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.
Population of CSA/MSA in 2012 - population of CSA/MSA in 2010
That numerical difference is then divided by 27 not 24. The census was finalized in April of 2010 whereas the census estimates are released year-over-year in July. Once you get this number, multiply it by 12 (for each month of a calendar year), then by 10 (for number of years in a decade) and then by 4 (four more decades till 2050).
From the census of 2010 to the most current estimates, it's from April 2010 to July 2012.
Statistics like these all remind me of the late 19th century when many northern cities were going through their booms, and as a result, made predictions about where their populations would be by the late 20th century. Needless to say, they were way off as they didn't account for the deindustrializing shift that would come about in the mid-century economy. The urban watershed of the 1950s taught many industrial cities, especially in the Rust-Belt, that growth is not infinite; it is predicated on the economy.
I can't help but feel the Sun-Belt will feel the wrath of an economic shift by the time we reached 2050, possibly from the shift of a new resource war as the oil dries up. Environmentally, the changing climate, rising sea levels, and growing scarcity of water might leave a city like Chicago, near one of the largest bodies of fresh water and surrounded by fertile soil, in an advantageous position to boom again.
Statistics like these all remind me of the late 19th century when many northern cities were going through their booms, and as a result, made predictions about where their populations would be by the late 20th century. Needless to say, they were way off as they didn't account for the deindustrializing shift that would come about in the mid-century economy. The urban watershed of the 1950s taught many industrial cities, especially in the Rust-Belt, that growth is not infinite; it is predicated on the economy.
I can't help but feel the Sun-Belt will feel the wrath of an economic shift by the time we reached 2050, possibly from the shift of a new resource war as the oil dries up. Environmentally, the changing climate, rising sea levels, and growing scarcity of water might leave a city like Chicago, near one of the largest bodies of fresh water and surrounded by fertile soil, in an advantageous position to boom again.
Just an aside, I think the numerical gains over time haven't been nearly as volatile for CSAs and MSAs as they have been for central cities. There is still uncertainty for sure, but I think it makes the projections a bit more reasonable. Also many projections use percentage gains which can lead to ridiculous projections farther out (obviously as a metro gets larger the denominator keeps growing making sustaining a high percentage growth rate less likely).
I made the projection for fun, I thought current numerical gains were far more interesting. I wish I had made two threads..
by "some of them" meaning the sun belt cities, a lot of the major american cities (New York, Chicago, Boston, Philly) certainly haven't been booming the last 50 years and have been just barely increasing their populations if not losing people to the suburbs or the south
New York 1950 - 7,891,957 weak gain of +444,740 people in 62 years for our biggest city
________2012 - 8,336,697
Chicago 1950 - 3,620,962 __________-906,106
________2012 - 2,714,856
Boston 1950 - 801,444____________ -164,965
_______2012 - 636,479
Phil 1950 - 2,071,605 _____________ -523,998
___2012 - 1,547,607
Yes, I was referring to the Sun Belt cities. But all those cities losing or having slow growth once boomed just like the Sun Belt. And to be fair, NYC, Boston, Philly and Chicago, after periods of decline, are growing again, so the net change may be a little different than what's happening currently. Detroit... yeah it's going nowhere but down.
Statistics like these all remind me of the late 19th century when many northern cities were going through their booms, and as a result, made predictions about where their populations would be by the late 20th century. Needless to say, they were way off as they didn't account for the deindustrializing shift that would come about in the mid-century economy. The urban watershed of the 1950s taught many industrial cities, especially in the Rust-Belt, that growth is not infinite; it is predicated on the economy.
I can't help but feel the Sun-Belt will feel the wrath of an economic shift by the time we reached 2050, possibly from the shift of a new resource war as the oil dries up. Environmentally, the changing climate, rising sea levels, and growing scarcity of water might leave a city like Chicago, near one of the largest bodies of fresh water and surrounded by fertile soil, in an advantageous position to boom again.
The Sun Belt also relies on other factors that are really not sustainable long-term: low cost of living and taxes, cheap land prices, lack of legacy amenity costs, economies based, in part, on construction, etc.
The Sun Belt also relies on other factors that are really not sustainable long-term: low cost of living and taxes, cheap land prices, lack of legacy amenity costs, economies based, in part, on construction, etc.
Yeah I can agree with that, I definitely don't see these things being consistent in the future.
25 million in LA? Good luck getting enough water to quench all those mouths. Better find a way to desailinate.
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.
