Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 23, 2017, 12:42:49 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 443
1  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: August 2017 House Election on: August 20, 2017, 11:10:11 pm
REPUBLIC OF ATLASIA - In Dave We Trust
Official Ballot



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES - NINE SEATS



[4] fhtagn of Maine
Federalist Party



[5] Haslam2020 of Tennessee
Federalist Party



[  ] Governor Illiniwek of Illinois
Labor Party



[  ] JGibson of Illinois
Labor Party



[  ] LongLiveRock of Colorado
Labor Party



[3] North Carolina Yankee of North Carolina
Federalist Party



[  ] Peebs of North Carolina
Labor Party



[2] Potus2036 of West Virginia
Federalist Party



[1] RFayette of California
Atlas Conservative Party



[  ] vivaportugalhabs of Kansas
Labor Party



[  ] Write-in:______________________________
-__________________



[  ] None of the above
2  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: Lincoln Voting Booth: August 2017 on: August 18, 2017, 06:01:00 pm
LINCOLN REGION
AUGUST 2017 ELECTIONS
OFFICIAL BALLOT



FOR SENATE (CLASS II)
ONE (1) to be elected

[2] AScott of New Hampshire
Labor

[1] LouisvilleThunder of Indiana
Federalist

[ ] Write-in:


FOR ASSEMBLY
THREE (3) to be elected

[4] bruhgmger2 of New York
Labor

[2] kyc0705 of New Jersey
Independent

[3] lok1999 of Indiana
Labor

[1] ReaganClinton20XX of Connecticut
Federalist

[ ] Write-in:

3  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: August 15, 2017, 10:37:03 am
The Denver-Aurora CSA has grown every decade since 1900. However, the growth has been a bit erratic, with fast (gold rush?) growth in the 1900s, followed by slower growth until after WWII, and a ramp up afterwards, except in the 1980s:



All of the Denver CSA's constituent metros have always grown, except Greeley during the 1930s:



At the county level, Denver proper lost population during the 1970s and 1980s. Other counties, largely on the periphery, have lost population in other decades. Broomfield was not a separate county until 2001:



The 1980-2016 county estimate percentage population change map gif confirms that the Denver losses in the 1980s spilled over to the early 1990s. Both Denver and Jefferson County lost a little population in the early 2000s, too:



And the 2000-16 town map confirms that the minor Jefferson County losses were not pinpointed to any one jurisdiction:



The static county maps show explosive growth in some counties, particularly south of Denver. Here is the 1980-2016 county map:



And the 2000-16 static map shows the fast growth in Douglas County has continued in more recent decades:



The 2010-16 static town map shows growth pretty much throughout the CSA:

4  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: If your state lost a district, who would you want combined? on: August 14, 2017, 08:27:57 pm
It will never happen, since the bulk of the population loss is upstate, but seeing Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler put in the same Manhattan-only district would be ideal.  That could possibly open up a South Brooklyn/Queens district that could elect a Republican.  It would also be good to see Manhattan down to being represented by the 3 Congressmen its numbers deserve, instead of 4.
5  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 538: The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats on: August 09, 2017, 07:38:36 pm
I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.

You're for politicians basically stealing seats for their party just because it is a ...tradition?

...seriously?

Sorry. I don't find something that has been going on since the founding of the republic as offensive as most here seem to do. Quite frankly, a lot of the supposedly neutral redistricting criteria proposed by others are just as likely to lead to partisan Gerrymandering. Forcing "competitive" districts on states where one party's population is concentrated in a particular city or region is a dumb idea that destroys communities of interest, overrepresents the minority party and overrepresents that city or region. Supposedly "neutral" commissions almost always aren't. And court-drawn maps often take on the biases of the appointed special master.

