671
Senior MemberSenior Member
671

Post6:00 PM - May 15#1376

I'd also point out that while Slay won the challenge in the mid-2000s, it was revealed to be completely false in 2010. The city doesn't necessarily have a great history with challenging.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


2,765
Life MemberLife Member
2,765

Post6:32 PM - May 15#1377

Or did STL just stop challenging? The challenge doesn't rewrite Census methodology. They'll make the same miscalculation every year and every decade unless someone is there to challenge. It doesn't make sense for every city but for STL, probably best to have a department and university partnership that can challenge every census and annual estimate. Since these estimates drive federal funding it could payoff rather quickly. 

1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

Post9:25 PM - May 15#1378

pattimagee wrote:
soulardx wrote:
3:22 PM - May 15
dbInSouthCity wrote:
2:35 PM - May 15
And in the same time frame the city added 5,000
Housing units and number of vacant units went down.   We’re in the 290s still
Denis, I largely respect your data analysis and you've beaten this housing units drum for years.... yet it's never gained steam anywhere other than here and when you tweet about it (and then RT yourself).

Why?

I'm not saying you are wrong and want to believe you are correct but if it's so clear to you, why no one else?
imo, I think its probably due to the fact that city gov probably needs ancillary data confirmation that STL City is actually and honestly at the bottom of the decreasing trend... rather than the number "just" being higher than the reported... So that you can earnestly have the adjustment made and then also begin to show a trend-line of added population in the years to follow. Imagine getting that adjustment only to have another decrease in the years to follow... takes all of the air out of the balloon.
An issue with a unit vacancy approach is that doesn’t control for the collapse in family sizes, single vs married couples living together, etc.

523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

Post10:25 PM - May 15#1379

StlAlex wrote:
6:00 PM - May 15
I'd also point out that while Slay won the challenge in the mid-2000s, it was revealed to be completely false in 2010. The city doesn't necessarily have a great history with challenging.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Can't say I recall the 2010 thing happening.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen. lol Was it reported on? 

671
Senior MemberSenior Member
671

Post12:48 AM - May 16#1380

soulardx wrote:
StlAlex wrote:
6:00 PM - May 15
I'd also point out that while Slay won the challenge in the mid-2000s, it was revealed to be completely false in 2010. The city doesn't necessarily have a great history with challenging.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Can't say I recall the 2010 thing happening.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen. lol Was it reported on? 
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... sults.html

https://www.newgeography.com/content/00 ... ation-loss

The Census Bureau would have had the city at 311,000 under their model, 8,000 below the actual 319,000. But the city won 6 challenges throughout the 2000s, which resulted in a false estimate of 357,000 for 2009.

All of this was part of the fake renaissance the Slay Admin was spinning.

Overall, I agree the city should challenge. I think it's closer to 285,000 than 278,000, but it was embarrassing and devastating back when the Census figures came out and revealed everything everyone thought about the city was actually a complete lie. Idk how you could forget.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


528
Senior MemberSenior Member
528

Post5:26 AM - May 16#1381

Isn’t census data not even 100% accurate when it’s taken every 10 years? It’s not like everyone responds to the requests to fill out information, so it’s hard to get a true figure. I do think St. Louis is pretty close to bottoming out on the population side of things. You’re reaching a point where people are either staying because they don’t have the money to move or are fully invested in the City and want to stay.

2030 should be the low census point. 2040 should be higher.

523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

Post3:58 PM - May 16#1382

StlAlex wrote:
12:48 AM - May 16
soulardx wrote:
StlAlex wrote:
6:00 PM - May 15
I'd also point out that while Slay won the challenge in the mid-2000s, it was revealed to be completely false in 2010. The city doesn't necessarily have a great history with challenging.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Can't say I recall the 2010 thing happening.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen. lol Was it reported on? 
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... sults.html

https://www.newgeography.com/content/00 ... ation-loss

The Census Bureau would have had the city at 311,000 under their model, 8,000 below the actual 319,000. But the city won 6 challenges throughout the 2000s, which resulted in a false estimate of 357,000 for 2009.

