[PRCo] Re: population trends

Mon Apr 9 11:26:32 EDT 2012

I think John was referring to the late Leonard Staisey, an Allegheny County
commissioner.

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org] On Behalf Of Dwight
Long
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 11:06 AM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: population trends

John

Are you referring to Bob Stacey (RIP) or someone with a sound-alike name?

Dwight

From: John Swindler
Sent: Monday, 09 April, 2012 09:00
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: population trends

Perhaps much of the US census statistics are not important - except to
politicians looking for someone to tax, and for playing games with number of
congressional districts.   Don't overlook what Stasey told Geissenheimer
back in 1972 - that about 25% of the voting rolls have changes each
election.  People move.  They get jobs.  They get married.  They have
children.  They buy homes.  Children get old and leave the home.  They
retire.  They die.  So why should this all occur in the same county or even
the same municipal district??       > Subject: [PRCo] Re: population trends 
> From: fwschneider at comcast.net
> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 16:18:07 -0400
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> 
> Some of the U. S. Census Bureau's intercensal estimates have been way off
base.   Do I believe growth in Allegheny County?
> 
> The county is much more urban than the surrounding areas.   It includes
Pittsburgh.  Many other cities showed unprecedented growth in the 2010
census ... perhaps we are learning that we cannot afford to live on huge
lots in the suburbs in humongous homes that cost a fortune to heat and cool
and require inordinate expense to get to and from our daily destinations.
Would I believe a slight gain ... maybe.   The gain they are showing is 0.2
percent, which, if extrapolated over ten years, would only be one-third of
the loss between 2000 and 2010.
> 
> For the first time, Pittsburgh's unemployment is slightly below the
national average.  Maybe the region has finally reached equilibrium and can
accept a slight influx of people.  Time will tell.   
> 
> But the story tells us it was driven not by more births than deaths but by
people moving into the area.   If you start with a given ... given we
already believe that the population is growing, and we know from vital
statistics that deaths exceed births, then we must blame the increase on
people into the area.   Yes, you all know I am a cynic.   But I also know
there is no good way to document migration between states or counties or
cities.   
> 
> We should be creating the estimate by adding together births minus deaths
plus in migration minus out migration.  However, I want you to tell me how
you are going to measure migration from state to state.   If the federal
government was really good at it, then we would know where all those
Mexicans are dispersed!   :<)   Truth is, they don't know.   If they want to
take the time to look, for example, at where courtesy claims for
unemployment insurance are being filed, they might have some idea that
people from Pittsburgh moved to Topeka or that people from Wichita moved to
Dallas.   They might also get a clue by looking at school enrollment data.
But my experience in looking at some of their intercensal estimates makes me
believe they are more along the line of projections based on the past than
honest attempts at estimating the future.   The latter takes too much work
and is awfully hard to defend.    But this Pittsburgh number is the reverse
of the past.   I have no cl!
ue!
>   what they are doing.   Maybe they know some cities went up and think
it's only proper to move them all up?????
> 
> I remember a urinating contest I got into back in the early 1970s over how
many Spanish speaking people lived in Lancaster County. I inflamed the
Spanish speaking community by telling them that my estimate was 2,500.  My
estimate was one-quarter of the number they wanted us to believe.   I had
based it on the percentage of kids in the schools and the family size of
Spanish kids compared to non Spanish.   All knowns.   When the census came
in a few months later at 2,475, we were of course both idiots ... I didn't
know how to estimate and the census didn't know how to count.    But the guy
who argued most loudly with me moved back to Puerto Rico.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 8, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Dennis F Cramer wrote:
> 
> > http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_790
> > 377.html This was in the Sunday (4-8) Tribune Review. What is not 
> > included in the online version is the graph showing the various 
> > counties. I have attached a scan of it.
> > 
> > Here is a small portion of the article.
> > "The 10-county area of Western Pennsylvania showed population gains 
> > in 2011, according to Census Bureau population estimates released last
week.
> > 
> > Allegheny County's population increased by 2,233 people from 2010 
> > for a 2011 population of 1.2 million people. The region's population 
> > - despite losses in some counties, like Westmoreland, which saw a 
> > 614 decrease from 2010 - rose by 930 people for a 2011 population of 2.6
million people.
> > 
> > The 10-county region includes Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, 
> > Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington and Westmoreland
counties.
> > 
> > Newcomers rather than newborns made the difference. The region had 
> > 3,468 more deaths than births, Census figures showed."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >          Dennis F. Cramer
> > http://home.windstream.net/dfc1
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> > -- Type: image/jpeg
> > -- Size: 433k (444399 bytes)
> > -- URL : 
> > http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/population%20tre
> > nds.jpg
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 