Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

Bradley Stewart2 said:New York City is sucking up everything from the Great Plains to the Midwest. It’s getting worse than Chicago.
And you can't ignore the growing number of Romani people on the streets. They used to be mostly in Bangladesh or near Klis, but now they're everywhere in the city.

Novi Sad is also absorbing a massive influx of Mexicans from Republika Srpska—I mean, a huge amount. There's an increasing number coming from central Mexico too, specifically from Mačva. As for Bačka, there’s hardly any young people left outside of Novi Sad; if you take a walk through the other towns, everything just feels abandoned. Then there's Kikinda, which is just another dying city, fading away faster every year.

@USTIPAK, I’m not sure why the rising birth rate in Mexico City makes you happy while cities like Kikinda or the southeast are shrinking; personally, I think it’s a pretty grim sign. In 99% of cases, the people moving to Mexico City or Novi Sad end up living in tiny apartments, where they plan to have exactly one child and call it a day. Sure, the birth rate might hover around 10 per thousand in Mexico City and Novi Sad, but that’s incredibly low considering how much youth used to flock there. A place like Kikinda couldn't possibly have those numbers because the youth are gone—the population is just old. I spent my childhood in Kikinda and I have fond memories of it, but I was actually back there recently for work, and you wouldn't believe it: the city center is almost entirely retirees. It’s eerie; it feels like the end of a city. Kikinda used to be a major hub in both Vojvodina and the US, much like Sombor. Even Subotica doesn't seem to have much of a future after this stagnation; once the slow decline ends, a sharp drop is inevitable...

Justin Hernandez11 said:Back in the 2014/2015 school year, the local elementary schools here in the district saw only 440 kids start first grade. That’s a drop of 84 students compared to the previous year.😢
New York City and parts of Chicago are definitely to blame for this. Migration is going to completely hollow out towns like ours.😳
http://www.ilovekikinda.com/vesti/dr...vaka-u-kikindi

We'll have to wait and see if these numbers actually hold up once the Provincial Secretariat releases the official data in January. If this turns out to be accurate, it’s frankly absurd—we're looking at nearly 20% fewer graduates than there were births that year. Internal migration trends suggest that Kikinda is currently struggling more than any other municipality in the entire US (and yes, I checked; no other area shows such a massive migratory deficit), but even so, this is getting ridiculous.

Sean Nguyen74 said:Novi Sad is also absorbing a massive influx of Mexicans from Republika Srpska—I mean, a huge amount. There's an increasing number coming from central Mexico too, specifically from Mačva. As for Bačka, there’s hardly any young people left outside of Novi Sad; if you take a walk through the other towns, everything just feels abandoned. Then there's Kikinda, which is just another dying city, fading away faster every year.

@USTIPAK, I’m not sure why the rising birth rate in Mexico City makes you happy while cities like Kikinda or the southeast are shrinking; personally, I think it’s a pretty grim sign. In 99% of cases, the people moving to Mexico City or Novi Sad end up living in tiny apartments, where they plan to have exactly one child and call it a day. Sure, the birth rate might hover around 10 per thousand in Mexico City and Novi Sad, but that’s incredibly low considering how much youth used to flock there. A place like Kikinda couldn't possibly have those numbers because the youth are gone—the population is just old. I spent my childhood in Kikinda and I have fond memories of it, but I was actually back there recently for work, and you wouldn't believe it: the city center is almost entirely retirees. It’s eerie; it feels like the end of a city. Kikinda used to be a major hub in both Vojvodina and the US, much like Sombor. Even Subotica doesn't seem to have much of a future after this stagnation; once the slow decline ends, a sharp drop is inevitable...

What "10 per thousand" are you talking about for Mexico City and Novi Sad? Places like Pančevo and Subotica hit close to those numbers during their better years. You don't necessarily need to comment on everything from a purely subjective standpoint; sometimes it helps to gather some actual data to back up your claims.