So, no, there is no such thing as "neutral" redistricting. And I don't view partisan redistricting as "stealing" seats for any one party - what Republicans do in Ohio or Michigan can easily be offset by what Democrats do in Illinois or California, anyway.
6  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 538: The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats on: August 09, 2017, 09:19:59 am
As usual, those who harp on supposed Republican gerrymanders conveniently forget about Democratic gerrymanders in states like Maryland and Illinois.  There is a diary on RRH which claims that after taking Democratic gerrymanders into account, Republicans would actually gain a few seats under non-partisan maps due to self-packing.  I'm not sure I believe it, but it is intellectually dishonest to ignore Maryland and Illinois, plus the Mathismander in Arizona, if you're truly concerned about partisan gerrymandering.

I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.


Recent non-partisan 3-part test from Princeton concluded that both Illinois and Maryland were not gerrymanders.

Here is the article: Princeton Gerrymandering Projection

According to their website, two of the three MD tests were skipped for some reason, and the Monte Carlo test showed that in most scenarios, Republicans would end up with another seat in MD.
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 538: The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats on: August 09, 2017, 07:02:18 am
As usual, those who harp on supposed Republican gerrymanders conveniently forget about Democratic gerrymanders in states like Maryland and Illinois.  There is a diary on RRH which claims that after taking Democratic gerrymanders into account, Republicans would actually gain a few seats under non-partisan maps due to self-packing.  I'm not sure I believe it, but it is intellectually dishonest to ignore Maryland and Illinois, plus the Mathismander in Arizona, if you're truly concerned about partisan gerrymandering.

I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.
8  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 29, 2017, 09:02:11 pm
The Cleveland-Akron-Canton CSA hasn't grown much since the 1960s. It had one slight up decade in the 1990s, but has declined since:



Much of this loss is due to the decline of the core Cleveland-Elyria metro. The Akron & Canton-Massilion metros were also down some of those decades:



Cleveland's Cuyahoga County has declined every decade since the 1960s. It usually had the fastest decline of any CSA county, too:



The 1980-2016 yearly county estimate percentage population change map shows Cuyahoga County declining every year except a few in the early 1990s and, due to a better 2000 census result than 1999 estimated, 1999-2000:


The 2000-16 town maps show the cities of Cleveland, Akron & Canton losing population every year. Some suburbs outside Cuyahoga still grow, though, especially in Medina County:



The 1980-2016 static county percentage population growth map shows that Medina County was the fastest-growing over that period.  Other Cuyahoga-bordering suburban counties also grew:



The 2000-16 county map shows that the Medina County trend has continued recently:



The 2010-16 static town map shows that very few Cuyahoga County suburbs have grown this decade. The Medina County gains are pretty much county-wide.  Other suburban counties tended to have growth concentrated right next to the Cuyahoga County border.

9  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 27, 2017, 10:54:08 pm
The Minneapolis-St. Paul CSA grew at about a 100,00 persons per decade clip pre-WWII. Post-war, that usually ramped up to 300K-400K, except in the 1970s, when growth slowed to around 200K:




The core Minneapolis-St.Paul-Bloomington Metro has never lost population in any decade since 1900. Nor has St. Cloud. The 3 outlying micropoltian areas have lost population at times:



The 1900-2016 decadal county population change map shows core Hennepin (Minneapolis) and Ramsey (St. Paul) Counties losing population in the 1970s. Ramsey also lost pop in the 2000s:



The 1980-2016 yearly county percentage population change map map shows suburban/exurban counties growing at a faster percentage pace than core Hennepin & Ramsey most years, except roughly 2010-13:



The 2000-16 town map shows the twin cities of Minneapolis & St. Paul losing population from roughly 2001-2006. Generally, only the suburban/exurban county towns bordering the core 2 counties seem to have continued to grow during the great recession. Some exurbs seem to have lost population during that time:



The 1980-2016 static county percentage change map shows the collar counties growing fastest during that period:



The 2000-16 static county map shows somewhat of a continuation of this pattern in some counties, particularly Scott:



The 2010-16 static town map shows some Hennepin County and border towns growing faster than the rest:

