Census 2016 City Population Estimates

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Crawford

You can't be serious. This is almost Trumpian-level absurd spin.

You're basically trying to spin this by saying "Chicago is doing fine because only the black hooligans are leaving, and that's a good thing".

Putting aside the apparent racism, and absurd premise, there is nothing happening with Chicago outmigration that isn't happening in every other big city in the Northeast and Midwest. There's absolutely no difference. In every city, the black population is declining. In fact, many cities have higher black population loss than Chicago. But none of these cities have equivalent overall population loss, so what gives?

Also, the premise is wrong. Chicago isn't losing people because of outmigration, or blacks leaving. Chicago is declining because there is lower inmigration than in other cities or metros. Again, Chicago isn't losing blacks (or others) at a greater rate than other cities; it's not gaining blacks (or others) at a similar rate, hence the decline.

When you look at net migration, you're looking at inflows vs. outflows. Chicago is losing whites just like they're losing blacks. But Chicago receives more white inmigration (the Big 10 grads) so the overall numbers for whites are better. But it doesn't mean that whites aren't fleeing at similar rates as blacks.

Also, looking specifically at black outmigration (which makes no sense as Chicago isn't declining because of blacks leaving), there's zero evidence that the blacks leaving are lower income. Black neighborhoods in Chicago have gotten much poorer over time. Obviously people moving to suburban/Sunbelt homeownership tend to be middle class. Historically middle class black enclaves that have slid into poverty; places like South Shore, are the neighborhoods suffering losses. Crime and disorder in such areas has risen, not declined.

The real reason Chicago is declining is because Chicago used to have huge immigrant numbers, especially from Mexico, and those numbers have plummeted in recent years. That's the primary issue.

^ Uhhhh...

Not sure how anything you're saying refuted Bnk or that article.

Anyhow, there is way the hell more to this story than mere net population numbers. And the city is doing fairly well in spite of this massive outmigration of blacks, a phenomenon we can all agree is unfortunate to see.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Uhhhh...

Not sure how anything you're saying refuted Bnk or that article.

Anyhow, there is way the hell more to this story than mere net population numbers. And the city is doing fairly well in spite of this massive outmigration of blacks, a phenomenon we can all agree is unfortunate to see.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...graphic-trends

[Yuri]

I looked to the Census population and the smallest decade/decline (absolute numbers), by far, was between 1990-2000 with 76,000 (or 7,600/year average).

As Detroit peaked in 1950, this 3,500 fall registered in 2015 and in 2016 might be the smallest in the past 67 years. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a positive number before 2020.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

As Detroit peaked in 1950, this 3,500 fall registered in 2015 and in 2016 might be the smallest in the past 67 years. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a positive number before 2020.

I would be shocked if Detroit showed near-term population growth.

Older U.S. cities generally grow because of immigration, and Detroit (city proper) receives almost none.

The Detroit region is booming, with full employment and record auto profits, so these are the absolute best of times, hence the region is growing (slightly) and the city is declining less. Michigan has the best economy of the Great Lakes Midwest states. A few years ago, when Detroit had crazy-high population loss, the state had the worst economy in the nation.

In the late 1990's, when the region was in another auto boom, the annual estimates were comparatively good too. Over the last 40 years or so, population trends can be tied to the auto industry fortunes.

Also, Detroit is much bigger than a Pittsburgh, so the effects of core gentrification are going to be masked somewhat. It will simply take a TON more gentrifiers in Detroit to have a similar effect as Pittsburgh.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Crawford

You can't be serious. This is almost Trumpian-level absurd spin.

You're basically trying to spin this by saying "Chicago is doing fine because only the black hooligans are leaving, and that's a good thing".

Putting aside the apparent racism, and absurd premise, there is nothing happening with Chicago outmigration that isn't happening in every other big city in the Northeast and Midwest. There's absolutely no difference. In every city, the black population is declining. In fact, many cities have higher black population loss than Chicago. But none of these cities have equivalent overall population loss, so what gives?

Also, the premise is wrong. Chicago isn't losing people because of outmigration, or blacks leaving. Chicago is declining because there is lower inmigration than in other cities or metros. Again, Chicago isn't losing blacks (or others) at a greater rate than other cities; it's not gaining blacks (or others) at a similar rate, hence the decline.

