45 replies to this topic

[Carter711]

Rank the 10 largest cities in New England (population of just the city, not metro area)  But please don't grab an Almanac or look it up online.  Just guess from what you already think.  Don't expect to get them all or even any of them right.   Also guess the pop. of each city please.  

For example...

1. Boston, MA... 1,230,000
2. New Bedford, MA... 563,000
3. Burlington, VT... 495,000
4. .....

You get the picture.  

In a few days I'll post the most recent Census estimates, I think it might be interesting to see how close our perceptions are to reality.

[Jerry2]

1.) Boston-539K
2.) Providence-173K
3.) Worcester-172K
4.) Springfield-149K
5.) Bridgeport-139K
6.) New Haven-126K
7.) Stamford-124K
8.) Hartford-123K
9.) Manchester-111K
10.) Waterbury-108K

[HartfordTycoon]

1. Boston-?
2. Providence-?
3. Springfield-165k
4. Worcestor-?
5. Bridgeport-145k
6. Hartford-125k
7. New Haven-123k
8. Stamford-110k
9. Waterbury-108k

?10.Cambridge-?

Edited by HartfordTycoon, 26 July 2006 - 09:46 PM.

[Cotuit]

Jerry02908, on Jul 26 2006, 07:06 PM, said:

2.) Providence-173K

~176k

[MadVlad]

Boston 583k
Providence 175k
Worcester 150k
Springfield 145k
Bridgeport 139k
Hartford 125k
New Haven 124k
Stamford 121k
New Bedford 110k
Waterbury 108k

[runawayjim]

boston ~589k
providence ~176k
worcester ?
bridgeport ?
new haven ~124k
hartford ~124k

new haven is larger than hartford, i know that much, but i know they're close.

Edited by runawayjim, 28 July 2006 - 10:32 AM.

[HartfordTycoon]

runawayjim, on Jul 28 2006, 12:31 PM, said:

boston ~589k
providence ~176k
worcester ?
bridgeport ?
new haven ~124k
hartford ~124k

new haven is larger than hartford, i know that much, but i know they're close.

It's not larger. Hartford is the second largest city in CT.

I did just check the estimates, the 2005 estimate puts them ahead by a few hundred.

Edited by HartfordTycoon, 28 July 2006 - 11:21 AM.

[runawayjim]

HartfordTycoon, on Jul 28 2006, 01:01 PM, said:

It's not larger. Hartford is the second largest city in CT.

according to the US census estimates from 2003, hartford has 124,387 and new haven has 124,512.  the census doesn't seem to have 2005 estimates, but i found these...

http://products.cerc...tp/hartford.pdf

http://products.cerc...tp/newhaven.pdf

those have hartford at ~124,600 and new haven at ~130k

wait... found the census estimates for 2005...

got these from the population finder at census.gov

new haven - 124,791
hartford - 124,397

Edited by runawayjim, 28 July 2006 - 11:22 AM.

[Jerry2]

runawayjim, on Jul 28 2006, 01:21 PM, said:

according to the US census estimates from 2003, hartford has 124,387 and new haven has 124,512.  the census doesn't seem to have 2005 estimates, but i found these...

http://products.cerc...tp/hartford.pdf

http://products.cerc...tp/newhaven.pdf

those have hartford at ~124,600 and new haven at ~130k

wait... found the census estimates for 2005...

got these from the population finder at census.gov

new haven - 124,791
hartford - 124,397

If this is the most recent estimate then, Worcester is slightly ahead of Providence. So change mine around and leave the rest.

[HartfordTycoon]

Jerry02908, on Jul 28 2006, 03:28 PM, said:

If this is the most recent estimate then, Worcester is slightly ahead of Providence. So change mine around and leave the rest.

Wow, so I guess Mighty Worchester is New Englands number 2 city. That's funny it's the one nobody outside of New England has ever heard of and/or can't spell or pronounce....

Edited by HartfordTycoon, 28 July 2006 - 01:33 PM.

[runawayjim]

Jerry02908, on Jul 28 2006, 03:28 PM, said:

If this is the most recent estimate then, Worcester is slightly ahead of Providence. So change mine around and leave the rest.

from that population finder...

providence - 176,862
worcester - 175,898

close, but no cigar...

[runawayjim]

by the way... i have a feeling those pdf's i linked to earlier for hartford and new haven are way off, so i wouldn't trust what they say.  the 2005 estimates i got were from the census.

[Jerry2]

runawayjim, on Jul 28 2006, 03:43 PM, said:

from that population finder...

providence - 176,862
worcester - 175,898

close, but no cigar...

I read somewhere that they had eclipsed Providence. Worcester was one of the biggest growth spots in all of NE. Every other NE city lost population.

[runawayjim]

Jerry02908, on Jul 28 2006, 04:27 PM, said:

I read somewhere that they had eclipsed Providence. Worcester was one of the biggest growth spots in all of NE. Every other NE city lost population.

no idea... that's the 2005 estimate from the census... it's possible it's wrong, but i really don't know...

[Cotuit]

According to the US Census website, Providence is still ahead of Worcester as of the 2005 estimates:

Providence: 176,862
Worcester: 175,898

Providence officially passed Worcester as of the 2000 census, but as you can see we are very close, and seeing as we are 5 years out from the official count, I wouldn't be surprised if they were actually ordered differently, though Providence seems to have been growing faster since at least 1990. And the Providence estimate for 2005 is actually down about 2,000 from the 2004 estimate.

[Cotuit]

Considering these are estimates, Hartford and New Haven are in a statistical deadheat with New Haven leading slightly:

New Haven: 124,791
Hartford: 124,397

Stamford is closing in quick though:

Stamford: 120,045

[waccamatt]

What about the same thing for metro's?

Boston - 5m or so
Hartford - 1.2m or so
Providence - 800k or so
Worcester
New Haven
Bridgeport
New Bedford-Falls River
Springfield
Manchester
Stamford-Greenwich
Portland

[Jerry2]

Cotuit, on Jul 29 2006, 01:05 AM, said:

According to the US Census website, Providence is still ahead of Worcester as of the 2005 estimates:

Providence: 176,862
Worcester: 175,898

Providence officially passed Worcester as of the 2000 census, but as you can see we are very close, and seeing as we are 5 years out from the official count, I wouldn't be surprised if they were actually ordered differently, though Providence seems to have been growing faster since at least 1990. And the Providence estimate for 2005 is actually down about 2,000 from the 2004 estimate.

I don't remember the article I read, but it said Worcester was #1 with just over 4% population growth in the last year.They have also expanded service to Boston and are experiencing a commuter boom as of late.

[runawayjim]

Jerry02908, on Jul 29 2006, 09:20 AM, said:

I don't remember the article I read, but it said Worcester was #1 with just over 4% population growth in the last year.They have also expanded service to Boston and are experiencing a commuter boom as of late.

i wouldn't be surprised if the new expanded providence service to boston increases the providence population over the next year or so...

[Cotuit]

Jerry02908, on Jul 29 2006, 09:20 AM, said:

I don't remember the article I read, but it said Worcester was #1 with just over 4% population growth in the last year.They have also expanded service to Boston and are experiencing a commuter boom as of late.

Don't know where you read that, but according to the census bureau, as of July 2005 (and every year since 2000) Providence has a slight lead on Worcester. Though Worcester did grow slightly between '04 and '05 while Providence contracted slightly. But as I said, these are all estimates, and we are 5 years out from the base upon which those estimates are based, Providence and Worcester are basically tied.

I don't know about the commuter expansion either, I know the Worcester Mayor wants more commuter rail service, but as of yet he hasn't got it. Maybe it was an older article. Providence know has more service than Worcester thanks to last weeks service expansion.