[PRCo] Re: population trends

Mon Apr 9 16:04:01 EDT 2012

 If you can telecommute, then doesn't much matter where you live.  There's a former co-worker that is a vice-president of a consulting firm in Philadelphia.  He still lives in Harrisburg.  Couple years ago, Dave mentioned that he had never been to the Philadelphia office - going to the office didn't generate billable hours.     > Subject: [PRCo] Re: population trends 
> From: fwschneider at comcast.net
> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 13:47:37 -0400
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> 
> I guess my perspective would be like Derricks.   
> 
> If you can live in cheaper digs in the city near where you work and telecommute too, that might just offset the taxes on a larger home in the burbs.   The millage rate may be higher in the city but the property may cost less and the commuting costs can also be a lot lower.   (And there is some similarity too when dad will's us a home as in your case or gives us the ground on which to build it, helps you build it, and gives a very low interest rate on a mortgage ... my case.   Our millage rate may be higher but we paid a lot less for the property so we can afford to live where we do.   If I had to buy where I live, would I?   There are a lot of "what ifs" that would change if I knew then what I know today.
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 9, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Edward H. Lybarger wrote:
> 
> > You have to look where Allegheny's population growth is...new communities
> > are springing up on vacant land all over the place, and it's most definitely
> > suburban.  I believe the population numbers, but don't understand the desire
> > to pay high property taxes.  Butler and Washington taxes are about half of
> > Allegheny's.  I guess my perspective is different from many.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org
> > [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org] On Behalf Of Fred
> > Schneider
> > Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 4:18 PM
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: population trends 
> > 
> > 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 clue!
> >  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_79037
> >> 7.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%20trend
> >> s.jpg
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>