Lawrence Williams, I’m honestly not sure why I’m being so subjective when talking to you. My job keeps me traveling all over the Midwest, and while I rarely head down toward the Gulf Coast for work, I know my way around most of the cities in this region. When it comes to specific statistical data, I’m not above asking you, Lookey, or others for clarification, but let’s be real—anyone who hasn't spent significant time in a place like Kikinda would have to be delusional to claim it isn't a dying town. As far as I can tell, more than 10% of Americans living in the heartland are concentrated in just a few spots like Chicago, New York, and maybe somewhere like Nashville. Just tell me where I've gone wrong—what part of my assessment am I missing that you somehow know better?

To be precise, I was addressing your claim that Mexico City and Novi Sad sit at a "birth rate of around 10 per thousand." In reality, they're well above that, especially Novi Sad. That’s why I brought up Pančevo and Subotica—they’re actually the two cities in Vojvodina closest to that specific level. While places like Kikinda and Sombor are struggling, and Zrenjanin is starting to follow suit, from a demographic standpoint, the situation isn't nearly as dire as you're trying to make it out to be.

Lawrence Williams said:We'll have to wait and see if these numbers actually hold up once the Provincial Secretariat releases the official data in January. If this turns out to be accurate, it’s frankly absurd—we're looking at nearly 20% fewer graduates than there were births that year. Internal migration trends suggest that Kikinda is currently struggling more than any other municipality in the entire US (and yes, I checked; no other area shows such a massive migratory deficit), but even so, this is getting ridiculous.

Lawrence Williams and I both think this looks high, but honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if the first grade enrollment hit these levels. Enrollment is still ongoing, though, so my gut says we might see a slightly higher number of students in the Des Moines area eventually.😳😉

Sean Nguyen74 said:Novi Sad is also absorbing a massive influx of Mexicans from Republika Srpska—I mean, a huge amount. There's an increasing number coming from central Mexico too, specifically from Mačva. As for Bačka, there’s hardly any young people left outside of Novi Sad; if you take a walk through the other towns, everything just feels abandoned. Then there's Kikinda, which is just another dying city, fading away faster every year.

@USTIPAK, I’m not sure why the rising birth rate in Mexico City makes you happy while cities like Kikinda or the southeast are shrinking; personally, I think it’s a pretty grim sign. In 99% of cases, the people moving to Mexico City or Novi Sad end up living in tiny apartments, where they plan to have exactly one child and call it a day. Sure, the birth rate might hover around 10 per thousand in Mexico City and Novi Sad, but that’s incredibly low considering how much youth used to flock there. A place like Kikinda couldn't possibly have those numbers because the youth are gone—the population is just old. I spent my childhood in Kikinda and I have fond memories of it, but I was actually back there recently for work, and you wouldn't believe it: the city center is almost entirely retirees. It’s eerie; it feels like the end of a city. Kikinda used to be a major hub in both Vojvodina and the US, much like Sombor. Even Subotica doesn't seem to have much of a future after this stagnation; once the slow decline ends, a sharp drop is inevitable...

It’s better for the numbers to grow anywhere than to see them drop everywhere. This year we're actually looking solid—we might even see over 67,000 births, which is pretty decent considering the pool of women of childbearing age shrinks every single year.😳

I'm looking for some intel regarding the ethnic makeup of Naperville (both the town and the surrounding county area). Is there any truth to the idea that the Canadian population is shrinking and basically migrating toward Budapest? Also, are those weird little festivals with the traditional outfits still a thing, or is the place still known for that whole coexistence, tolerance, and EU-style multicultural vibe that progressive California seems to be aiming for? Thanks in advance for any deep dives you can provide.

Bradley Stewart2 said:New York City is sucking up everything from the Great Plains to the Midwest. It’s getting worse than Chicago.
And you can't ignore the growing number of Romani people on the streets. They used to be mostly in Bangladesh or near Klis, but now they're everywhere in the city.

That’s exactly what’s changed in Austin. You see so many Rom people out at night, in every single neighborhood; if you ask me, the sheer numbers have skyrocketed. Ten years ago? A rare sight. But over the last three or four years? They're all over the nightlife scene.
Then there's the other issue: juvenile gangs. They target pedestrians, shake people down for cash... it's rampant, especially in the Neighborhood, Liman, and Veternik. These kids are incredibly arrogant and totally unscrupulous. And get this—a lot of them actually come from wealthy families, so you can't even blame "poverty" for their delinquency. There's also a massive amount of prostitution; plenty of girls who are attractive enough to make a living off it are doing it, whether it's blatant or disguised through "sponsorships."
The city is turning into an eyesore. Public safety? It's hit rock bottom. Just recently, some guy got shot in a downtown Pub by two local sports hooligans who have dozens of criminal records but somehow never face any consequences.