10  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 26, 2017, 12:16:36 am
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale was the 14th largest Primary Statistical Area in 2014, according to Wikipedia. It is the first PSA that is only a Metropolitan Area on the list. The Phoenix metro has grown every decade since 1900, adding over 1,000,000 people in the 1990s and almost as many in the 2000s:



The Phoenix metro only has two counties, Maricopa and Pinal. Both have grown every decade since 1900:



The 1980-2016 yearly percentage population change county map gif is equally boring. The only county that ever lost population was Pinal in 2010-11:



The 2000-16 town percentage population change map gif shows the city of Phoenix losing population in 2008-10, and that the Pinal County loss was pretty much county-wide:



Unsurprisingly, the 1980-2016 county percentage population change was off the chart:



The 2000-16 static county map shows that Pinal County grew faster than Maricopa County from 2000-16 in percentage terms, but Maricopa County is much larger:



The 2010-16 static town map shows a growing picture, with Buckeye and Pinal County leading the area in percentage population growth:

11  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 25, 2017, 11:17:30 pm
The Seattle-Tacoma CSA has grown each decade since the 1900. It had a big growth spurt in the 1900s and ramped after WWII:



Its component metros and micros have usually grown, too. The core Seattle-Tacoma-Bellvue Metropolitan Area has grown every decade since 1900:



King, Snohomish and Pierce Counties have grown each decade. Only the islands and far fringes have had loss decades:



1980-2016 yearly county map shows Snohomish County growing at a higher percentage rate than King - until recently. Tacoma's Pierce County likely had a slight down year in 2009:



The 2000-16 town map shows Seattle losing population in 2001-03. Now, it grows as fast as unincorporated Snohomish. Tacoma lost population in 2002-04 & 2009:



The 1980-2016 static county percentage population change map shows growth throughout, especially in suburban Snohomish County and Olympia's Thurston County:



The 2000-16 static county map shows the same growth pattern, albeit at a slower rate:



And the 2010-16 static town map shows that Seattle is one of the fastest-growing towns in King County:

12  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 25, 2017, 01:38:35 pm
With the Detroit-Warren-Ann Arbor CSA at CBSA #12, we finally get our first look at the population change patterns in a rust belt city - and it's not pretty. The Detroit CSA has seen better days. It was Atlanta or Dallas-like during the 1920s - adding over 1,000,000 people that decade at a time when the US population was much lower than it is today. The CSA has largely been in decline since the 1970s, with a brief respite during the 1990s:



The Ann Arbor Metro has helped prop up the Detroit CSA's numbers a little bit - it is still growing.  But the core Detroit-Warren-Dearborn metro and the Flint metro have generally been losing population or stagnant recently:



At the decadal county level, Detroit's Wayne County has lost population every decade since the 1970s.  Detroit-suburban Oakland and Macomb have gained population during that period, albeit sometimes anemically. Exurban Livingston County has grown fastest, percentage wise:



The yearly 1980-2016 county percentage population change map shows Wayne County losing population practically every year, except during the early-to-mid 1990s. Even Oakland County has lost population some years. Even exurban Livingston County lost a little bit of population in the late 2000s:



The 2000-16 town percentage population change map shows just how badly Detroit and most of its inner suburbs have lost population recently, while Detroit's outer suburbs generally gained population:



The 1980-2016 county static map shows Wayne 20-30% of its population, suburban Oakland and Macomb up, and Livingston growing at an 80% clip over that period:



The 2000-2016 county static map shows basically the same growth pattern, with Macomb growing a little more than Oakland:



And the 2010-2016 static town map shows most of Wayne County losing population, except a few towns at the outer fringes of the county:

13  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 25, 2017, 09:21:29 am
Why is Ulster County PA part of the New York CSA?

Are there people in Ulster County who actually commute to NYC or spend a decent amount of time there?

Jimrtex can probably give you the technical answer, but as I understand it, CSA borders are based on commuting patterns.  They change every 5 years, and were last changed for 2012.  We're due for a 2017 update soon, probably in January 2018.

