In 1833, Chicago had a population of about 200. By 1900, it was the 5th largest city on earth. That’s one of the most explosive growth rates of any city anywhere at anytime.
@@dougclendening5896 - Supposedly, it was, for a period of about 30 years, the richest city in the world, as I've been told. Not so hard to believe, with the explosive growth of the automobile and the post-war baby boom, the demand for cars was high and Detroit produced.
@@StephenKershaw1 From Wikipedia: Brooklyn was an independent incorporated city (and previously an authorized village and town within the provisions of the New York State Constitution) until January 1, 1898, when, after a long political campaign and public relations battle during the 1890s, according to the new Municipal Charter of "Greater New York", Brooklyn was consolidated with other cities, towns, and counties, to form the modern City of New York, surrounding the Upper New York Bay with five constituent boroughs.
This would be a bit better if you made it clear when cities combined: Northern Liberties, Southward, and Spring Garden are now part of Philadelphia. And of course Brooklyn is now part of New York.
You can see the first westward wave in the 19th century (Chicago, St. Louis), the decline of the rust belt (Detroit), then the enormous growth of the sun belt. Cars and air conditioning were helpful.
1954 being the first year with more than one sun belt city makes so much sense. Also, it between 1953 and 1955 that rock and roll had it's big breakthrough.
It's going to be something how cities deep in the desert like Phoenix will go on with climate change wrecking havoc on the waterways that stream out from the Rockies.
I think it's funny that most of the older cities: NYC, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc. are shown to be shrinking until the current year and then they start growing again. Kinda shows the imprecision of future predictions
Great observation. It makes no sense. San Antonio should have passed Philly and left it in the dust and Houston should have caught and passed Chicago before 2030.
@Luke Shaw's Daddy Yeah I agree I think by 2035 everyone will move out of New York City and either Miami or Houston will be the new number 1 because everyone from New York is either moving to Florida or Texas!
New York City and Brooklyn had a combined population of 1 million by 1860. Brooklyn wasn’t officially part of New York City until it was consolidated with the other boroughs in 1898.
I’m from St. Louis, we just fell under 300,000 people and it was over 800,000 in the 50’s. Now the entire northern half of the city is a wasteland and we have the highest per capita murder rate in the country. So basically just like Detroit
@@nathanielthomas2502 they need to stop giving cities that nickname, Beirut used to be called the Paris of the Middle East and it’s not faring too well these days either
My wife and I went to Chicago a couple years ago, probably the coolest city I’ve ever been too. Beautiful city. Amazing food. Very clean. And so so so much to do. All the time. I honestly wish I could go back.
*The only thing I don't like about the way this is depicted here is when Brooklyn (Kings) merged with New York (Manhattan) and also the Bronx, Queens, and Staten Island (Richmond) in 1898. They made it seem like everyone was leaving Brooklyn like it was on fire with the numbers dwindling down on the chart. The people didn't go anywhere. Brooklyn just lost its autonomy as an independent city.*
its just straight lines from each census. It not a live count would have just squashed to zero instantly but the bar has to go from its population from one census to zero by the next census so it does a slope.
@@vivalabamremastered4127 Assuming it's based on the once-every-ten-year census, then the Civil War wouldn't really show up in the data. Besides, the number of deaths from the Civil War was ~1 million over the 4 years (i.e. 250,000 per year). US population was growing by ~700,000 per year that decade. This means the Civil War only slowed the growth but did not cause a decline. Without the Civil War, I suppose the US population would have been growing by ~950,000 per year.
Well it was 1 of the original places in the US. So it would only seem natural and the "business" capital of the world. But thanks to 2020, people leaving just like crooked California
6:04 You can see that New York's numbers were decreasing during the 70s, that's because of the Fiscal crisis. US economic stagnation hit the city particularly hard, amplified by a large movement of middle-class residents to the suburbs, which drained the city of tax revenue. In February 1975, New York entered a serious fiscal crisis and was $10 billion in debt.