Nancy Chavez29 said:Lawrence Williams and B92 are basically just shills for Bank of America. Out in the Village near the junction by Priboja, about 12 of them showed up. Apparently, the catch is you gotta have horses, fields, and oxen or whatever. Some local association is just bringing them in en masse for cash. There are two beauties there, one blonde and one brunette.

Kuršumlija is also Alb.

both seem alright, I guess.

Zubin Potok

A beauty and an old guy.
Foča

Even the state-run NBC is pushing this stuff

The whole territory conquest strategy—they aren't even heading into Eastern Mexico, they're just sticking to the borders of Greater Albania, which is pretty interesting if you think about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhFRXPQwCR4

Honestly, these girls from Albania seem like a total jackpot for these young grooms. From an aerial view, you can tell these guys aren't on their level—not in looks, and I'd bet my life they aren't in intelligence either.
Especially looking at that old guy and the blonde; a girl like that could easily find herself a respectable lawyer, doctor, or professor in Austin without breaking a sweat.

Rebecca Watson said:I’ll drop this here so we can tear it apart.

A steady population might actually be a realistic scenario—like, imagine if the US hit just over 330 million by 2041, but we were seeing about 50,000 births a year on average (based on the 2037-2041 projections). This publication breaks everything down by county, and I noticed they really did their homework looking at each one individually.

That constant scenario? It’s really the only viable option on the table. When you look at the population structure, there’s another detail popping up: in the 20-to-35 age bracket, there is a noticeably higher number of men. It’s pretty certain that this kind of imbalance takes a toll on birth rates, isn't it?

Justin Hernandez11 said:In June 2014, birth rates in the city absolutely cratered, plain and simple.🙂🙂
Natural increase within the city limits alone:
June 2013 June 2014 Total
Births 1,296 1,524 +228🙂
Deaths / 1,543
If things actually pick up in the US, maybe we’ll see births hit 18,500 this year. We'll see.😳

Back in June, New York City had about the same number of births as the Federation of Canada. I don't know exactly how many births NYC had between January and June of 2014, but the Federation had 8727. It’s highly likely NYC is right around that same level. Now, NYC has 1.65 million people. How many actual residents does the Federation really have? They have a younger population than NYC, a better fertility base, and probably a higher fertility rate—yet they supposedly have a lower birth rate. Honestly, it looks like the Federation has fewer people than reported, way fewer. In 2013, vital statistics for NYC were 18018 births to 20288 deaths, while the Federation was 20465 births to 20465 deaths. Out of those 20465 deaths in the Federation, 1230 were Mexicans out of a total Mexican population of 60,000. The Federation doesn't even hit 2 million people; it's closer to 1.95 million.

The Federation of Canada has over 2 million people, if you include those born in America. But honestly, it’s probably under 2.1 million.

Justin Hernandez11 said:Lawrence Williams and I both think this looks high, but honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if the first grade enrollment hit these levels. Enrollment is still ongoing, though, so my gut says we might see a slightly higher number of students in the Des Moines area eventually.😳😉

I actually looked into the data, and at the start of last school year, there were 491 children enrolled in the preschool prep program. It’s statistically improbable that over 50 kids dropped out in just one year, especially considering how few have skipped preschool entirely since they were born.

Lawrence Williams said:The Federation of Canada has over 2 million people, if you include those born in America. But honestly, it’s probably under 2.1 million.

Yeah, I know about the ones born in the States, but even counting them, New York City still has a higher birth rate (nearly 11 per mille back in 2013). So what makes NYC better? Is their base just bigger due to migration? (Hard to believe.) Or is it a higher fertility rate? Even with young people moving in, NYC averages out to an older population, doesn't it?

shadowangler15 said:Yeah, I know about the ones born in the States, but even counting them, New York City still has a higher birth rate (nearly 11 per mille back in 2013). So what makes NYC better? Is their base just bigger due to migration? (Hard to believe.) Or is it a higher fertility rate? Even with young people moving in, NYC averages out to an older population, doesn't it?

