Subdude Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Cities gaining population: Demographer William Frey of the Brookings Institution has analyzed Census Bureau data to determine internal migration trends among big metropolitan areas with more than 1 million residents. His data exclude population growth due to birth or death rates or the immigration of foreigners, so they reveal which big cities working-age The big gainers: and losers: I expected Houston to come out higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pragmatist Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 (edited) I commented on the Yahoo post of that article earlier. Their numbers appear to be wrong. The Austin metropolitan area had an estimated 1.834 million people in July 2012. The area was at 1.716 million people at the time of the April 2010 census. The amount of time that had elapsed was 2.25 years. The change in population over that period is 118,000. Therefore, we get a yearly addition of about 118,000/2.25 = 52,400 people in the Austin metro area. The Greater Houston area had a population of 5.920 million people at the April 2010 census. The July 2012 estimate for the area was 6.177 million. The net gain during this period was about 257,000 people. That means the Houston metropolitan area added (approximately) 257,000/2.25 = 114,222 people per year over this period. I don't know if they were just counting the numbers added annually within the city limits or what, but they were definitely wrong in listing it as metropolitan area growth from what I can find. Edited January 23, 2014 by The Pragmatist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 (edited) I commented on the Yahoo post of that article earlier. Their numbers appear to be wrong. The Austin metropolitan area had an estimated 1.834 million people in July 2012. The area was at 1.716 million people at the time of the April 2010 census. The amount of time that had elapsed was 2.25 years. The change in population over that period is 118,000. Therefore, we get a yearly addition of about 118,000/2.25 = 52,400 people in the Austin metro area. The Greater Houston area had a population of 5.920 million people at the April 2010 census. The July 2012 estimate for the area was 6.177 million. The net gain during this period was about 257,000 people. That means the Houston metropolitan area added (approximately) 257,000/2.25 = 114,222 people per year over this period. I don't know if they were just counting the numbers added annually within the city limits or what, but they were definitely wrong in listing it as metropolitan area growth from what I can find. As the quote above said, "His data exclude population growth due to birth or death rates or the immigration of foreigners". Having said that, his estimate of roughly 13,000 per year net domestic migration seems low when we are growing by 114,000 + per year total. That means we are adding roughly 101,000 per year through international migration and births exceeding deaths. Really? Further questions arise by the absence of D/FW. Is D/FW really not among the top 10 metro areas for domestic migration? Highly doubtful. Edited January 23, 2014 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pragmatist Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Yeah, I missed that in the article when I read it as I was doing some homework at the same. Even considering this, I'm still with you in saying that the numbers seem just a bit odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.