Enough Ulster County residents probably commute to Dutchess County (in the NY MSA) or White Plains, Westchester County to justify CSA status, but not Metro status.  And there might even be a few Ulster County residents who commute all the way to NYC on Metro North from Poughkeepsie, which is right across the Mid-Hudson Bridge from southern Ulster.  Ulster is in the NYC TV market, so including it in the CSA isn't terribly strange to me, anyway.

The stranger county to me is Carbon, PA, which is in the Allentown-Bethlehem Metro being in the CSA.  I doubt many people commute to NYC from there.  But enough probably commute to Lehigh County, PA to put it in the Allentown Metro, and enough Lehigh/Northampton County, PA residents probably commute to NYC or its NJ suburbs to put the Allentown MSA in the CSA.

Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Micropolitan Statistical Areas are collectively known as Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA) - the distinction between Metropolitan and Micropolitan is population, their delineation is the same.

A CBSA is comprised of Central Counties and Outlying Counties. Counties qualify to be a central county by having half the population in urban areas, or containing 5000 persons of an urban area of at least 10,000. Urban areas are blobs of people (continuous areas of somewhat dense population). Urban Areas are either Urbanized Areas or Urban Clusters, again distinguished by their size, with Urbanized Areas having more than 50,000 people. Urban Clusters have to have 2500 persons to exist, but need 10,000 to form the basis for a Micropolitan Statistical Area.

Urbanized Areas, but not Urban Clusters, are grandfathered from one census to the next. If an Urbanized Area and Urban Cluster grow together, the Urban Cluster is absorbed. But when Urbanized Areas grow together, their identity is kept separate, typically at or near county lines.

The NYC Urbanized Area does quite reach the Delaware River. But it comprises 25% of Sussex, 40% of Hunterdon, 19% of Warren, and 8% of Mercer. Since it is the largest urban area in Sussex and Hunterdon counties, those two counties are Central Counties of the NYC Metropolitan Statistical Area.

More of Warren (29%) is in the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Urbanized Area, so it is a Central County of the Allentown Urbanized Area. Easton is traditionally associated with Allentown so there is a division in the county. The NYC Urbanized Area could conceivably grow such that it was the dominant Urban Area, and Warren would flip between MSA's.

Because of Trenton, most of Mercer is in the Trenton Urbanized Area, and blocks the NYC Metropolitan Area.

Pike County, PA is potentially the Port Jervis Micropolitan Statistical Area, since the Port Jervis Urban Cluster has 10,000 persons, including 5000 in Pike County.

To the north, the Bridgeport-Stamford Urbanized Area keeps the NYC UA out of Fairfield County, and the Poughkeepsie-Newburgh Urbanized Area keeps the NYC UA out of Dutchess and pretty much out of Orange. But the NYC Urbanized Area does extend into Putnam County, so that Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland are central counties to the north.

The Poughkeepsie-Newburgh UA does extend a bit into Ulster to reach New Paltz, but the dominant Urbanized Area in Ulster is Kingston UA.

So in New York, you have the Poughkeepsie-Newburgh proto-MSA with Dutchess and Orange serving as central counties.

Outlying counties are determined on the basis of commuter flows. If 25% of workers who live in a county work in the central counties of CBSA, the county is an outlying county. But a central county of one CBSA may not be an outlying county of another CBSA.

But once the initial CBSA are delineated, then one CBSA may be treated as outlying to another. This appears what pulls Orange+Dutchess as a unit into the NYC Metro area. Commuting into NYC, Westchester, Rockland, and Putnam, plus most of Northern New Jersey counts as commuting into the central counties.

The number one destination for Dutchess is Westchester (15.2K), Putnam is next at 5.5K, followed by New York (Manhattan) 5.3, Orange 5.1, and Ulster 4.3. For Orange it is New York 9.9K, Rockland 9.2, Bergen, NJ 7.1K, Westchester 6.9K, Dutchess 5.1K, and Bronx 4.4K. It appears that Orange is dragging Dutchess into the NYC MSA (but I can only account for 24.5% of Orange+Dutchess workers working in the NYC MSA).