@@Rainb0wzNstuff Trump's lawyer (Giuliani) was mayor in 1994-2001 and he got the city back on track. There was a decrease of homicides from 4000 a year to 10 under his leaderhsip and Times Square in the 70's was the sleaziest place until Guliani banned sex for money and sleazy motels were disbanned. The city was doing much better until the pandemic. I suspect that the population and its finances have taken a hit, more people working from home means that they don't have to live in such a crowded and overpriced city and they can go live somewhere else, taking away with them their tax money. Crime is also going up again due to more poverty, I suspect the people living in poverty have increased by a lot and those people don't have the priviledge of working from home as they may be the delivery truck drivers or they work in factories etc.
@@jrr6947 commiefornia and new reich are going to plummet in population once they realize what really is going on, or if they ever do understand anyway
@@blacker5826 new reich?? You do realize the Nazis were fascists right? not communists... complete opposites. Extreme far left is communist. Extreme far right is Fascist. So if yr saying NY is a reich, yr calling it an extremely right wing conservative place. Basically, yr a flippin idiot.
Brooklyn didn't lose population slowly like it shows in the video. It merged with New York in 1898. It should have shown Brooklyn falling of the chart and New York gaining about 800,000 people in 1898, not a slow loss for one and a slow increase for the other.
Chicago and Minneapolis are top 7 in 1776? That's pretty surprising, seeing as how they weren't founded until 1833 and 1850 respectively. Also surprising since the British would not allow Americans to settle west of the Appalachians. I'm thinking your beautiful data is off.
Yes, it was the first U.S. city to host an Olympic games and at the beginning of the 20th century it was like Seattle is now, the popular up and coming city. Somewhere along the way it just fizzled out.
Not to nitpick, but technically, at this time ( 0:01 - 0:12 ) it was not even part of the U.S. (and the same goes for Minneapolis) We did not purchase the western part of the Mississippi until 1803.
I was surprised at this too. It made sense thst it grew so steadily all through the 19th century, but looks like it started shrinking beginning with great Depression, got a second wind after the war, then dropped off a cliff since the 1950s.
Northern Liberties is a neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. Prior to its incorporation into Philadelphia in 1854, it was among the top 10 largest cities in the U.S. in every census from 1790 to 1850.
Detroit used to be enormous, and is an example here where the city is smaller than it used to be in terms of population. In fact, I think it's somewhere close to half of it's former peak in the 1950s, where it was over 1.8M, now it's somewhere around 700k I believe as of the most recent census. People actually left Detroit in droves because it became so corrupt, overrun with crime and poverty all because the big automotive manufacturers moved their operations elsewhere so they could save some money, and the city of Detroit and State of Michigan were run by the auto companies so this was all allowed with basically nothing to compensate the families that were devastated. Absolute cruelty, and one of the most diabolical things that's really happened and nobody really ever talks about it. People talk about how bad Detroit is, but it's pretty rare to hear people who actually understand how it got that way and how prosperous it used to be.
The latest statistics show that Detroit has shrunk to just 1/3 of it's peak population as its current residents clock in around 624k and steadily lose about 8k a year.
No, complacency against what the public wanted in regards to quality and MPGs. The UAW would have cared about building one car over another. If GM had been more forward thinking, they could have owned the batter technology patents.
Meanwhile, metro Detroit still has 3.5 million people there, they just don’t live in Detroit proper anymore. It still feel likes a huge city when you’re there.
It's easy to think of cities as being as big (relatively speaking) and important in the past as they are now. That's pretty much true for New York, but you can see how a lot of other small-ish (nowadays) cities were leading cities in the past. Baltimore, Charleston, Cincinnati. And then you have some that are really big now, and were really big throughout the 20th century, that were nothing until the latter 1800's. Chicago, for example. Then cities that started booming even more recently, like L.A. or Detroit. It's crazy to think how Detroit didn't start booming until the early 1900's, and 50 years later it was already transforming into a hollowed out slum.
Crazy how san jose is irrelevant to us Californians since there really isnt much theres. Yet you guys are happy austin is comparable to san jose . Lmao this is so weird to me I dont get it I really dont
Cincinnati was once known as the Queen City of the West. In the early half of the 19th century it was a major migration center. People like my ancestors would land from Europe in Baltimore and then cross the Appalachians via the National Road (now U.S 40) then get on barges and sail down the Ohio River. They stopped in Cincinnati and made new lives there because the year-round climate was great, farming was excellent and new industries were multiplying in the area, including nearby Hamilton, Middletown and Dayton. For the rest of the 19th century it was a major political and cultural center. Four U.S. presidents, the two Harrisons, Grant and W.H. Taft, had ties to Cincinnati. Henry Clay was from nearby Lexington, KY. It was a center of the abolition movement, and the first professional baseball team, the Reds, started playing there in 1870.