All of this was part of the fake renaissance the Slay Admin was spinning.

Overall, I agree the city should challenge. I think it's closer to 285,000 than 278,000, but it was embarrassing and devastating back when the Census figures came out and revealed everything everyone thought about the city was actually a complete lie. Idk how you could forget.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
thanks for sharing. that did jog some memories! lol

Slay's admin won every challenge they did. Wonder why they stopped in 2010? seems they could have kept winning. 

The challenges are about image/brand/PR wins. To simply keep the city off of the "biggest population" lists.  Bring back the challenges!

671
Senior MemberSenior Member
671

Post4:00 PM - May 16#1383

soulardx wrote:
StlAlex wrote:
12:48 AM - May 16
soulardx wrote: Can't say I recall the 2010 thing happening.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen. lol Was it reported on? 
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... sults.html

https://www.newgeography.com/content/00 ... ation-loss

The Census Bureau would have had the city at 311,000 under their model, 8,000 below the actual 319,000. But the city won 6 challenges throughout the 2000s, which resulted in a false estimate of 357,000 for 2009.

All of this was part of the fake renaissance the Slay Admin was spinning.

Overall, I agree the city should challenge. I think it's closer to 285,000 than 278,000, but it was embarrassing and devastating back when the Census figures came out and revealed everything everyone thought about the city was actually a complete lie. Idk how you could forget.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
thanks for sharing. that did jog some memories! lol

Slay's admin won every challenge they did. Wonder why they stopped in 2010? seems they could have kept winning. 

The challenges are about image/brand/PR wins. To simply keep the city off of the "biggest population" lists.  Bring back the challenges!
They wouldn't have kept winning, the 2010 census revealed the city was high on its own supply and delusional.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

Post4:22 PM - May 16#1384

StlAlex wrote:
4:00 PM - May 16
soulardx wrote:
StlAlex wrote:
12:48 AM - May 16
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... sults.html

https://www.newgeography.com/content/00 ... ation-loss

The Census Bureau would have had the city at 311,000 under their model, 8,000 below the actual 319,000. But the city won 6 challenges throughout the 2000s, which resulted in a false estimate of 357,000 for 2009.

All of this was part of the fake renaissance the Slay Admin was spinning.

Overall, I agree the city should challenge. I think it's closer to 285,000 than 278,000, but it was embarrassing and devastating back when the Census figures came out and revealed everything everyone thought about the city was actually a complete lie. Idk how you could forget.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
thanks for sharing. that did jog some memories! lol

Slay's admin won every challenge they did. Wonder why they stopped in 2010? seems they could have kept winning. 

The challenges are about image/brand/PR wins. To simply keep the city off of the "biggest population" lists.  Bring back the challenges!Census shows St. Louis is hollowing out BY DOUG MOORE • > 314-340-8125 JEREMY KOHLER • > 314-340-8337 AND Paul hampel • > 314-727-6234 St. Louis Post-Dispatch Feb 25, 2011 
They wouldn't have kept winning, the 2010 census revealed the city was high on its own supply and delusional.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
I think this is the exact 2011 story that makes your point and likely what you remembered and what I didn't. lol

This *exact* same story could be written today. that's how little things have changed.  Worth a reread.

https://www.stltoday.com/online/article ... 2bc8b.html

Census shows St. Louis is hollowing out 
BY DOUG MOORE • > 314-340-8125 JEREMY KOHLER • > 314-340-8337 AND Paul hampel • > 314-727-6234 St. Louis Post-Dispatch Feb 25, 2011 

ST. LOUIS • The city's population has dropped to a level not seen since the late 19th century, with some neighborhoods in the north losing more than 20 percent of their residents. In all, the city lost 8 percent of its population from 2000, about 29,000 people. St. Louis County also saw its population drop, by 1.7 percent, to below 1 million people. Meanwhile, the rest of the Missouri counties in the St. Louis region grew, based on new population numbers released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. Illinois numbers released last week showed that seven of the eight counties in the Metro East grew, giving the metropolitan area 4.2 percent growth. 