After the CBSA's are delineated, they may be agglomerated into a CSA, with each CBSA being treated as a unit. While for a CBSA, commuting must be into a Central County, for a CSA it just has to be between CBSA. In addition the link can be weaker. That is what brings the Ulster (Kingston MSA) into the CSA. Ulster has 9K commuting into both Ulster and Orange counties, compared to about 5K for the entire rest of the NYC MSA.

Were Ulster not itself a Central County it would have been part of the proto-Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown (PNM) CBSA. I'm not sure why NYC and PNM are merged, rather than PNM and Kingston.

It may be possible for the merging of CBSA into CSA to be chained (e.g. Bridgeport-Stamford being pulled in, then brought New Haven, and Waterbury-Danbury in.

Carbon being part of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSA is what bring it into the NYC CSA. Warren being part of the Allentown MSA and also including about 20% of its population in the NYC UA, likely pulls in Allentown. The commuting only has to anywhere into Northern New Jersey or southern New York, not into Manhattan or even Newark. It could even be into Sussex County.

A CSA might be considered to be more like a group of related CBSA, which is hard to see when comparing NYC and any CBSA, let alone Kingston. But the relationship is somewhat easier to understand with NYC and the Connecticut MSAs, or Allentown and Trenton and NYC.

Even easier to comprehend is Washington and Baltimore being in a CSA.

Thanks for the explanation.  I could have sworn there used to be a separate Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown metro area in recent years. I was actually surprised to see Dutchess and Orange as part of the New York Metro Area again.
14  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 24, 2017, 10:25:49 pm
The Atlanta--Athens-Clarke County--Sandy Springs CSA generally grew by about 100,000 people per decade before WWII.  It slowly ramped up after WWII to gain more than 1,000,000 people per decade in the 1990s and beyond:



Note that the 1900-40s numbers might not be accurate due to county boundary changes. For example, Campbell and Milton Counties were absorbed by Fulton County in the 1930s.  That's why Fulton County has its strange, long shape.

At the metro level, the core Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell Metro has always grown. The outlying metropolitan and micropolitan areas have been mixed.  The Athens-Clarke County Metro lost population in the 1920s:



The decadal county map shows that Fulton County lost population the 1970s. Atlanta's suburban and exurban counties started to grow after WWII, and really ramped up in the 1960s:



The 1980-2016 yearly county percentage population change map shows that core Fulton and DeKalb Counties lost population in the early 2000s. It has since recovered. Growth in some exurban counties cooled down after the great recession, but is picking up again, especially on the northern fringes of the metro:



The 2000-16 town percentage population change map shows that Fulton's early 2000s population loss was due at least in part due to the city of Atlanta losing population:



The static county maps confirm Atlanta's suburban/exurban growth.  For example, practically every suburban/exurban county on the 1980-2016 map is dark, dark red, particularly north of Fulton:



Even most counties in the 2000-16 county growth map are deep red:



The 2010-16 town percentage population change map shows which towns and county remainders have grown fastest since 2010:

15  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 24, 2017, 10:44:26 am
The Houston-The Woodlands CSA was 10th largest in 2014, according to Wikipedia, but has leapfrogged at least Miami since.  The CSA has grown every decade since 1900, largely at an accelerating rate.  Like Dallas, it added more than 1,000,000 people in the 00s:



The CSA is made up of the main Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land Metro and four micro areas.  The core Houston Metro has always grown since 1900.  The micros have not been so lucky:



The 1900-2016 decadal county map shows that the Houston CSA's core county, Harris, has grown every decade since 1900. Recently, suburban/exurban Fort Bend and Montgomery Counties are growing faster than Harris on a percentage, but not numerical, basis:



The 1980-2016 yearly percentage population change map shows that Harris County actually lost some population after the oil bust in the mid 1980s.  Otherwise, the picture is generally one of growth, except at the fringes:



Finally, the 2000-16 town map shows a slight decline in Houston in 2003.  The city of Galveston also seems to have lost population throughout the 00s.  Otherwise, it largely mirrors the county map, which shouldn't be surprising in a CSA that has relatively few incorporated places:



Like in most high-growth areas, the static maps aren't that interesting.  The 1980-2016 county percentage population change map shows growth throughout the CSA, except in Matagorda County:



The 2000-16 County map is virtually identical:



And the 2010-16 Town Map pretty much shows growth throughout the CSA, except in Trinity County:

16  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 23, 2017, 08:40:58 pm
The Miami-Fort Lauderdale-St. Lucie CSA has always grown since 1900.  The extent of the growth in the 1900s-20s is not easily calculable, though, due to county boundary changes. At the turn of the last century, Dade County covered most of Southeast Florida, including some or all of current Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin Counties.  Further, the northern part of the CSA was in Brevard County, which is not in the CSA. Nevertheless, it is likely that fewer than 10,000 people lived in the CSA as of 1900.  But the calculated early numbers should be taken with a grain of salt:



Every component metro of the Miami CSA has always grown every decade since 1900.  The one component micropolitan area, Okeechobee, shrunk in the 1930s.  This was probably not due to a county boundary change, but I can't be sure:  



On the county level, practically every CSA county has been gaining population every decade:



The 1980-2016 county yearly percentage population change map gif shows that Miami-Dade County lost population in 1992 (likely due to Hurricane Andrew) and Broward County lost population from 2005-07 (likely due to Hurricane Wilma).  Martin and Okeechobee Counties have also periodically lost population. Otherwise, the map is a sea of deep red:



The 2000-16 town change map shows that the 2005-07 Broward County losses were pretty much countywide, except for a few inland communities.  Otherwise, the map shows that most other areas have consistently grown, including the city of Miami:



The static maps aren't terribly interesting.  The 1980-2016 county percentage population change map shows heavy growth throughout the CSA:



As does the 2000-16 county map:



The 2010-16 town map is a sea of red.  Every component town has gained population this decade:
17  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 22, 2017, 11:37:57 pm
The Philadelphia-Reading-Camden CSA has grown every decade since 1900 - though it only barely grew in the 1970s:



Its component metros weren't as consistent.  The core Philadelphia-Camden-Wimington MSA lost population in the 1970s.  The Ocean City MSA, a.k.a. Cape May, like Cape Cod has been stagnant recently:



On the county level, Philadelphia lost population in the 1930s and 1950-1990s.  Philadelphia's suburban counties grew in the post-WWII timeframe:



The 1980-2016 yearly county population estimate map gif shows Philadelphia turning the corner around 2006.  Now, the CSA's New Jersey counties are stagnant or losing population:



The county trends are confirmed by the 2000-16 town percentage population change maps.  Philadelphia's New Jersey suburbs are losing population, perhaps along with some Bucks County towns, while Philadelphia's Pennsylvania suburbs still grow a bit:



The 1980-2016 static county population change map shows that all but Philadelphia and Salem County growing in that time frame:



The 2000-16 static county map shows that Philadelphia has gained since then, while Salem and Cape May Counties have lagged behind:



The 2010-16 static town map confirms the New Jersey stagnation:

18  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 22, 2017, 05:19:52 pm
The Dallas-Fort Worth Metro grew by about 100,000 residents pre-WWII.  Growth quickly ramped up after.  Now, explosive growth of 1,000,000+ is the norm:



The CSA is made up of 7 micropolitan and 2 metropolitan areas.  The vast majority of people live in the central Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metro.  It's always grown.  The outlying metros and micros haven't been so lucky:



The decadal county map shows huge losses in outlying rural counties during the 1920s.  It also shows suburban Denton and Collin Counties growing fastest on a percentage basis these days:



The 1980-2016 county population estimates map shows growth practically everywhere every year.  Dallas County lost population during 2 years in the mid 2000s:



According to the town map, those Dallas County losses were largely due to population loss in Dallas and some southeastern Dallas County suburbs:



The 1980-2016 static county map show explosive growth, particularly in the collar counties:



The 2000-2016 county map confirms that this growth is continuing:



And the 2010-2016 town growth map shows where the growth is at the town level. Texas has some very weirdly shaped towns due to their annexation laws:



19  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 21, 2017, 11:01:00 pm
The story of the Boston-Worcester-Providence CSA is one of fairly steady, unspectacular growth of about 400,000 people most years:



Most of the component metros have always grown, except on Cape Cod and the far reaches of New Hampshire:



The decadal County map gif shows Suffolk County (mainly Boston) lost population in the 1930s and 1950s-70s. Some of the losses were six-figures. Cape Cod rapidly grew, but is now stagnant:



The 1980-2016 yearly estimate map gif shows a pattern similar to San Francisco in the early 2000s, with much of the Massachusetts part of the population shrinking or stagnant.  Did the dot-com bust affect the Boston CSA, too, or is this due to people moving to the NH exurbs?



In the 2000-16 Town map gif, you can see that Cape Cod's population stagnation isn't exactly uniform or consistent town-by-town, and I think Bedford, MA losing population in the 2000s due to cuts at Hanscom AFB:



As for the static maps, the 1980-2016 county percentage population change map shows growth throughout - but higher percentage growth at the fringes of the CSA:



And the 2000-2016 county growth map shows Boston's county among the fastest-growing counties of the metro over that period, with losses on Cape Cod and urban Rhode Island:



I'm still trying to fix the 2000-16 Town growth maps.  The 2010-16 town version isn't terribly remarkable:

20  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 21, 2017, 09:31:01 pm
Why is Ulster County PA part of the New York CSA?

Are there people in Ulster County who actually commute to NYC or spend a decent amount of time there?

Jimrtex can probably give you the technical answer, but as I understand it, CSA borders are based on commuting patterns.  They change every 5 years, and were last changed for 2012.  We're due for a 2017 update soon, probably in January 2018.

Enough Ulster County residents probably commute to Dutchess County (in the NY MSA) or White Plains, Westchester County to justify CSA status, but not Metro status.  And there might even be a few Ulster County residents who commute all the way to NYC on Metro North from Poughkeepsie, which is right across the Mid-Hudson Bridge from southern Ulster.  Ulster is in the NYC TV market, so including it in the CSA isn't terribly strange to me, anyway.

The stranger county to me is Carbon, PA, which is in the Allentown-Bethlehem Metro being in the CSA.  I doubt many people commute to NYC from there.  But enough probably commute to Lehigh County, PA to put it in the Allentown Metro, and enough Lehigh/Northampton County, PA residents probably commute to NYC or its NJ suburbs to put the Allentown MSA in the CSA.
21  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 21, 2017, 03:05:36 pm
The Bay Area's CSA is the country's fifth-largest.  It is called San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland because San Jose is the largest city in the metro.  San Jose and San Francisco-Oakland are also in different metros.

The 1900-2016 CSA map gif shows a consistently growing San Francisco CSA:



The 1900-2016 metro map gif shows that every component metro grew every decade:



I had to use the slide effect instead of the flip effect on this gif because the latter was crashing my gifmaking program.

The decadal county map gif shows that the city/county of San Francisco lost population from the 50s through the 70s, probably due to suburbanization:



The yearly 1980-2016 yearly county estimate population change gif shows the effects of the dot com bust in the early 2000s.  Many counties lost population then, but have since rebounded, making the decade's growth in them net-positive:



The 2000-2016 yearly town estimate population change map gif shows how the dot com bust played out at the micro level:



The static 1980-2016 county percentage population change map shows good growth, particularly in the suburban/exurban counties:



And the 2000-16 static county map also shows CSA-wide growth:


Unfortunately, I noticed a rounding issue with my 2000-16 static town maps.  I have to re-update my databases in order to fix it.  I also have to fix at least some of the earlier maps (there's more near 0s than there should be, and county remainders, at least, are getting rounded up to the nearest tenth, instead of not being rounded). 

