U.S. Census Bureau screws up on KCMO estimates

[ShowMeKC]

The U.S. Census Bureau now says that KC has lost less than a hundred people and hasn't gained anyone.

Now, this is where they are screwed up.

The Northland is constantly developing more and more houses and gaining more and more people every year, about 70% of the homes are in the city limits of KCMO and the houses are being sold quickly.

Downtown is also booming gaining 6,100 people in the last 2-3 years. And the current and proposed housing units (over 8,000) are all being sold quickly.

The city maintains the most housing units and housing permits in the whole metro, with over (or near) 2,000 housing permits issued each year.

I can go to the northland the housing areas of KC and see alot more sold and rented signs than for sale or for rent signs.

I think they have finally screwed up on KC's numbers.

[Allan]

Welcome to the club! The census bureau is notorious for making estimates that are way off. In the 1990s they estimated that Chicago lost people. Then in 2000, low and behold, the city gained 100,000 people. They try to provide estimates that, unfortunately, aren't all that accurate. You'll have to wait until 2010 if you want accurate numbers.

[ShowMeKC]

I was in Chicago on the 24th and 25th and I can tell you, it's not losing people at all.

Oh and someone on SSC said they use old IRS records, well, our IRS is in the middle of a big 6,000 employee move to downtown, I'm sure they aren't going to screw around with the census with all the construction.

[Allan]

Yeah, Chicago certainly isn't loosing people. They tried to tell us that Detroit's rate of decline has increased its pace to the highest level in more than 30 years, despite all the reconstruction efforts all over the city. We are only experiencing the biggest boom since the 1940s. I think that the census needs to work on their methods of estimating a bit.

[Ivory Tower]

Welcome to the club! The census bureau is notorious for making estimates that are way off. In the 1990s they estimated that Chicago lost people. Then in 2000, low and behold, the city gained 100,000 people. They try to provide estimates that, unfortunately, aren't all that accurate. You'll have to wait until 2010 if you want accurate numbers.

Even then it is not 100% accurate.

Detroit has people that are ilegal immigrants, has arrest warrents and scores of homeless people.

Not to mention those who just dose not fill out the form.

I believe figures were more accurate 50 years ago because you had less of that stuff.

[M. Brown]

Would this explain Boston's loss in population?

[BrandonTO416]

The census bureau estimates system is always off it seems.

Unfortunate, really.

[KCghettoboi]

yea...

[ShowMeKC]

I emailed the local census branch, and they replied and told me it was the national part that comes up with the census estimates and projections, not them. Hehe so it's clear that they can screw up very easily. Since the estimates are not based in the city itself. And since they don't look at the post census growth rates and information.

[Brickcity]

You think you got screwed, you should see what they did to us.

[ShowMeKC]

yea, I even thought when I was in St. Louis your population loss wasn't very bad. I mean, at the rate they say it'd have to be visible. That'd be like 1 person a day or something...