The population loss in both the city and the county came from substantial drops in their white populations. Unlike towns in the Metro East, such as Belleville, the gain of blacks and other minorities in St. Louis County was not enough to offset the loss of whites. St. Louis County lost 10 percent of its white population, or 78,882 people. The black population increased 21 percent, or 39,723. The city lost both whites and blacks, 8 percent and 12 percent, respectively. The overall population loss was a stunner for city leaders, who had aggressively fought the Census Bureau for the better part of the last decade on annual population estimates. 

The last estimate showed the city at 356,587, an increase of nearly 8,400 people from the 2000 Census. The 2010 number came in at 319,294, nearly 29,000 less than a decade ago. City leaders did little to sugarcoat the latest census news. "This is absolutely bad news," Mayor Francis Slay said on his blog immediately after the numbers were made public. "We had thought, given many of the other positive trends, that 50 years of population losses had finally reversed direction." The city's population peak was 856,796 in 1950, and it has dropped steadily since then. It is now just slightly above its post-Civil War population. Slay said the new numbers for the city and St. Louis County "will require an urgent and thorough rethinking of how we do almost everything. ... If this doesn't jump-start regional thinking, nothing will." 

Merging with the county is something Slay has talked of for years. St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley stuck with his position this week, saying such a decision should be made by a vote of the people. After the census numbers came out Thursday, Dooley remained positive, despite the population decline. "The things we are doing must be working, because last year, the population estimate was 993,000," Dooley said. The census counted 998,954. "At the end of the day, we still have a million people and St. Louis County is still the jobs destination of the entire region, hands down," he said. Dooley predicted that such county developments as the massive NorthPark enterprise zone, east of Lambert-St. Louis International Airport, would reverse the trend. 

He touched on the issue of white flight from north St. Louis County school districts, but could offer no reason for the migration. The Hazelwood School District has had a 30 percent drop in white students from 2000, as has Normandy. Ferguson-Florissant schools saw a 32 percent drop. "I really don't focus on ethnicity; I focus on quality of life. And North County is a great place to live, work and shop," Dooley said. While the largest loss of population in the county was in the northern communities, mid-county cities immediately to the west of St. Louis also experienced decline, including Maplewood and Richmond Heights. Clayton, however, jumped by 24 percent, to 15,939. Clayton Mayor Linda Goldstein speculated that the growth there came from people downsizing their homes and moving to her city to be closer to their jobs and public transit. Maplewood Mayor James White attributed his city's loss of 13 percent of its population to the housing torn down to make way for commercial development east of Hanley Road, including a Walmart, Sam's Club and Lowe's store.

For the rest of the St. Louis region, it was good news. St. Charles County grew by 27 percent. Its largest city, O'Fallon, shot up by nearly 72 percent. It is now the seventh largest city in the state. Even with that impressive growth, it's a slowdown from a nearly 147 percent jump a decade before, when the city moved to 13th from 28th. O'Fallon Mayor Bill Hennessy celebrated by sending out a press release. "The growth that this city has experienced over the last decade is truly remarkable," Hennessy said. "It is a testament to the wonderful residents and businesses who help to keep this city such a great place to live."

St. Charles County, with 360,485 residents, surpasses the city of St. Louis. Lincoln County also grew, by 35 percent. Jefferson County is now the fifth largest county in the state, with 218,733 people, a 10.4 percent increase from 2000. On the other side of the state, Kansas City saw its population increase by 4.1 percent, taking its population to 459,787. Jackson County, which includes Kansas City, grew by 2.9 percent. But it still is ranked second behind St. Louis County. The Kansas City suburb of Lee's Summit grew 29.2 percent. Columbia grew by 28.4 percent, to 108,500 people. Springfield, Missouri's third largest city, grew by 5.2 percent, to 159,498. In St. Louis, city leaders crunched the numbers again and again, looking for what caused the dramatic loss. Slay's chief of staff, Jeff Rainford, said that the city lost about 6,700 adults and more than 22,000 people 17 and younger. Those numbers, he said, show it's clear that St. Louisans left for better public schools.

