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.
Nobody knows. I’d be inclined to trust the Census more than random people will access to way less information.
There is no reason to trust these numbers more than the census other than you want them to be true.
Can’t speak for large jurisdictions that don’t operate as a state/county/city, but DC has access to information at all three levels giving it an unprecedented amount of data that no other jurisdiction in the nation controls to the same degree.
The caveat is the extra from the undercount comes from the Urban Institute's data rather than the Census. It will be interesting to see post Census estimates again for all of these places and their sustained growth.
Can someone please explain to me how the Urban Institute can claim Minnesota was over counted by .76% rather than their model simply not being super accurate to fractions of a percent?
Like his can the census possibly produce an over count? Seems like errors can only cut one way in the census
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,568,606 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
Can someone please explain to me how the Urban Institute can claim Minnesota was over counted by .76% rather than their model simply not being super accurate to fractions of a percent?
Like his can the census possibly produce an over count? Seems like errors can only cut one way in the census
Probably has something to do with cities and "urban centers" being undercount, vs the other areas that are non-urban could reflect over estimations. So at a state level you obviously have to account properly for both urban and rural dynamics.
There also could be some level of over/under counting of either domestic or international migration patterns. I think either of those being counted off over the course of 10 years makes a big difference. I could see some possibility that the Census Bureau might not perfectly capture immigration/migration data at the moment data of release, especially if dealing with a number of other federal agencies on different timelines with providing their data.
Last edited by the resident09; 11-04-2021 at 08:53 PM..
Probably has something to do with cities and "urban centers" being undercount, vs the other areas that are non-urban could reflect over estimations. So at a state level you obviously have to account properly for both urban and rural dynamics.
There also could be some level of over/under counting of either domestic or international migration patterns. I think either of those being counted off over the course of 10 years makes a big difference. I could see some possibility that the Census Bureau might not perfectly capture immigration/migration data at the moment data of release, especially if dealing with a number of other federal agencies on different timelines with providing their data.
But they don’t do trends and stuff. It’s a count. All that trend line stuff is how you get the 2020 estimates. You can miss people or maybe mom from Eden Prarie counts her not Danny who moved to St Paul in Fall 2019 at home or something, but I don’t see how a pretty large overcount is possible.
But I don’t see how a systemic overcount is possible to the tune of almost 1%.
I think there is no good reason to pick the Urban Institute numbers over the census other than the fact you want DC to have more people than the census says
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,568,606 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
But they don’t do trends and stuff. It’s a count. All that trend line stuff is how you get the 2020 estimates. You can miss people or maybe mom from Eden Prarie counts her not Danny who moved to St Paul in Fall 2019 at home or something, but I don’t see how a pretty large overcount is possible.
But I don’t see how a systemic overcount is possible to the tune of almost 1%.
I think there is no good reason to pick the Urban Institute numbers over the census other than the fact you want DC to have more people than the census says
All population counts are just a snapshot in time though. Census numbers will always be considered the official numbers, but even official numbers are never a flawless total count, as we all know. This goes for anywhere. Do you think every Census that comes out has the exact total that the population actually was on that day? No, it's just the most accurate possible count of what is deemed to be the current population of a place.
DC was an undercount, not an overcount like Minnesota so that's contradicting your point. It's a state masquerading as a city. Many states like Texas and Mississippi were undercount too. DC was just under count the most, and missing it by 2% certainly warrants recognition that the official Census count was off some. Each of those places has high Black populations that tend to historically be undercount, this isn't some urban myth. The numbers are the numbers.
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.