I was shocked too! But it's by a major river and ships passed through there. Same reason why Cleveland was a major city. That and it's between NYC and Chicago and they passed/layover in Cleveland. I guess they were busy planting seeds and shipments too! 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
This illustrates pretty vividly how neither meteoric growth nor steep decline last forever; there are alternating periods of prosperity and struggle, but long-term trends prove perennially difficult to accurately-predict. Washington, DC was once the nation's most-dangerous city, with residents spilling-out into the suburbs, but today, it's growing rapidly, with great wealth creation. The same could be said for other cities that were once down on their luck, and likewise, cities with booming populations today may slow in growth as living expenses rise and competition for housing and jobs increases. I'm very interested to think of which cities will grow the most between now and later this century, perhaps ending-up on the top 10 list; Austin, Jacksonville, Columbus, Indianapolis, Seattle, and Denver could all have over 1 million people in the near-future.
I think eventually a lot of people will end up moving to cities in the rust belt due to higher costs of living and those cities already having the infrastructure to support future industries.
@@AllDay3004 I think younger generation prefers living in dense cities than suburbs. I for one, hate suburbs and the car and Walmart centric southern cities.
@@davidfreesefan23 In reality Houston will probably overtake it long before then. If you look at Chicago they had mostly declined population throughout the 2010s but suddenly after 2021 it only grows from there; that optimism simply has no basis in reality.
Interesting dynamic of the changing composition of the top 10 US cities. I was surprised that Austin didn't overtake San Jose during between 2023 and 2035. You assumed a linear growth in population for each city between each census and this works well for most decades. However, for the great industrial centers and cities like Boston and Washington, DC had there been a census in 1945, those population figures might have been considerably larger those recorded in the 1950 census. It would be interesting to go back to the early colonial period, but there were likely few data points. Carl Bridenbaugh provides some info. Boston was the leading city up until the 1730s and the enterprising young Ben Franklin left Boston around this time for Philadelphia, one of the fastest growing US cities in the late colonial era. You have used the rankings as they were listed at the time of each census and this makes sense. An alternative might use present city boundaries and go in back in time. This is nearly impossible to accomplish, but one could approximate this by combining smaller cities among the top 100 at each census with the larger city into which they eventually were merged, So Spring Garden, Northern Liberties and Southwalk would be added to Philadelphia; Allegheny would be combined with Pittsburgh, and in the case of New York City, each of the five boroughs was listed, I believe, in each census. If not, a simple approximation would be to combine Brooklyn with New York. When people think of those cities that have lost a great deal of population since their peak, usually Detroit comes immediately to mind as it down nearly one a quarter million people from its 1.85 million in 1950. One must go back to 1910 to find a lower population figure for that city. However, in the case of St. Louis, one would have to go back to the 1860 census to find a lower figure than its present level.
From 5:27 to 5:57 there was a constant battle for who would be the 10th largest, also it was sad watching Detroit go from being the 4th largest in the country to off the chart in the 2000’s
Domestic auto manufqcturing moved to South. the unions made it hard for Detroit to compete. less money was available to make good product and foreign auto gained market share. The tax thing is screwed up. I believe its like a 100% tax on us made vehicles sold in europe.
Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, were rust belt cities. Meaning they produced a lot of steel, and were the highest in factory production, mostly due to making war machines for WWII and because that was where technologywas going. But after the war, and heading into the 1960's other cities were becoming more advanced, so cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, stopped being as important and cool, thus losing residents. However these cities are on the rise again. I think the Browns are actually a large reason Cleveland has not completely collapsed.
Detroit has slid to #30 and currently only houses 1/3 of it's peak population (624,000 is the 2022 estimate) having steadily lost around 7k every year.
It’s a garbage place to live. Detroit sucks. Metro Detroit on the other hand is a very underrated area in the country. Very affordable and a lot of good jobs.
