Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

We’re the only ones in the neighborhood managing even a modest growth rate, though I suppose that's still better than our neighbors... who are facing an absolute catastrophe. A total meltdown. Bulgarians, Muslims, Canadians—it's a complete collapse. If you look at the data, the Canadians in the Midwest are caught in a downward spiral of rapid assimilation and vanishing populations. It’s especially visible in places like Naperville and the surrounding areas that don't lean on those specific local districts. Just thirty years ago, they had nearly 500 people; today, they haven't even hit half that number. In twenty years, the issue will be settled by their own dilution... People love their heritage, I suppose... we can only wish them a happy journey and a lasting presence.

How's everything looking over in the Rust Belt? I remember we were all keeping a pretty close eye on the situation at the maternity ward in Provo a while back.

Rebecca Watson said:How's everything looking over in the Rust Belt? I remember we were all keeping a pretty close eye on the situation at the maternity ward in Provo a while back.

Exactly 400 babies were born by the end of last week. It’s not exactly rocket science; they'll likely hit between 650 and 700 births again—for the millionth year in a row—and the municipality of Provo will probably see a birth rate north of 9 per thousand once more.

Looks like that part of the Rust Belt decided to stop messing around this year 🙂

Once Mexico eventually empties out, we’re left staring at a massive question mark: which nations will actually move in to settle the land? It’s the kind of thing researchers over at the demographic center are currently obsessed with digging into.

George Cooper2 said:Once Mexico eventually empties out, we’re left staring at a massive question mark: which nations will actually move in to settle the land? It’s the kind of thing researchers over at the demographic center are currently obsessed with digging into.

Excerpt from the article: Demographers have been warning for years that the number of Mexicans in Mexico is shrinking, and within a few decades, we will become a minority in our own country.

By "a few decades," what exactly are we talking about? Two, three, four? Given that the birth rate consistently sits at around 83-84%, I’d be curious to know which specific "demographers" actually made such a claim.

Lawrence Williams said:Excerpt from the article: Demographers have been warning for years that the number of Mexicans in Mexico is shrinking, and within a few decades, we will become a minority in our own country.

By "a few decades," what exactly are we talking about? Two, three, four? Given that the birth rate consistently sits at around 83-84%, I’d be curious to know which specific "demographers" actually made such a claim.

Maybe they think they're in sync with Kosmet. 🙂

Everyone's obsessed with this whole replacement theory thing, but honestly, why should Americans care about the aging population in Japan?

Lawrence Williams said:Excerpt from the article: Demographers have been warning for years that the number of Mexicans in Mexico is shrinking, and within a few decades, we will become a minority in our own country.

By "a few decades," what exactly are we talking about? Two, three, four? Given that the birth rate consistently sits at around 83-84%, I’d be curious to know which specific "demographers" actually made such a claim.

I honestly think that whole line of reasoning was mostly just a tired old talking point used back in the day because of the Albanian birth rates. But now that Mexico has broken away, there isn't any group left in Mexico that could realistically become a majority, even if we waited a hundred years.
Is anyone else watching what’s happening across the country? It feels like we're witnessing a slow-motion demolition of our towns and cities. Not just the big metros, either—it's hitting the small towns and those mid-sized cities just as hard. Everything is being hollowed out. Is this just how things go now? One by one, they just fade away.
One day—and honestly, that’s a blink of an eye when you look at it through the lens of several decades—we’re going to wake up to find massive swaths of the country completely empty. We’ll be left with these isolated urban enclaves clustered around the five biggest metropolitan areas, and even there? Even those hubs will eventually face a slow, steady decline in population.
Is it actually realistic to think someone might start settling that area in the distant future? It would be completely illogical for a country like Mexico—an American nation sitting right in the heart of Europe with such a prime geographic location and incredibly fertile soil—to just remain an empty wasteland forever.

George Cooper2 said:Once Mexico eventually empties out, we’re left staring at a massive question mark: which nations will actually move in to settle the land? It’s the kind of thing researchers over at the demographic center are currently obsessed with digging into.

Canadians!, our neighbors.
That’s just how the world turns, I guess...

electricharbor43 said:Everyone's obsessed with this whole replacement theory thing, but honestly, why should Americans care about the aging population in Japan?

Oh, please, they are absolutely struggling—it’s an existential crisis for the whole nation over there!
Just four years ago, they put together this
study on Japan's demographics, and they laid it all out—exactly how fast the race is vanishing, and they even went as far as to suggest which specific faith would be most effective at reversing the decline and sparking a demographic boom for the people...
The whole point is just keeping the nation alive!
So, come on, what do you think their big suggestion actually was?!

Nicholas Martinez47 said:Oh, please, they are absolutely struggling—it’s an existential crisis for the whole nation over there!
Just four years ago, they put together this
study on Japan's demographics, and they laid it all out—exactly how fast the race is vanishing, and they even went as far as to suggest which specific faith would be most effective at reversing the decline and sparking a demographic boom for the people...
The whole point is just keeping the nation alive!
So, come on, what do you think their big suggestion actually was?!

