2020 Census

symphonicpoet · PostNov 10, 2023#10762023-11-10T06:31+00:00

^^With due respect, I think we all know that. I think the city government and a variety of civic organizations are trying to do that. Federal policy makes it a real challenge. State policy doesn't do us any favors. I'm a bum who writes music and helps his parents because his immigrant wife works her touchas off. (I did help her immigrate, to be fair. And let me tell you from direct experience, the feds make that really, really, really bloody hard.)

I've wondered in the past whether it would be worthwhile starting some kind of organization to help hook local companies up with legal services to help them with visa sponsorship paperwork, since we have a lot of talented young students come through the local universities who would love to stay, but end up going elsewhere since they can't even apply for jobs here. (Some of my wife's college friends have gone to Cali, others have gone back home.) Honestly, I doubt my wife's current employer would even have looked at her if she hadn't already gotten here by other means. (And become a citizen by then, but that's another story.)

Short story: there are people who want to come, who want to stay. People here want to help. But man, are there a lot of obstacles in the way. I wholeheartedly agree with you, and I think a bunch of other people do too. So . . . how do we make it happen?

GoHarvOrGoHome · PostNov 10, 2023#10772023-11-10T15:24+00:00

Federal policy really needs to come in here. Create a "fast lane" in the visa process for people willing to move to slow growth/declining cities. Cut the time it takes to become a citizen by a few years for those willing to live in the Rust Belt, many of them would likely stay for good too.

Baltimoron · PostDec 18, 2023#10782023-12-18T16:22+00:00

Dialing in from Baltimore. I have been city watching household sizes shrink rapidly for several years in just about every older city. St Louis however seems to be the poster child, with the average household size dropping to 1.86 in the latest American Community Survey (ACS 1-year.) The ACS now has the majority of St Louis households as single person. Since 1.86 is extremely low even compared to other shrinking cities, I was wondering if anyone has given the city's ultra-low household size any thought. Household sizes in Baltimore are shrinking too, but on current trend it will take until the end of the decade to get down to St Louis' current level.

I have only spent a couple of days in St Louis - had a great time - but I had time to drive around the city by myself and with a local friend. I didn't notice a city where everyone lives in tiny apartments. House sizes looked pretty comparable to Baltimore's. Also, in St Louis I didn't see a large area of tiny rowhouses like in East Baltimore. The North Side was quite a shock, even to a person who has spent some time in West and Southwest Baltimore. Those areas of Baltimore are a disaster, but much more structurally intact. Anyway, to me the North Side looked already depopulated when I was there a few years ago and not ripe for a lot more depopulation. Do any of you have any thoughts?

jshank83 · PostDec 18, 2023#10792023-12-18T16:32+00:00

Baltimoron wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
Dialing in from Baltimore. I have been city watching household sizes shrink rapidly for several years in just about every older city. St Louis however seems to be the poster child, with the average household size dropping to 1.86 in the latest American Community Survey (ACS 1-year.) The ACS now has the majority of St Louis households as single person. Since 1.86 is extremely low even compared to other shrinking cities, I was wondering if anyone has given the city's ultra-low household size any thought. Household sizes in Baltimore are shrinking too, but on current trend it will take until the end of the decade to get down to St Louis' current level.

I have only spent a couple of days in St Louis - had a great time - but I had time to drive around the city by myself and with a local friend. I didn't notice a city where everyone lives in tiny apartments. House sizes looked pretty comparable to Baltimore's. Also, in St Louis I didn't see a large area of tiny rowhouses like in East Baltimore. The North Side was quite a shock, even to a person who has spent some time in West and Southwest Baltimore. Those areas of Baltimore are a disaster, but much more structurally intact. Anyway, to me the North Side looked already depopulated when I was there a few years ago and not ripe for a lot more depopulation. Do any of you have any thoughts?

I keep wondering how much more of the north side really can clear out. Seems like it has to be close to the bottom.

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10802023-12-18T16:38+00:00

Baltimoron wrote:Dialing in from Baltimore. I have been city watching household sizes shrink rapidly for several years in just about every older city. St Louis however seems to be the poster child, with the average household size dropping to 1.86 in the latest American Community Survey (ACS 1-year.) The ACS now has the majority of St Louis households as single person. Since 1.86 is extremely low even compared to other shrinking cities, I was wondering if anyone has given the city's ultra-low household size any thought. Household sizes in Baltimore are shrinking too, but on current trend it will take until the end of the decade to get down to St Louis' current level.