@@saberswordsmen1 "People just moved to the suburbs" A gross over-simplification... no other American city has 60% of it's structures destroyed/razed and square miles of empty fields anywhere near their city centers. Detroit is singular in it's devastation and the metro area's decline reflects that people are leaving the entire region (30k people left in the past year according to this year's census numbers).
Thanks for the video. I'll bet there's already a video of how many people have left the big cities since the covid pandemic began. Many of those who can seem to be moving out to work from home in suburbs or rural spaces.
It's an extremely attractive spot if you hate the snow, but aren't looking for a coastal-ish town. I know that if Canada would become a US state, Phoenix is in my top 3 spots I would move to... The 2 others from the top 3 are Savannah, GA and somewhere in Texas (I don't know what I could afford, but Galveston or thereabouts is interesting). The only problem with Phoenix are it's torrid summers, but everything else I like. My parents would move to San Diego and my sister to Florida. Yeah we're all tired from the northern cold/snow ;-)
It would be interesting to see an overlay of technologies onto this graph. Specifically skyscraper/elevator, automobile, Air Conditioning and internet boom.
It is a shame this didn't take into account census bureau estimates in between census years, for if you did you would have noted that the Census estimated Detroit briefly hit the 2 million mark in the early 1950s before the rise of the post-war suburbs began to draw away in earnest people the new homes being built there. The decline to the 1960s census number didn't happen to around 1954, not 1950 as this chart says.
It was fun watching Chicago hit the afterburners (oops no pun intended :) 😀 . That was around 1890 right after the flow of the Chicago River was reversed (one of the great engineering feats of the 19th century) to flow AWAY from Lake Michigan and towards the Mississippi River cause ya' know. So then with better water and better waist disposal Chicago could support millions of people.
I'm trying to figure out the color code. At first (when I saw Minneapolis included in the top ten many years prior to its incorporation) I thought it was perhaps by the largest racial/ethnic group. But then it seemed to be based on the region of the country. But then, seeing Washington DC with the same color as San Francisco, that explanation didn't hold water, either. So what is it?
Understanding that the steep decline of Midwestern cities in the 1960's, planted the seeds of the current national political voting trends of the people of those areas of the country.
Those areas were raped of their resources in the late 1800s then setup as singularly focused industrial zones. Not great foresight on the leader's behalf.
Only becuase we don't want the 49% in New York and California to destroy our way of life. There's a reason we have the electoral college. Half the country would be controlled by one state and one city leading to a civil war that would split the country into pieces.
It's interesting to consider potential consequences of climate-change, with growth in booming southern cities possibly redirecting to more-temperate climates in Rust Belt cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, etc. You can never be too sure about the future.
@@jacobbernard1393 Climate change will not have the affect most of the alarmist are claiming. For decades they have been saying sea levels will rise in just a few years and it never happens. That's ignoring the fact these same alarmist where screaming ice age in the 80s.
It’s crazy how the city I live right next to, Philadelphia (and visit every month or two) had a population of 22,000 when the country gained independence, but today it has over one million people! It’s crazy how much it grew. And, in 2035, It’ll have 1.7M people!
Kinda funny how they included Brooklyn and New York on the same graph as the population is all the same. My city, DC, was on the list for a hot minute and then faded. I'm surprised that Atlanta and Miami, New Orleans, etc. were not on the list after 2022.
Brooklyn was once a separate city from New York, and was annexed into NYC in 1898. Atlanta and Miami both only have about 500,000 people in the city proper, though each has a metropolitan area close to 6 million. New Orleans peaked in population around 1960, with a huge drop-off after Hurricane Katrina, but has started to recover in growth since.
It's interesting to consider the actual geographic size of the cities when watching this. Philly did some series boundary changing around 1854 that spiked it's "population". Curious if there are other border/city limit changes I missed in here.
I honestly curious about some of these growth spurs. Why was Philadelphia stagnant for a while and then got a big jump in the 1850s. And what happened in Chicago that made it grow so fast?
Some of it you chalk it up to industrialization and ramping up to civil war (and relating factors). But likely the biggest reason it jumps so much on this chart is that it goes by census data which is every 10 years and creates a slope between census. In 1854 Philadelphia basically redistricted to include a lot of surrounding area and lumped it all into Philly. Naturally representing a big population growth.