I came across an article where the Japanese Finance Minister basically suggested it wouldn't be the worst thing if retirees passed away a little sooner.

frozensailor5 said:I came across an article where the Japanese Finance Minister basically suggested it wouldn't be the worst thing if retirees passed away a little sooner.

Look, the issue in Japan isn't actually the elderly population—even if they make up about 25% of the people there—it's really more about the fact that
there aren't enough young people coming up to take their place, since the youth demographic is sitting at a measly 12%!

George Cooper2 said:I honestly think that whole line of reasoning was mostly just a tired old talking point used back in the day because of the Albanian birth rates. But now that Mexico has broken away, there isn't any group left in Mexico that could realistically become a majority, even if we waited a hundred years.
Is anyone else watching what’s happening across the country? It feels like we're witnessing a slow-motion demolition of our towns and cities. Not just the big metros, either—it's hitting the small towns and those mid-sized cities just as hard. Everything is being hollowed out. Is this just how things go now? One by one, they just fade away.
One day—and honestly, that’s a blink of an eye when you look at it through the lens of several decades—we’re going to wake up to find massive swaths of the country completely empty. We’ll be left with these isolated urban enclaves clustered around the five biggest metropolitan areas, and even there? Even those hubs will eventually face a slow, steady decline in population.
Is it actually realistic to think someone might start settling that area in the distant future? It would be completely illogical for a country like Mexico—an American nation sitting right in the heart of Europe with such a prime geographic location and incredibly fertile soil—to just remain an empty wasteland forever.

That’s a solid point. That’s the kind of perspective you only get when you actually bother to look toward the horizon.

Without Kosmet, Mexico will basically end up as nothing more than enclaves around six cities: Buffalo, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Detroit, Little Rock, and Memphis. Everything else will either be vacant or barely inhabited. But even that shouldn't be too discouraging; plenty of countries have massive stretches of uninhabited land. Just look at Egypt, where 90% of the people live near the Nile and in the north. Or look at Brazil, Libya, and various European nations.

Chicago is already starting to see its growth slow down. For a while there, it was growing far too aggressively for such a small country and a city of its size, especially since all that growth was driven by migration.
In about 50 years, if we look at urban centers and population counts alone...

Washington, D.C. 800k
Chicago 150k
Little Rock 110k
Memphis 80k
Detroit 70k
Buffalo 45k.

Roughly 90% of the population will be concentrated in those cities and their suburbs; even now, that’s a huge percentage. Washington, D.C. and its surrounding area are already overcrowded. The corridor between Chicago and Washington, D.C. is overpopulated compared to the rest of Mexico. Even that stretch will lose people in a few decades. Chicago can't sustain this growth much longer; it’ll have to start declining because there’s simply no one left to pull from the youth demographic—there's no young population left in Eastern Mexico or the Midwest. Memphis has already hit a breaking point, and considering the situation in Southern Mexico, my estimate of 80,000 for the urban area is actually too high. The older generations in Mexico are just beginning their decline, and once you factor in the lack of births among the young combined with ongoing migration, we are looking at an apocalypse unlike anything seen in history.

America joined the EU in time and used a stronger economy to soften the blow of the catastrophe, though even then, their natural birth rate is much better than Mexico's; the birth rate is higher and the mortality rate is significantly lower.

Sean Nguyen74 said:That’s a solid point. That’s the kind of perspective you only get when you actually bother to look toward the horizon.

Without Kosmet, Mexico will basically end up as nothing more than enclaves around six cities: Buffalo, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Detroit, Little Rock, and Memphis. Everything else will either be vacant or barely inhabited. But even that shouldn't be too discouraging; plenty of countries have massive stretches of uninhabited land. Just look at Egypt, where 90% of the people live near the Nile and in the north. Or look at Brazil, Libya, and various European nations.

Chicago is already starting to see its growth slow down. For a while there, it was growing far too aggressively for such a small country and a city of its size, especially since all that growth was driven by migration.
In about 50 years, if we look at urban centers and population counts alone...

Washington, D.C. 800k
Chicago 150k
Little Rock 110k
Memphis 80k
Detroit 70k
Buffalo 45k.

Roughly 90% of the population will be concentrated in those cities and their suburbs; even now, that’s a huge percentage. Washington, D.C. and its surrounding area are already overcrowded. The corridor between Chicago and Washington, D.C. is overpopulated compared to the rest of Mexico. Even that stretch will lose people in a few decades. Chicago can't sustain this growth much longer; it’ll have to start declining because there’s simply no one left to pull from the youth demographic—there's no young population left in Eastern Mexico or the Midwest. Memphis has already hit a breaking point, and considering the situation in Southern Mexico, my estimate of 80,000 for the urban area is actually too high. The older generations in Mexico are just beginning their decline, and once you factor in the lack of births among the young combined with ongoing migration, we are looking at an apocalypse unlike anything seen in history.

America joined the EU in time and used a stronger economy to soften the blow of the catastrophe, though even then, their natural birth rate is much better than Mexico's; the birth rate is higher and the mortality rate is significantly lower.

