Those seem more like closer to accurate number to me IMO.
Estimated Current Population: 635,872 Population: 673,342 White Population: 80,042 Black Population: 571,308 Hispanic Population: 48,027 Asian Population: 5,969 Hawaiian Population: 609 Indian Population: 8,007 Other Population: 24,643 Male Population: 317,392 Female Population: 355,950 Avg House Value: $76,384.00 Avg Household Income: $26,801.80 Avg Persons Per Household: 2.51 Median Age: 35.76 Median Age [[Male): 34.06 Median Age [[Female): 37.17
That's what I was noticing too, a rapid [[and I do mean RAPID) decline throughout the city. I can't imagine what would offset that. The 635,872 estimated current population number sounds more believable.In the parts of Detroit I drive through everyday [[much of the east side, SW Detroit), I'm noticing a continued rapid decline. I ocassionally detour through midtown as I commute across town, and I notice some improvements, but certainly not nearly enough to counter-balance to rapid decline of the other 95% the city. Once we begin to see Chicago loop-type improvements, then I might change my mind.
It boggles the mind how Detroit was the 5th largest city in the US just 35 years ago, and is now the 18th largest.Here is the Census Bureau url with 2012 population estimates for all cities in Michigan and the USA.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/ci...012/index.html
This September, the Census Bureau will release 2012 American Community Survey data showing the characteristics of Detroit residents. We will be able to see if there has been an migration of young college graduates into the city and, to some degree, analyzing who is leaving. In 2012, Detroit retained its rank as the nation's 18th largest city. Quite likely El Paso will pass Detroit in population size by the time of the next census. Texas cities have annexed their potential suburban rings.
It gets even weirder when you realize, generally, NYC, Chicago and Philadelphia have maintained their rankings.
And Detroit wasn't just any ol' unsustainable boom town. It has/had the same they have to maintain its high population.
"The fastest growing cities in Metro Detroit are the most sprawling, and least urban: Macomb Twp, Lyon Twp, and Oakland Twp."
Except none of those are cities. These are all estimates. There's some basis for them but they're not actual numbers so cheerleaders and doomdayers on either side of the Detroit population numbers are arguing over educated guesses.
In the latest Canadian Census, only two cities with a population over 100,000 lost people between 2006 and 2011. Leading the way was Windsor, Ontario with a loss of 1.3% followed by Thunder Bay at 1.1%. Every other Canadian city posted population gains which leads you to wonder what will happen to Windsor if Detroit isn't able to turn around its' rapid decline. Perhaps the two cities can work together to find a solution to the problems that have made both cities a symbol of large-scale urban failure in the American and Canadian media.
|
Bookmarks