I think Los Angeles can grow to 5 million or more by 2035. 2010 to 2020 saw a lot of mid rise to high rise apartment or condo construction. Most people see LA as single family homes, but thats changing. Some SFH lots adding multiple homes. Major commercial streets are adding residential housing like midrise and high rises especially near Metro stations. Its happening all over American cities. LA is just slower at building taller. Honolulu, NYC, Chicago, Miami, Seattle are building so many tall buildings compared to big LA city. But LA will catch up. Most will be 5 to 7 floor apartment buildings not 20 floor apartments. Since its cheaper to build concrete and wood apartments than steel and glass towers.
Doubtful, citizens are leaving CA in droves, but it does have an increasing illegal immigrants population, not sure how much of that is included in this data though, technically no one really knows exact numbers when you account for that.
Buffulo use to be considered a major city all they way into the 90's that's crazy because the other 24 cities stayed major and Buffulo got replaced with Phoenix and I think Buffulo downtown skyline is bigger that Phoenix downtown skyline.
Milwaukee is a pretty big city.To consider it a US major city yeah it definitely qualifies.It dont surprise me that is was there in 61-63.I bet it is bad ass there in that city.I will visit one day.
This channel actually inspired me to make my own youtube videos haha! I figured making bar chart race videos would be a good way to learn. I've moved on to other types of videos now, but I'll always remember where I started!
Cleveland (my home town!) was once bigger than LA?!?!?!?!? Wowsers! I knew how the race would "end", but I loved it when LA smoked Chicago! That music was perfect!
Never knew Buffalo was that big , like this chart gives us a little history of this country. As if Buffalo is the last stop before going into Canada. 🤔
iCost buffalo was a huge port due to the canals and hydroelectricity generated from the niagara River. There was a lot of factories and production. Back in the mid 1800s buffalo was the richest city in America. I recommend a visit if you like architecture, you can really see the former wealth in the old mansions and buildings
With many in the bay area moving into the Central Sacramento Valley or out of California, it's likely that San Jose isn't staying in the top 10 into 2030.
How are these population figures determined? For instance, I would have thought that Los Angeles would rival New York in population. Are they based on metropolitan areas, or local government council areas (which are meaningless to everyone except local governments)?
All cities have defined borders. All living in LA city is around 4 million. Both cities are roughly the same size land area. Nyc is known for dense tall buildings while Los Angeles is more a mix of single family detached and low rise apartments but some are high rise areas like Downtown LA. LA is part of a large county of 10 million total made up over 88 incorporated cities and also county unincorporated areas LA metro msa is 13 million which includes LA county plus 3 million orange county Great la csa is 18 milliom. And is 5 county areas or 3 different meaning areas
Horrible, ain't it? But an extremely telling lesson of what greed, corruption, and the wickedness of man can do to undo blessing, hard work, ingenuity, and success.
If this was a graph of metro area growth vs. population within city limits, Atlanta would explode onto the scene in the 90s through now. While the actual city population is "only" over 500,000 the entire metro area has now passed 6 Million people. In terms of metro area, Atlanta is now Top 8 in the country after having "only" 2 million in the region in 1988.
Everyone talking about Huston surpassing Chicago and Toronto is just sitting here being the 3rd largest city in north America at 3.1 million people proper.
It's 4th. LA is the 3rd largest in north America. Mexico city, NYC , LA are bigger than Toronto. By metro and population. Houston might surpass Toronto in the next 20 years.
Austin and Fort Worth will surpass San Jose for the 10th and 11th spot. Both will reach 1 million citizens as well as Charlotte, Jacksonville and Columbus.
As a lifelong Dallas Texan I was shocked to see San Antonio was more populated than Dallas. I knew Houston was but had no clue about San Antonio. Learn something new every day 🤔
We've been bigger than ya'll for a long time. It's just when you put Dallas and Fort worth together that ya'll are bigger. I think our not even close to as impressive skyline makes people think we're not as big as we are.
Looks like it's meant to represent the region: blue for the Northeast, pink for the South, orange for the Midwest, yellow for Washington DC and the West.
Not only this but if you divided each NYC borough into a separate city, 4/5 would be in the top 10 most populated US cities. The Bronx (1.4m), Queens (2.3m), Brooklyn (2.6m), and Manhattan (1.7m). Currently #6 is Phoenix (1.7m) and #9 is Dallas (1.4m).