I have only spent a couple of days in St Louis - had a great time - but I had time to drive around the city by myself and with a local friend. I didn't notice a city where everyone lives in tiny apartments. House sizes looked pretty comparable to Baltimore's. Also, in St Louis I didn't see a large area of tiny rowhouses like in East Baltimore. The North Side was quite a shock, even to a person who has spent some time in West and Southwest Baltimore. Those areas of Baltimore are a disaster, but much more structurally intact. Anyway, to me the North Side looked already depopulated when I was there a few years ago and not ripe for a lot more depopulation. Do any of you have any thoughts?

I have to wonder what the impact of younger folks without kids moving into the city is to this number. We’ve added a sizeable number of studio or 1 bedroom doors over the past couple years.

quincunx · PostDec 18, 2023#10812023-12-18T16:41+00:00

Household size shrinkage has been a major component of population loss since the 1950s. Fun fact if Stl County had the same household size at Stl City did in 1950, it'd have like 300k more people.

Part of it is the phenomenon of households overall shrinkage in a wealthy country. Part of it is families not living in the city due to the SLPS having a lot of impoverished children. Another part is Black families leaving north city.

Alex discussed household size in 2011, and 2014.

The 2010 Census Pt. II: The State of St. Louis

https://nextstl.com/2011/04/the-2010-ce ... -st-louis/

Understanding Population Change and Density in St. Louis (UIC & nextSTL @ PXSTL)

https://nextstl.com/2014/09/pxstl/

GoHarvOrGoHome · PostDec 18, 2023#10822023-12-18T16:49+00:00

The black areas of STL are where the majority of our larger households still exist, and that population has been the fastest shrinking population in the city. The fact of the matter is that parts of the city that still have families are not good places to raise a family. Infrastructure is bad, neighborhoods are hallowed out and plagued by vacancy or concentrated poverty. Most importantly, the schools are bad. Public schools in the county are much better than what STLPS can offer (unless you find your way into our excellent magnet schools) even in most cheaper districts.

Even in the affluent areas of STL, parents generally move out to the suburbs when their kids get to schooling age unless they can afford private education.

Thus how we get to our abnormally low average household size number. Similar to how our murder statistics get blown out of proportion by our city/county divide, this one gets warped as well. The city is one giant struggling school district, the housing stock trends smaller and towards apartments, and is also a magnet for young adults just starting out and DINKs like myself who don't care about schools. Perfect storm for low household size.

Getting STLPS back on track is a big part of reversing this trend to some extent, unfortunately there really isn't a clear path to that happening anytime soon.

quincunx · PostDec 18, 2023#10832023-12-18T16:59+00:00

What is bad about SLPS? That it has a lot of poor kids? I'd like to see SLPS student performance by household income compared to other districts.

dtgwvc · PostDec 18, 2023#10842023-12-18T17:11+00:00

The test scores, quality of education outside of magnet schools, and reputation of STLPS are all really bad. My opinion is that we should took into smartphone bans in schools

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10852023-12-18T17:21+00:00

quincunx wrote:What is bad about SLPS? That it has a lot of poor kids? I'd like to see SLPS student performance by household income compared to other districts.

Math proficiency is at like 12% vs a state average of 35%. Reading is at 19% vs a state average of 45%. It’s simply not an option to send you kids to SLPS for anyone who can afford private or moving to a better district.

STLEnginerd · PostDec 18, 2023#10862023-12-18T17:53+00:00

Baltimoron wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
Dialing in from Baltimore. I have been city watching household sizes shrink rapidly for several years in just about every older city. St Louis however seems to be the poster child, with the average household size dropping to 1.86 in the latest American Community Survey (ACS 1-year.) The ACS now has the majority of St Louis households as single person. Since 1.86 is extremely low even compared to other shrinking cities, I was wondering if anyone has given the city's ultra-low household size any thought. Household sizes in Baltimore are shrinking too, but on current trend it will take until the end of the decade to get down to St Louis' current level.

I have only spent a couple of days in St Louis - had a great time - but I had time to drive around the city by myself and with a local friend. I didn't notice a city where everyone lives in tiny apartments. House sizes looked pretty comparable to Baltimore's. Also, in St Louis I didn't see a large area of tiny rowhouses like in East Baltimore. The North Side was quite a shock, even to a person who has spent some time in West and Southwest Baltimore. Those areas of Baltimore are a disaster, but much more structurally intact. Anyway, to me the North Side looked already depopulated when I was there a few years ago and not ripe for a lot more depopulation. Do any of you have any thoughts?

Glad you enjoyed St. Louis. I think we have a lot to offer for both weekend visitors and new residents. I think we tend to surprise people when they actually get a chance to experience it here.
My guessas to why the demographics here. St. Louis struggles to draw immigrants. Immigrant families tend to be larger and are artificially propping up the demographics of the 'healthier cities' you reference.

Why does St. Louis struggle to draw immigrants?

We're in the middle, not a typical port of entry
We have a state government that is at best ambivalent and often hostile to the idea of new immigrants
We have poor name recognition internationally (not the worst but its mediocre)

Those are a few of the big ones IMHO.

Interesting comparison to Baltimore. My sense is there is a fair amount of new immigrant spill over to Baltimore from other cities on the coast that are pricing a lot of them out. I imagine this props up the demographics and preserves the urban fabric. I might be wrong since i don't know Baltimore much at all. Flew through the airport a few times, but never explored the city.

North side depopulation will probably outpace redevelopment here for a while yet. A lot of who is left are elderly longtime residents. So time will catch up to them eventually and younger locals don't seem open to rethinking the large scale abandonment yet. Its pretty engrained in the culture at this point that the northside is beyond hope. Of course propagating that sort of rhetoric, shapes opinions such that it is a self fulfilling prophesy. Pulling out of the death spiral is really really difficult.

dtgwvc · PostDec 18, 2023#10872023-12-18T17:58+00:00

Im optimistic about the north side because I think demand for single family houses are so red hot that we will see significant rehabs and infill in the near northwest side neighborhoods just north of Delmar. The NGA area will probably take longer just because it’s so far gone and Paul McKee owns half of it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

quincunx · PostDec 18, 2023#10882023-12-18T18:08+00:00

dtgwvc wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
The test scores, quality of education outside of magnet schools, and reputation of STLPS are all really bad. My opinion is that we should took into smartphone bans in schools

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do kids do that are in your income bracket?

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10892023-12-18T18:15+00:00

quincunx wrote:
Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
quincunx wrote:What is bad about SLPS? That it has a lot of poor kids? I'd like to see SLPS student performance by household income compared to other districts.
Math proficiency is at like 12% vs a state average of 35%. Reading is at 19% vs a state average of 45%. It’s simply not an option to send you kids to SLPS for anyone who can afford private or moving to a better district.
How do kids do that are in your income bracket?

I’m not sure i understand that question? Poverty levels are obviously a driver of the performance of SLPS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JaneJacobsGhost · PostDec 18, 2023#10902023-12-18T18:30+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
What is bad about SLPS? That it has a lot of poor kids? I'd like to see SLPS student performance by household income compared to other districts.

This is my question too.

I grew up in a school district that shouldered the load of educating the vast majority of region’s poor and black populations. Those in surrounding, whites only districts would malign my district by pointing to its low average scores.

In reality my district had far more AP and honors programs and extra curricular opportunities and despite our poor average test numbers, each graduating class at my high school sent around 20 students each year to ivy or ivy adjacent colleges and universities.

In the surrounding, whites-only school districts with the higher average scores, it was considered a big deal if your kid got in to the U of I or SLU.

PostDec 18, 2023#10912023-12-18T18:32+00:00

But anyway, it’s all about not sending your kids to school with black children. That’s what it has ALWAYS been about and what it continues to be about.

quincunx · PostDec 18, 2023#10922023-12-18T18:54+00:00

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
quincunx wrote:
Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
Math proficiency is at like 12% vs a state average of 35%. Reading is at 19% vs a state average of 45%. It’s simply not an option to send you kids to SLPS for anyone who can afford private or moving to a better district.
How do kids do that are in your income bracket?
I’m not sure i understand that question? Poverty levels are obviously a driver of the performance of SLPS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point is that the biggest factor in school performance is the student's household income. I hate that people look up test scores and think it'll be the outcome for their kid when it's more a proxy for how poor the kids are. It perpetuates the death spiral.

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10932023-12-18T18:56+00:00

Yes racism is a contributing factor to why SLPS is in the state it’s in, and yes some parents don’t want to send their kids to school with black kids. But for purposes of the current discussion, SLPS is a major driver of why parents don’t stay in the city. If I had kids, I would not send them to a non magnet SLPS, because I would want a better education for them. On the other hand, diversity in enrollment is something I would also want my children to experience in their education.

JaneJacobsGhost · PostDec 18, 2023#10942023-12-18T19:06+00:00

Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10952023-12-18T19:06+00:00

quincunx wrote:
Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
quincunx wrote: How do kids do that are in your income bracket?
I’m not sure i understand that question? Poverty levels are obviously a driver of the performance of SLPS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My point is that the biggest factor in school performance is the student's household income. I hate that people look up test scores and think it'll be the outcome for their kid when it's more a proxy for how poor the kids are. It perpetuates the death spiral.

Doesn’t that have the potential to be a self fulfilling prophesy? Aren’t children usually going to school with others in the same income bracket? That seems to be the case in SLPS.

PostDec 18, 2023#10962023-12-18T19:07+00:00

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?

Better/safer facilities. Higher pay = better teachers. More extra curricular programs. I mean have you ever talked to a poor kid at a SLPS school? They don’t think they are getting the same chance at an education as a kid at Ladue high.

JaneJacobsGhost · PostDec 18, 2023#10972023-12-18T19:19+00:00

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?
Better/safer facilities. Higher pay = better teachers. More extra curricular programs. I mean have you ever talked to a poor kid at a SLPS school? They don’t think they are getting the same chance at an education as a kid at Ladue high.

Considering there are two SLPS high schools ranked higher than Ladue Horton, I don’t think this statement is anything close to universal.

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#10982023-12-18T19:26+00:00

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:
Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?
Better/safer facilities. Higher pay = better teachers. More extra curricular programs. I mean have you ever talked to a poor kid at a SLPS school? They don’t think they are getting the same chance at an education as a kid at Ladue high.
Considering there are two SLPS high schools ranked higher than Ladue Horton, I don’t think this statement is anything close to universal.

Interesting. What SLPS schools rank higher than Ladue Horton?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

STLEnginerd · PostDec 18, 2023#10992023-12-18T19:28+00:00

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?
Better/safer facilities. Higher pay = better teachers. More extra curricular programs. I mean have you ever talked to a poor kid at a SLPS school? They don’t think they are getting the same chance at an education as a kid at Ladue high.

They'd be right to a degree but they are also being TOLD they don't have the same chance as someone from Ladue. Thus they (speaking in generalities) do not invest in their own education. Someone going to Ladue (excepting the rich entitled ones) is working to the high expectation of parents who made sacrifices to put them in that school district. So they work to those expectations and they model the drive they see in their parents.

SO I'm not saying the schools are equivalent, they are not for all the reasons you mentioned but if they had them tomorrow I question whether we would see the impact. Definitely not in the first test cycle. You have to convince the kids in SLPS that the means are there for them to be successful.

Debaliviere91 · PostDec 18, 2023#11002023-12-18T19:31+00:00

STLEnginerd wrote:
Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑
Dec 18, 2023
JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Can you describe how the education elsewhere is better?
Better/safer facilities. Higher pay = better teachers. More extra curricular programs. I mean have you ever talked to a poor kid at a SLPS school? They don’t think they are getting the same chance at an education as a kid at Ladue high.
They'd be right to a degree but they are also being TOLD they don't have the same chance as someone from Ladue. Thus they (speaking in generalities) do not invest in their own education. Someone going to Ladue (excepting the rich entitled ones) is working to the high expectation of parents who made sacrifices to put them in that school district. So they work to those expectations and they model the drive they see in their parents.

SO I'm not saying the schools are equivalent, they are not for all the reasons you mentioned but if they had them tomorrow I question whether we would see the impact. Definitely not in the first test cycle. You have to convince the kids in SLPS that the means are there for them to be successful.

Totally agree. Your peers and the culture around you impacts your quality of education.

2020 Census

Choose Display Mode