When you look at net migration, you're looking at inflows vs. outflows. Chicago is losing whites just like they're losing blacks. But Chicago receives more white inmigration (the Big 10 grads) so the overall numbers for whites are better. But it doesn't mean that whites aren't fleeing at similar rates as blacks.

Also, looking specifically at black outmigration (which makes no sense as Chicago isn't declining because of blacks leaving), there's zero evidence that the blacks leaving are lower income. Black neighborhoods in Chicago have gotten much poorer over time. Obviously people moving to suburban/Sunbelt homeownership tend to be middle class. Historically middle class black enclaves that have slid into poverty; places like South Shore, are the neighborhoods suffering losses. Crime and disorder in such areas has risen, not declined.

The real reason Chicago is declining is because Chicago used to have huge immigrant numbers, especially from Mexico, and those numbers have plummeted in recent years. That's the primary issue.

Yeah I heard the only real reason Chicago grew so rapidly between 1990-2000 is because of Mexican immigration and that is all but dried up.

[eschaton]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression of why Detroit began hemorrhaging population at such a higher rate again in the 2000s was essentially the housing bubble. It was really, really easy for comparably low-income residents to afford a house in suburbia for the first time, so a significant portion of the black lower-middle and upper working class left the city for first-ring suburbs - particularly to the north of the city.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression of why Detroit began hemorrhaging population at such a higher rate again in the 2000s was essentially the housing bubble. It was really, really easy for comparably low-income residents to afford a house in suburbia for the first time, so a significant portion of the black lower-middle and upper working class left the city for first-ring suburbs - particularly to the north of the city.

Yes, though it's also that Detroit's inner-ring suburbs collapsed in the mid-2000's, creating a void and extreme affordability. All the old Poles, Italians and Germans were dying out, their kids sold granny's house, and young black families replaced them. See places like Harper Woods, Eastpointe, South Warren. I remember as a kid, these places were dominated by 80-year-old grannies with European accents.

Also, there were fewer racial barriers and obviously mortgages were given out like candy. The city also eliminated residency requirements for workers, so no one had to be in the city.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I would be shocked if Detroit showed near-term population growth.

On the first years of this decade, they were losing 8,000 average. With another similar improvement, they can easily go to positive terrain.

Few people are leaving (as there are less and less people to leave) and quite a few numbers are coming to live in those new developments on Downtown and Midtown.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

On the first years of this decade, they were losing 8,000 average. With another similar improvement, they can easily go to positive terrain.

Few people are leaving (as there are less and less people to leave) and quite a few numbers are coming to live in those new developments on Downtown and Midtown.

Again, the Detroit auto industry has been booming, with record-breaking profits. These are the absolute best of times in Detroit.

The auto industry is now finally slowing down, and I predict regional population growth will enter negative territory, and Detroit will have greater losses. Detroit is all about auto industry trends.

Downtown is almost irrelevant. There are maybe 10,000 people living in the core. What does it matter what 1/60 of the city is doing?

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Again, the Detroit auto industry has been booming, with record-breaking profits. These are the absolute best of times in Detroit.

Yes, I said that in my original post. Smallest loss since 1950.

And why do you think -3,500 is some magical number (up from -9,000 just a couple of years ago)? It could be -2,500 or +1,000. We don't know.

Originally Posted by Crawford

The auto industry is now finally slowing down, and I predict regional population growth will enter negative territory, and Detroit will have greater losses. Detroit is all about auto industry trends.

Well, we'll have to wait and see if you're right. I hope you're not. I wouldn't be that determinist as things change.

[tdawg]

Interesting to find out that Huntsville overtook Mobile to become Alabama's third largest city, and is expected to pass both Montgomery and Birmingham in 10 years. I went to high school in Huntsville and was surprised to see on a recent trip back that its downtown is booming with several dense, live-work-play developments. It'll never have the height of downtown Birmingham though due to the cave system below ground and Huntsville's lack of financial HQs.

[maru2501]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...graphic-trends

^ correct on chicago. still mostly a black flight issue

[balletomane]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

On the first years of this decade, they were losing 8,000 average. With another similar improvement, they can easily go to positive terrain.

Few people are leaving (as there are less and less people to leave) and quite a few numbers are coming to live in those new developments on Downtown and Midtown.