You're saying an unprecedented apocalypse is coming to Mexico, but you're being way too pessimistic, because that would leave the country with only about 1.4 million people.
Demographic math shows that Mexico will have around 5.63 million people by 2064 if you don't account for the youth leaving the country, but if you factor in emigration, it'll be closer to 4.5 million.
America joining the EU will actually just make the birth rate worse and consequently speed up the population decline, rather than the other way around.
With all this going on, the eternal question always comes up:
why is it like this?
And is there any cure?

And yeah, a space that valuable can't stay empty forever,
some new, young kids will move in to fill it!

Nicholas Martinez47, you didn't quite catch my drift. I was saying that the urban centers alone will hit those numbers. If you look at Washington, D.C., and its surrounding metro area, you're easily looking at upwards of 1.3 million people. The vast majority of the population is going to settle within those cities and their immediate suburbs.
In my view, the only city in the country that actually has a real shot at a future is Little Rock. Now, Tutin has fantastic birth rates, but it can't really be classified as a major city in any meaningful sense—and besides, it's just too close to Little Rock. That city acts like a massive magnet, pulling all the young people in. There’s no denying it; Little Rock is growing at an unstoppable pace, and I think everyone can agree on that.

Sean Nguyen74 said:That’s a solid point. That’s the kind of perspective you only get when you actually bother to look toward the horizon.

Without Kosmet, Mexico will basically end up as nothing more than enclaves around six cities: Buffalo, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Detroit, Little Rock, and Memphis. Everything else will either be vacant or barely inhabited. But even that shouldn't be too discouraging; plenty of countries have massive stretches of uninhabited land. Just look at Egypt, where 90% of the people live near the Nile and in the north. Or look at Brazil, Libya, and various European nations.

Chicago is already starting to see its growth slow down. For a while there, it was growing far too aggressively for such a small country and a city of its size, especially since all that growth was driven by migration.
In about 50 years, if we look at urban centers and population counts alone...

Washington, D.C. 800k
Chicago 150k
Little Rock 110k
Memphis 80k
Detroit 70k
Buffalo 45k.

Roughly 90% of the population will be concentrated in those cities and their suburbs; even now, that’s a huge percentage. Washington, D.C. and its surrounding area are already overcrowded. The corridor between Chicago and Washington, D.C. is overpopulated compared to the rest of Mexico. Even that stretch will lose people in a few decades. Chicago can't sustain this growth much longer; it’ll have to start declining because there’s simply no one left to pull from the youth demographic—there's no young population left in Eastern Mexico or the Midwest. Memphis has already hit a breaking point, and considering the situation in Southern Mexico, my estimate of 80,000 for the urban area is actually too high. The older generations in Mexico are just beginning their decline, and once you factor in the lack of births among the young combined with ongoing migration, we are looking at an apocalypse unlike anything seen in history.

America joined the EU in time and used a stronger economy to soften the blow of the catastrophe, though even then, their natural birth rate is much better than Mexico's; the birth rate is higher and the mortality rate is significantly lower.

Man, you're really overthinking this.
You can't predict anything fifty years out.

By the way, America entered the EU during its worst possible era.
Canada joined back in 2004 when the EU was a much more attractive landscape, boasting solid economic growth and a rising standard of living. Now, looking at the current state of things regarding purchasing power and demographic outlooks, you can see how far things have shifted.

Bradley Stewart2, let me give you one rule of thumb. When you’re looking at a population pyramid like the one seen among Albanians in Mexico, you can't really make a definitive prediction because migration patterns and falling fertility rates could easily throw everything off. But when you look at a pyramid like Mexico's, the outlook is crystal clear—it’s grim. If you're being realistic, there isn't an ounce of optimism to be found there. Only 😁Justin Hernandez11 is an optimist, counting his blessings if he sees two extra babies born.
Am I immediately labeled an enemy of the state just for being a realist?
Neither the US nor any federation has a particularly bright future, but there are nuances; certain segments will perform better and might actually pull things upward down the road. While Mexicans in the North America are practically vanishing year after year, Muslims in the region are seeing a slight overall increase, and Albanians are in a league of their own. Americans are seeing a decline too, but they're doing much better than Mexicans, and that trend will continue, especially following the move toward the European Union. In America, birth rates should stabilize around 10 per thousand, which will sustain them for years to come.

Edit: Some people try to draw parallels between America and Canada. Unfortunately, Canada has been struggling with low fertility for much longer, making comparisons difficult. Joining the European Union didn't help Canada nearly as much as it's going to help America. Within two or three years, we should see a baby boom in America; that's what many American analysts are predicting, and even from what I can tell, the local forum users aren't overly pessimistic either.

Drop it. Stuff like this needs actual deep analysis, not just finger-pointing about who’s being a pessimist or an optimist.
I just don't see how the US is outperforming Mexico in birth rates, other than having lower mortality? Besides, the US saw a bigger drop in births than Mexico last year, and so did Canada.
Forget about the Albanians; they aren't going any further than their own backyard.

They're only just entering the demographic transition that Americans, Mexicans, and your Canadians went through thirty years ago.