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:00 AM.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top