"For the city to thrive, people have to feel comfortable raising their kids here," Rainford said. He said the recession probably forced some parents to move their children from private city schools to suburban public schools. Rainford said the city had not yet decided whether to appeal the population count to the Census Bureau. But the city is already finding a discrepancy that could have led to an undercount, he said. The Census Bureau counted 176,000 housing units, while the city has 181,800 on record, using information it received from the U.S. Postal Service based on the first quarter of 2010. The census forms asked residents to list the address they were living at on April 1, 2010. 

Don Roe, acting director of planning and urban design for the city, said the successful challenges to population estimates were based on a formula provided by the Census Bureau. Once new construction is added to the total and demolished units are subtracted, the city is to estimate 2.6 people for each new single-family unit and 1.9 people for those living in multi-family units. "It's not like we're spitting in the wind," Roe said. Rainford said that if there was a silver lining, it was that not all parts of the city saw their population drop. Downtown and midtown wards saw growth. But north St. Louis was hit hard. The Hyde Park neighborhood saw a loss of 28 percent of its population. The Ville lost 26 percent. At least seven wards in north St. Louis had double-digit losses. Rainford said the city had done a decent job attracting empty nesters, young people and gays and lesbians. But it has been unable to hold on to the families that are now presumably moving to the suburbs. "We have to do something different," Rainford said. "That's the good, the bad, the ugly." 

9,652
Life MemberLife Member
9,652

Post9:03 PM - May 16#1385

things that dont click with pop est
Screenshot 2026-05-16 160100.jpg (130.25KiB)

671
Senior MemberSenior Member
671

Post10:08 PM - May 16#1386

For the record, I do think our population is being undercounted. There's simply none of the other affects we should be seeing from the city losing nearly 10% of its population in 5 years. Many of the affects we should be seeing, like existed in the 2000s, just aren't happening.

It's kinda the same as how downtown is a "dead wasteland" but hotels have been doing well, all the largest hotels are downtown, we haven't had a major downtown hotel closure in several years, downtown has a literal Four Seasons.....new hotels are being constructed or in the pipeline, etc. Other indicators just don't support the dead downtown narrative.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

Post10:21 PM - May 16#1387

StlAlex wrote:For the record, I do think our population is being undercounted. There's simply none of the other affects we should be seeing from the city losing nearly 10% of its population in 5 years. Many of the affects we should be seeing, like existed in the 2000s, just aren't happening.

It's kinda the same as how downtown is a "dead wasteland" but hotels have been doing well, all the largest hotels are downtown, we haven't had a major downtown hotel closure in several years, downtown has a literal Four Seasons.....new hotels are being constructed or in the pipeline, etc. Other indicators just don't support the dead downtown narrative.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Downtown hotels have been doing better in 2025 and so far year after being a very poor performer 2020-2024. Playing catch up to some degree and margin compression this year is some of the worst in the US. So not necessarily doing well financially.

STL has seen more urban core hotel foreclosures / work outs than some of our Midwestern peers of the last few hears. KC is also struggling with margin compression so there might be some regional cost pressures or could just be coincidence.

The Four Seasons is a very unique case. I’ve heard is it’s a loss leader for the casino from pretty reliable sources. Pretty confident it would not be there if not for the casino / larger development once planned.

671
Senior MemberSenior Member
671

Post10:42 PM - May 16#1388

ldai_phs wrote:
StlAlex wrote:For the record, I do think our population is being undercounted. There's simply none of the other affects we should be seeing from the city losing nearly 10% of its population in 5 years. Many of the affects we should be seeing, like existed in the 2000s, just aren't happening.