Here is a static map of town 2010-16 growth.  Everything is growing:

22  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 20, 2017, 11:57:32 pm
One piece of conventional wisdom is that the outflow from the IL collar counties this decade was in part due to moves to neighboring states driven by tax policy. That CW seems to hold up to some degree in the northern collars of Lake and McHenry compared to Kenosha. It doesn't seem to hold for the eastern edge, since the neighboring areas of IN in the CSA aren't growing.

From the town maps I've already done, that seems to be the case in the St. Louis Metro.  Metro East Illinois is shrinking, while the STL Missouri exurbs are growing.

Right now in Chicagoland, it seems like only the far west and southwest exurbs are growing - along the newish I-355 corridor, perhaps?
23  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 20, 2017, 11:37:33 pm
Baltimore and Washington, DC are in the same CSA.  Like the federal government, the CSA has steadily grown since 1900:



But it really is a tale of two cities.  The current Baltimore Metro used to be larger than the DC Metro.  As the metro map gif shows, DC is now over twice as large:



The 1900-2016 decadal county growth map gif shows that both the cities of DC and Baltimore started steadily losing population in the 1950s.  But DC has been gaining population recently.  Baltimore generally has not:



With the raw growth numbers removed, you can see the percentage growth patterns of Virginia's independent cities more clearly:



The 1980-2016 yearly percentage population growth map gif shows that DC turned the corner around 2005 and is currently picking up steam. Baltimore continued to lose population, except for a few years:



Unfotunately, the 2000-16 yearly town map gif doesn't add a whole lot of data.  There are fewer incorporated areas in most of the south and west, and Census doesn't provide yearly population estimates for CDPs:



The static 1980-2016 map shows that DC has had net positive growth since 1980.  But the DC suburbs and exurbs have grown even more rapidly:



The 2000-16 static county map shows the same pattern:


For comparisons, the 2000-16 static town map is below:


And, finally, here's the 2010-16 static town map, which is marginally useful for redistricting purposes:

24  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 19, 2017, 11:02:49 pm
Like Los Angeles, the Chicago CSA has grown every decade since 1900:



But unlike Los Angeles, some of the component Chicago CSA Metropolitan/Micropolitan Areas haven't always grown.  The core Chicago-Naperville-Elgin Metro area has always grown, though:



The 1900-2016 decadal county map shows a somewhat erratic growth pattern.  Even Cook County has lost population at times:


And the 1980-2016 shows an equally erratic pattern, although the Collar Counties have generally grown - until recently:



The 2000-2016 town map gif shows early growth in the far-out exurbs, followed by growth inward, and now, not much growth at all, except perhaps in the far west and southwest suburbs:


The 1980-2016 static county growth map shows population losses in Cook, and gains in most of the Collar Counties:


The 2000-2016 County Map is similar:


The 2000-2016 Town Map shows an outward growth pattern:


And, as always, the 2010-2016 Town Map might be useful for redistricting:
25  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth in CSAs and Metropolitan Areas, 1900-2016 on: July 19, 2017, 05:22:21 pm
Maps of the Los Angeles CSA are a bit more boring than New York, because there are only 5 counties in the CSA.

First, the CSA overview map:


The CSA has grown every decade, usually at a healthy clip.

Next, the map of the component metro areas:



Again, the three component metros grew every decade.

The decadal county growth maps show the same consistent growth pattern at the county level:


But the 1980-2016 yearly population estimate change maps show that Los Angeles County lost population a few years during the mid-1990s and mid 2000s.  Orange County also lost a little bit of population in the mid 2000s:



Next, the 2000-16 town population change map.  I've zoomed in to only include the major populated parts of Riverside and San Bernadino Counties.  The town population change maps pretty much confirm the OC and LA County slight population loss pattern:



Finally, two static town population change maps - 2010-2016 and 2000-2016.  I'm only going to make the county 1980-2016 and 2000-2016 maps on request, since there are so few counties in the LA CSA, and the maps wouldn't be that interesting:

2010-2016:


2000-2016:

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 443


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines