The Census has released its population estimates for 2020

[Roadgeekteen]

There were only two states that lost population between 2010 and 2020: Illinois and West Virginia

Mississippi is still a state

Is it really? The standard of living there makes it seem more like a territory or an independent country.

[SP Cook]

And as outlined in this map:

https://mcusercontent.com/d525ab9ade4d860d2b5772468/images/9f3dcfb4-c61e-4c65-9d39-2e7bb761e6ac.png

West Virginia is the only state to lose population 1950-2020.  Other states have grown fast and others slow, but only one state has less people today than 70 years ago.  When WV had SIX congressmen, or roughly 6/435ths of the population.

On to redistricting.  The drive by media superficially just reports that this or that state has gained or lost a congress seat and moves on.  Lot more to it than that.  Districts have to be redrawn every time, even if the state stays even, because they must be equal and population growth or decline is never equal all around the state.  For example, when the numbers are fully released, eastern Kentucky will have lost a lot, even though Kentucky did not lose a seat, and thus the eastern districts will have to get larger geographically, while the Cincy suburb district will be geographically smaller.  So on across the process.

Remember that every state (except the ones with one seat) will have to redistrict, and also redistrict state senates and state houses as well.  Pretty much the story, everywhere, will be less seats for rural areas and more for suburban ones.

[kphoger]

15th, not bad, but I'm guessing that a lot of states passed us.

Is the top of the list "better"?

I just want to give a congratulations to Montana for finally crossing the one million mark.

Who said they're happy about it?

[webny99]

15th, not bad, but I'm guessing that a lot of states passed us.

Is the top of the list "better"?

Not according to the founding fathers!

I just want to give a congratulations to Montana for finally crossing the one million mark.

Who said they're happy about it?

They should be happy. They just doubled their number of US representatives.

[kphoger]

The standard of living there makes it seem more like a territory or an independent country.

What's your working definition of "standard of living"?  Are you comparing income to cost of living?  Mean, median?

[hotdogPi]

The standard of living there makes it seem more like a territory or an independent country.

What's your working definition of "standard of living"?  Are you comparing income to cost of living?  Mean, median?

It's somewhat of a meme (possibly pre-Internet) that Mississippi is last in everything, such as education, health care, etc.

[kalvado]

The standard of living there makes it seem more like a territory or an independent country.

What's your working definition of "standard of living"?  Are you comparing income to cost of living?  Mean, median?

It's somewhat of a meme (possibly pre-Internet) that Mississippi is last in everything, such as education, health care, etc.

I have a friend who worked in MS hospital for a few years. He mentioned that it was a regular conversation - are we still 50th in that rating? WHAT? We climbed to the  49 place? HOW???

[kphoger]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

[Scott5114]

A lot of times you'll see an article where some aspect of living in Oklahoma is terrible, usually with a stat showing us 46th in something or order. The comments will inevitably include at least one instance of "Well, thank GOD for Mississippi!"

[Roadgeekteen]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

Mississippi life expectancy is only 74.4 years. That's lower than Mexico or Brazil's.

[NWI_Irish96]

Two pet peeves from the various media outlets coverage of the results:

1) The Census has been referred to as the "Census survey". While the Census Bureau does conduct surveys, a survey and a census are different things. A survey gathers data from a sample of a larger population. A census gathers data from the entire population.

2) "If the census had counted 89 more people in New York . . . " While this statement is technically true, it is worded in a way that implies that there was some sort of decision made to count fewer people. Everybody that was there was counted.

[Scott5114]

The drive by media superficially just reports that this or that state has gained or lost a congress seat and moves on.

Well, yeah, considering the Census Bureau has only released by-state totals and nothing more specific is going to be released until August, what else are they supposed to report? Made-up stuff?

Districts have to be redrawn every time, even if the state stays even, because they must be equal and population growth or decline is never equal all around the state.  For example, when the numbers are fully released, eastern Kentucky will have lost a lot, even though Kentucky did not lose a seat, and thus the eastern districts will have to get larger geographically, while the Cincy suburb district will be geographically smaller.  So on across the process.

Remember that every state (except the ones with one seat) will have to redistrict, and also redistrict state senates and state houses as well.  Pretty much the story, everywhere, will be less seats for rural areas and more for suburban ones.

This is would be a good thing in Oklahoma, since both the 4th and the 5th districts have urban or suburban areas with vast swaths of rural territory that share nothing with them politically attached to it. (The 5th is particularly dumb: let's take most of the Oklahoma City metro and nail Pottawatomie County to the side of it and pretend that makes sense. Sure, guy.)

But then again I doubt it will get any better because the way it's set up is how the Legislature wants it. If anything, it will get worse, because the Wrong Candidate won in district 5 in 2018.

[Avalanchez71]

Two pet peeves from the various media outlets coverage of the results:

1) The Census has been referred to as the "Census survey". While the Census Bureau does conduct surveys, a survey and a census are different things. A survey gathers data from a sample of a larger population. A census gathers data from the entire population.

2) "If the census had counted 89 more people in New York . . . " While this statement is technically true, it is worded in a way that implies that there was some sort of decision made to count fewer people. Everybody that was there was counted.

It is the drive-by media that is made to sensationalize that comment.

[Scott5114]

It is the drive-by media that is made to sensationalize that comment.

Well, yeah, considering the Census Bureau has only released by-state totals and nothing more specific is going to be released until August, what else are they supposed to report? Made-up stuff?

[kalvado]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

Wel, this is the one I have in mind:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm
MS is only 49th over past few years.

[kkt]

A lot of times you'll see an article where some aspect of living in Oklahoma is terrible, usually with a stat showing us 46th in something or order. The comments will inevitably include at least one instance of "Well, thank GOD for Mississippi!"

Yes, the "thank God for Mississippi" line has been around at least since the 1980s when Molly Ivins quoted it in one of her columns.

[Roadgeekteen]

Two pet peeves from the various media outlets coverage of the results:

1) The Census has been referred to as the "Census survey". While the Census Bureau does conduct surveys, a survey and a census are different things. A survey gathers data from a sample of a larger population. A census gathers data from the entire population.

2) "If the census had counted 89 more people in New York . . . " While this statement is technically true, it is worded in a way that implies that there was some sort of decision made to count fewer people. Everybody that was there was counted.

I don't think everyone was counted.

[kphoger]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

Wel, this is the one I have in mind:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm
MS is only 49th over past few years.

I'm not sure I equate teen births with "standard of living".  There's probably correlation, but...

[Roadgeekteen]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

Wel, this is the one I have in mind:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm
MS is only 49th over past few years.

I'm not sure I equate teen births with "standard of living".  There's probably correlation, but...

Poorer sex ed leads to more teen births.

[kphoger]

Poorer sex ed leads to more teen births.

A lot more than that leads to teen births.

But that's still not the same thing as "standard of living" to me.

[Roadgeekteen]

Poorer sex ed leads to more teen births.

A lot more than that leads to teen births.

But that's still not the same thing as "standard of living" to me.

In richer areas where education is more of a priority, teens could be more forward-thinking about their actions and the effect that it could have on their future.

[kalvado]

Yeah, yeah, I get that.  But I'm curious to know what the numbers actually are.  And, for that, I need to know what numbers are being compared.  Is Mississippi really that far behind, say, #45 on whatever list you have in mind?

Wel, this is the one I have in mind:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm
MS is only 49th over past few years.

I'm not sure I equate teen births with "standard of living".  There's probably correlation, but...

Well, another one
https://ssti.org/blog/useful-stats-capita-gross-state-product-1998-2018
Animation about 2 screens down is quite telling.

[Avalanchez71]

Two pet peeves from the various media outlets coverage of the results:

1) The Census has been referred to as the "Census survey". While the Census Bureau does conduct surveys, a survey and a census are different things. A survey gathers data from a sample of a larger population. A census gathers data from the entire population.

2) "If the census had counted 89 more people in New York . . . " While this statement is technically true, it is worded in a way that implies that there was some sort of decision made to count fewer people. Everybody that was there was counted.

I don't think everyone was counted.

I don't think everyone was counted in Minnesota.  That game could be played all day.  Likely their was actually an overcount with the Coronavirus migration in NYS.

[jeffandnicole]

Two pet peeves from the various media outlets coverage of the results:

1) The Census has been referred to as the "Census survey". While the Census Bureau does conduct surveys, a survey and a census are different things. A survey gathers data from a sample of a larger population. A census gathers data from the entire population.

2) "If the census had counted 89 more people in New York . . . " While this statement is technically true, it is worded in a way that implies that there was some sort of decision made to count fewer people. Everybody that was there was counted.

I don't think everyone was counted.

If someone wasn't counted, they chose to remain hidden.

[hotdogPi]

Are these numbers going to affect vaccination percentages?