Are you ready for some numbers.....
.... where is Hank Williams Jr. when you need him? This will be a living post for the moment.
Census dump is online here (and the Census' crib sheet excel file summary is here). Short version so far: County better than we thought, city worse by a decent % chunk. Pittsburgh region (MSA) is up just a bit percentage wise, but mostly where expected. Fayette has the biggest loss compared to the estimates and Westmoreland is the most above where the estimates had it pegged.
More to follow.
Census dump is online here (and the Census' crib sheet excel file summary is here). Short version so far: County better than we thought, city worse by a decent % chunk. Pittsburgh region (MSA) is up just a bit percentage wise, but mostly where expected. Fayette has the biggest loss compared to the estimates and Westmoreland is the most above where the estimates had it pegged.
More to follow.
City of Pittsburgh
2000: 334,438
2009 Estimated: 311,747
If we extrapolate simply, 2010 would be: 309,907
Census 2010: 305,704
Allegheny County
2000: 1,281,666
2010 Estimated: 1,220,510
Census 2010: 1,223,348
Pittsburgh 7 County MSA
2000: 2,431,087
2010 Estimated: 2,354,197
Census 2010: 2,356,285
Note that if you are comparing MSA’s between 2000 and 2010, the definition of the region changed over that time. So you may be looking at a 6 county region if you are comparing populations.
14 Comments:
Is it possible that the city simply had a poor response rate. I had the read that was a problem with Ohio’s cities (and Cincy and Cleveland both appear to have worse losses than expected).
-JoeP
Yes, I agree. The city had a bad response rate. Mostly from the folks who are not actually there.
That actually doesn't seem like a huge discrepancy to me, given the limits of their subcounty estimate methodology.
I suppose it is disappointing it is a little lower than expected, but it seems to me the most interesting questions are still things like the recent trends (which this Census can't really answer), and the distribution of the population within the City, including by location, age, and the two combined (which this Census can answer).
Pittsburgh is down 6,000 people. How many neighborhood have fewer than that?
That is, 6,000 lower than the 2009 estimate. I suppose only 4,000 lower than expected. That doesn't strike me as small discrepancy.
Sorry, I'm a novice. How do we get breakdown by neighborhood within city?
MH,
The Census estimate methodology for subcounty places requires an imputation procedure that is not necessarily accurate, and it can get more inaccurate over time. Given that, an error of a little over 1% doesn't strike me as particularly large.
I just dug up a Census study looking at April 2000 estimates versus the 2000 Census count for subcounty places. The mean error for subcounty places over 100,000 was 4.3%.
So that does seem to confirm that a 1.3% error or so is not necessarily a surprise.
Oh, and in 2000 if the population trend was negative, the estimate was more likely to be high, and the stronger the trend the greater the average error.
Given all that, I think only a 1.3% overshoot on the estimate would have counted as quite good in 2000. I assume we will eventually get a similar study of how the estimates did in 2010.
On the state level, the surprise of the decade is that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Hazleton MSA grew. Yeah, it grew by less than 1%, but it grew nonetheless.
O.K. Not so bad for the census, but it is that bad for Pittsburgh.
That was me.
Won't be too long before Allegheny County passes Cuyahoga County.
I'm waiting for Pittsburgh to drop below Lincoln.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home