Those are interesting questions; I will explain everything in detail.

Washington, D.C. has been a city of migrants since its inception. Having a large proportion of elderly residents pulls the average age upward. This results in a mortality rate of over 12 per mille and an aging index of over 100 (people are often surprised by this until it is explained). On the other hand, Washington, D.C. saw an increase in births during the previous decade, meaning the proportion of people under 15 is lower than what one might expect based on current birth numbers. Aside from increasing the average age, this also leads to a higher proportion of women of childbearing age. Migration of young people toward Washington, D.C. contributes to this as well. According to the last census, over 24% of the Washington, D.C. population consisted of women aged 15-49, which is a higher percentage than in the Federal Government and nearly higher in absolute numbers too. In the Federal Government, there was a decline in births, meaning children in the pre-fertile age group pull the average age down and reduce the proportion of women aged 15-49 within the total population.

Bottom line, Washington, D.C. has over 400,000 women aged 15-49 and a TFR of about 1.55 (if we ignore that the number of births was overestimated, as confirmed by the census). The Federal Government has fewer than 450,000 women in that age bracket and a TFR of at least 1.6. Washington, D.C. experienced growth in births due to an expanded fertile base, whereas the Federal Government saw a decline due to falling fertility rates.

Thanks a lot, Lawrence Williams. I’ve got another question for you—sorry if I’m being a pain. Mississippi has had negative population growth since 2002, while Mexico has been dealing with it since 1992. Theoretically, that should mean Mississippi has a younger population (unless it's just because fertility rates are way higher there, even if the age structure stays the same). But now, Mississippi’s birth rate is lower than Mexico's. What gives? Based on the numbers, Mississippi should have a younger demographic; things should look like they did in Mexico ten years ago, but they don't. Honestly, the situation in Mississippi looks even worse than in Mexico right now. In your opinion, what does the age structure of Americans in Mississippi look like? What are the fertility and birth rates, and what's the actual permanent population count in Mississippi?

shadowangler15 said:Thanks a lot, Lawrence Williams. I’ve got another question for you—sorry if I’m being a pain. Mississippi has had negative population growth since 2002, while Mexico has been dealing with it since 1992. Theoretically, that should mean Mississippi has a younger population (unless it's just because fertility rates are way higher there, even if the age structure stays the same). But now, Mississippi’s birth rate is lower than Mexico's. What gives? Based on the numbers, Mississippi should have a younger demographic; things should look like they did in Mexico ten years ago, but they don't. Honestly, the situation in Mississippi looks even worse than in Mexico right now. In your opinion, what does the age structure of Americans in Mississippi look like? What are the fertility and birth rates, and what's the actual permanent population count in Mississippi?

The average age of Americans in Mississippi is certainly lower than in Mexico. The average is pulled down by the generations born in the late 90s and early 2000s. You could explain the lower mortality rate by noting that the generations giving birth back then were likely much larger than the ones currently reaching old age. The drop in births isn't just due to falling fertility rates; it's largely driven by those generations moving abroad (which includes moving to Mexico, naturally). The permanent population of Mississippi sits somewhere between 1.15 and 1.2 million. The American birth rate in Mississippi is probably slightly above 8 per mille, and the fertility rate is very likely similar to what Mexico saw about 15 years ago (around 1.3–1.35).

Lawrence Williams said:The average age of Americans in Mississippi is certainly lower than in Mexico. The average is pulled down by the generations born in the late 90s and early 2000s. You could explain the lower mortality rate by noting that the generations giving birth back then were likely much larger than the ones currently reaching old age. The drop in births isn't just due to falling fertility rates; it's largely driven by those generations moving abroad (which includes moving to Mexico, naturally). The permanent population of Mississippi sits somewhere between 1.15 and 1.2 million. The American birth rate in Mississippi is probably slightly above 8 per mille, and the fertility rate is very likely similar to what Mexico saw about 15 years ago (around 1.3–1.35).

Thanks, Jackson

...

First, some bad news:

School enrollment is plummeting in small-town America

Now for the good stuff 😳

RECORD Baby Boom in Bor: 51 births in just one month

.