It's kinda the same as how downtown is a "dead wasteland" but hotels have been doing well, all the largest hotels are downtown, we haven't had a major downtown hotel closure in several years, downtown has a literal Four Seasons.....new hotels are being constructed or in the pipeline, etc. Other indicators just don't support the dead downtown narrative.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Downtown hotels have been doing better in 2025 and so far year after being a very poor performer 2020-2024. Playing catch up to some degree and margin compression this year is some of the worst in the US. So not necessarily doing well financially.

STL has seen more urban core hotel foreclosures / work outs than some of our Midwestern peers of the last few hears. KC is also struggling with margin compression so there might be some regional cost pressures or could just be coincidence.

The Four Seasons is a very unique case. I’ve heard is it’s a loss leader for the casino from pretty reliable sources. Pretty confident it would not be there if not for the casino / larger development once planned.
It wouldn't be there if not for the major attraction it shares a campus with? That's true for a lot of things.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

Post10:44 PM - May 16#1389

StlAlex wrote:
ldai_phs wrote:
StlAlex wrote:For the record, I do think our population is being undercounted. There's simply none of the other affects we should be seeing from the city losing nearly 10% of its population in 5 years. Many of the affects we should be seeing, like existed in the 2000s, just aren't happening.

It's kinda the same as how downtown is a "dead wasteland" but hotels have been doing well, all the largest hotels are downtown, we haven't had a major downtown hotel closure in several years, downtown has a literal Four Seasons.....new hotels are being constructed or in the pipeline, etc. Other indicators just don't support the dead downtown narrative.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Downtown hotels have been doing better in 2025 and so far year after being a very poor performer 2020-2024. Playing catch up to some degree and margin compression this year is some of the worst in the US. So not necessarily doing well financially.

STL has seen more urban core hotel foreclosures / work outs than some of our Midwestern peers of the last few hears. KC is also struggling with margin compression so there might be some regional cost pressures or could just be coincidence.

The Four Seasons is a very unique case. I’ve heard is it’s a loss leader for the casino from pretty reliable sources. Pretty confident it would not be there if not for the casino / larger development once planned.
It wouldn't be there if not for the major attraction it shares a campus with? That's true for a lot of things.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
My understanding it’s a loss leader maybe break even. The casino throws off alot of cash some of which is used to subsidize the hotel. Needed to propose such a hotel to win the casino RFP. Hotel probably wouldn’t survive if it was standalone.

I like it and it’s a good asset to have. Just wouldn’t point to it and say “events and tourism are doing so well that we landed this brand.”

230
Junior MemberJunior Member
230

Post10:54 PM - May 16#1390

turn back on the lights at the top of the building

1,631
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,631

Post4:43 PM - May 17#1391

Agree! Can’t believe they gave up on the skidhawk

1,525
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,525

Post3:36 AM - May 18#1392

dbInSouthCity wrote:
9:03 PM - May 16
things that dont click with pop est
And other things that don't click 

2018 - Etax collected -  173,774,265

2024 - Etax collected - 219,014,997

https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... imates.cfm

An increase over and above the rate of inflation - while the city lost 14,000 people 

possibilities -

 - Lots of jobs added in the city with the new workers residing elsewhere 

 - The people that are leaving have little to no taxable income 

 - The city really did not lose that many people 

probably some combination of all 3 

Regardless the decennial census is the only one that drills down enough to be somewhat accurate - St Louis has always faired better in it. 
 

1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

Post12:52 PM - May 18#1393

beer city wrote:
dbInSouthCity wrote:
9:03 PM - May 16
things that dont click with pop est
And other things that don't click 

2018 - Etax collected -  173,774,265

2024 - Etax collected - 219,014,997

https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... imates.cfm

An increase over and above the rate of inflation - while the city lost 14,000 people 

possibilities -

 - Lots of jobs added in the city with the new workers residing elsewhere 

 - The people that are leaving have little to no taxable income 

 - The city really did not lose that many people 

probably some combination of all 3 

Regardless the decennial census is the only one that drills down enough to be somewhat accurate - St Louis has always faired better in it. 
 