Its possible that Detroit could post positive numbers here and there, but I think it won't be until about 2050 that the city starts to show positive growth in between census figures, dropping to ~500,000 and then rebounding to about 600,000 by 2100. Maybe those numbers are unrealistic or sound pessimistic, but I think that the city will be much healthier by that time.

I also wouldn't doubt if the city was shrinking a bit faster then what the census estimates project. The US Census Bureau seems to have more difficulty estimating the population for a shrinking city, probably because there are many vacant homes and buildings that are accidentally assumed to be occupied. This is evident in the 2010 estimate vs. census result, the estimate was 850,000 whereas the census result was almost 710,000.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...graphic-trends

The point this article makes is that if it weren't for black flight, Chicago would be one of the fastest growing non-sunbelt cities in the country.

Not that this matters, of course, because black flight is happening. Every other ethnic group is growing. So at least we know what we have to work on.

[The North One]

No, if anything vacant structures with demolition permits have skewed these estimates against the city this year, not the other way around. DTE also posted a gain of 3000 residential accounts for the city this year. You've got no basis for assuming a larger loss, get over your fetish.

Every shmuck and their mother can speculate on the population trends of the next 100 years, we might as well start writing fan fiction about these cities.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by tdawg

Interesting to find out that Huntsville overtook Mobile to become Alabama's third largest city, and is expected to pass both Montgomery and Birmingham in 10 years. I went to high school in Huntsville and was surprised to see on a recent trip back that its downtown is booming with several dense, live-work-play developments. It'll never have the height of downtown Birmingham though due to the cave system below ground and Huntsville's lack of financial HQs.

I'll be interested to see how the continued migration to downtown Birmingham will affect its population growth into the future. As it is, the population is stable.

In other news in Alabama, Tuscaloosa is a year away from being the next 100,000+ city. Hoover might even get close by the 2020 Census.

[north 42]

Originally Posted by balletomane

Its possible that Detroit could post positive numbers here and there, but I think it won't be until about 2050 that the city starts to show positive growth in between census figures, dropping to ~500,000 and then rebounding to about 600,000 by 2100. Maybe those numbers are unrealistic or sound pessimistic, but I think that the city will be much healthier by that time.

I also wouldn't doubt if the city was shrinking a bit faster then what the census estimates project. The US Census Bureau seems to have more difficulty estimating the population for a shrinking city, probably because there are many vacant homes and buildings that are accidentally assumed to be occupied. This is evident in the 2010 estimate vs. census result, the estimate was 850,000 whereas the census result was almost 710,000.

There is absolutely no reason for Detroit to drop to 500,000, if anything Detroit will see growth, probably within ten years.

[balletomane]

Originally Posted by north 42

There is absolutely no reason for Detroit to drop to 500,000, if anything Detroit will see growth, probably within ten years.

I need to stop logging on earlier in the morning, I end up disagreeing with many of my earlier morning posts...

I hope Detroit starts seeing growth soon, and I hope it wouldn't drop to 500,000. I've just been wondering if maybe its shrunk more than the estimates suggest only because of the large difference between the 2010 estimate vs. census figure. I just don't want a 2020 estimate of 650,000 and then all of a sudden when the census results are released in 2021 the population has dropped below 600,000 or something unexpected like that, but this decade seems different than the past one so it seems unlikely.

[BG918]

Since the crisis began social services have been cut across the board, it seems the state's school districts are almost constantly imperil of running out of money, the state universities are seeing their credit ratings get continuously downgraded as Illinois continues to give them less money, etc.

Sounds a lot like the current situation in Oklahoma.

[bobdreamz]

Originally Posted by NorthernDancer

Usually there is a negative correlation between murder rates and population growth rates (people flee cities with high murder rates), yet Atlanta and Miami are growing fast even with relatively high per capita murder rates.

Regarding Miami the murder rate predominately affects the poor black population. The Miami Herald did a study a couple of years ago where 65% of the murder victims in the city were young black males under the age of 35 in certain neighborhoods of the city due to drugs & gang activity.
The rest of the murder victims were due to domestic violence across all groups with random murders of citizens or tourists being rare.
If you aren't part of this demographic than the murder rate in Miami doesn't really concern you.
I tend to think that Chicago and it's murder rate has similarities to Miami regarding demographics.