ETAX slightly outpaced CPI-U during 2018-2024. 2024 actual vs growing the 2018 figure by CPI-U results in pretty similar figures ($219 million vs $216 million). Healthcare led economic growth during this period which are higher paying jobs that likely explain much of the gap.

Can’t conflate jobs with population in a metro where <15% of metro residents live in the City. The City does a poor job of retaining young adults, who pay little to no income tax as you pointed out, and have an ever increasing death rate as the population ages, senior citizens also often don’t pay income tax.

9,652
Life MemberLife Member
9,652

Post1:16 PM - May 18#1394

2024 e tax also included refunds from covid era,
So there was a lot more collected

The city is expected to collect $250,000,000 by end of June for FY 26 (July 1, 2025-June 30 2026)

2,074
Life MemberLife Member
2,074

Post1:35 PM - May 18#1395

ldai_phs wrote:
12:52 PM - May 18
beer city wrote:
dbInSouthCity wrote:
9:03 PM - May 16
things that dont click with pop est
And other things that don't click 

2018 - Etax collected -  173,774,265

2024 - Etax collected - 219,014,997

https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... imates.cfm

An increase over and above the rate of inflation - while the city lost 14,000 people 

possibilities -

 - Lots of jobs added in the city with the new workers residing elsewhere 

 - The people that are leaving have little to no taxable income 

 - The city really did not lose that many people 

probably some combination of all 3 

Regardless the decennial census is the only one that drills down enough to be somewhat accurate - St Louis has always faired better in it. 
 
ETAX slightly outpaced CPI-U during 2018-2024. 2024 actual vs growing the 2018 figure by CPI-U results in pretty similar figures ($219 million vs $216 million). Healthcare led economic growth during this period which are higher paying jobs that likely explain much of the gap.

Can’t conflate jobs with population in a metro where <15% of metro residents live in the City. The City does a poor job of retaining young adults, who pay little to no income tax as you pointed out, and have an ever increasing death rate as the population ages, senior citizens also often don’t pay income tax.
I think the reason Denis is also showing KC and Springfield is because both of those MSA populations are growing at healthy rates.
2020-2024
KC MSA +11% from 2.2M->2.25M (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/KNCPOP?)
SGF MSA +13.5% from 475K->500K (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SPIPOP)

The point isn’t necessarily “earnings tax = population growth,” but that STL’s economic and tax trends seem to be behaving much more like other growing Missouri metros than a region supposedly seeing stagnation.

So when STL’s income numbers continue improving alongside KC and Springfield, but the census estimates are the outlier showing STLCity declining and STL MSA flat, I think its easy to understand why we would question whether the population estimates are fully capturing what’s actually happening on the ground.

The interesting thing to me, now after looking at this... is should the entire MSA be challenging these census estimates? or what is KC/SGF doing differently that would make them so demonstrably different than us in census counts only? 

222
Junior MemberJunior Member
222

Post2:35 PM - 7 days ago#1396

It had been a while since I pulled Missouri Census Data Center reports on American Community Survey estimates trends for St. Louis and wow -- there are some stunning pieces of data in there when you look at the past decade (2014 ACS compared to 2024 ACS). See the full report here.

Some highlights:

Age.png (75.99KiB)
-> Nearly all age groups declining (to be expected with overall drop) - except the 65-85 year old range. 65-74 grew by 47.4 percent! 
-> Largest drops seen in Under 5 and 15-19, suggestive of parents continuing to leave the city.
-> Over the decade median age rose from 34.9 to 37.3.


Income.png (94.68KiB)

-> Huge drops in low income households along with gigantic gains in high income households. In 2014, the percentage of households earning less than $25k was 38.4% of total, down to 24.2. The change in households making $75k or more was 19.7 percent in 2014 to 38.5 percent in 2024. Obviously there was a lot of inflation in the meantime, so some of this change is to be expected...but the relative income spread inversion is still striking.

Other interesting tidbits (sans screen caps):
-> Poverty rate dropped from 28.5 percent to 21.7 percent, with a -33.1 percent  drop in total number of impoverished individuals.
-> Despite the large population drop, employed civilian population rose slightly.
-> In the "Workers by Industry" table, the "Information" industry declined in employment by 68 percent. I'm guessing these would be IT/tech employees that left during the pandemic because of work from home policies?
-> On the other hand, the "Professional, scientific, management, administrative" category rose by 50 percent.
-> Average Household Size shrank from 2.23 to 1.80; Average Family Size went from 3.25 to 2.60.
-> In "Educational Attainment," the city went from 32 percent with a bachelor's degree or higher to 45 percent over the decade.
-> Foreign born population went from 5.7 percent to 8.8.

Okay one more screenshot since it's easier to show than tell:

Housing.png (59.67KiB)
-> An overall 8 percent increase in occupied housing units (and 31 percent decrease in vacancy) despite a 12 percent population drop. That's remarkable.

2,074
Life MemberLife Member
2,074

Post2:52 PM - 7 days ago#1397

^Kind of crazy to imaging the probability you would need to lose that many residents... seemingly... only to average household size reduction? If i'm reading all of that correctly... 

523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

Post2:53 PM - 7 days ago#1398

stldotage wrote:
2:35 PM - 7 days ago
It had been a while since I pulled Missouri Census Data Center reports on American Community Survey estimates trends for St. Louis and wow -- there are some stunning pieces of data in there when you look at the past decade (2014 ACS compared to 2024 ACS). See the full report here.

Some highlights:

Age.png-> Nearly all age groups declining (to be expected with overall drop) - except the 65-85 year old range. 65-74 grew by 47.4 percent! 
-> Largest drops seen in Under 5 and 15-19, suggestive of parents continuing to leave the city.
-> Over the decade median age rose from 34.9 to 37.3.


Income.png
-> Huge drops in low income households along with gigantic gains in high income households. In 2014, the percentage of households earning less than $25k was 38.4% of total, down to 24.2. The change in households making $75k or more was 19.7 percent in 2014 to 38.5 percent in 2024. Obviously there was a lot of inflation in the meantime, so some of this change is to be expected...but the relative income spread inversion is still striking.

Other interesting tidbits (sans screen caps):
-> Poverty rate dropped from 28.5 percent to 21.7 percent, with a -33.1 percent  drop in total number of impoverished individuals.
-> Despite the large population drop, employed civilian population rose slightly.
-> In the "Workers by Industry" table, the "Information" industry declined in employment by 68 percent. I'm guessing these would be IT/tech employees that left during the pandemic because of work from home policies?
-> On the other hand, the "Professional, scientific, management, administrative" category rose by 50 percent.
-> Average Household Size shrank from 2.23 to 1.80; Average Family Size went from 3.25 to 2.60.
-> In "Educational Attainment," the city went from 32 percent with a bachelor's degree or higher to 45 percent over the decade.
-> Foreign born population went from 5.7 percent to 8.8.

Okay one more screenshot since it's easier to show than tell:

Housing.png-> An overall 8 percent increase in occupied housing units (and 31 percent decrease in vacancy) despite a 12 percent population drop. That's remarkable.
Thank you for pulling that data and offering your analysis. Super interesting. 

222
Junior MemberJunior Member
222

Post2:55 PM - 7 days ago#1399

pattimagee wrote:
2:52 PM - 7 days ago
^Kind of crazy to imaging the probability you would need to lose that many residents... seemingly... only to average household size reduction? If i'm reading all of that correctly... 
Yes, I think it's a situation of losing 1,000 5-person households with children and gaining 1,200 households of singles (-5,000 + 1,200). Big losses despite increased overall occupancy.

5,719
Life MemberLife Member
5,719

Post1:10 AM - 7 days ago#1400

Thanks stldotage. 

Crazy to think that it is probably good snapshot of the US overall if we continue with our current immigration, or should say correctly no immigration policy.   We are on track for no population/zero gain in next couple of years and or even declining in not too distance future.   Then throw in the fact that continue to sprawl and the infrastructure required to support it. 

Read more posts (0 remaining)