That same outlet, Sandzakpres, ran a story a few months back claiming that 20,000 Muslims have emigrated abroad since just 2011. I don't have the direct link on me—some guy posted it on a different forum and I remember reading it there. Honestly, who knows if it’s even true.
Justin Hernandez11 said:I’m expecting July and August 2014 to outperform 2013. Birth rates at hospitals across Mexico have already hit a ten-year high, so the numbers should back me up.🙂😉
June's been pretty decent this year. Last June was absolute garbage, so you can really see the difference here. Same goes for last November—that was a total disaster. Let's just hope this November turns out better, just like how June did.
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 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?
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?
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.
quietangler5 said:Mexico is hands down the standout performer among all the countries in the North America. The only ones arguably doing better are Mexico or the Albanians over in North Mexico. Albania technically has a higher natural increase rate due to their age demographics, though their fertility rates are just a hair lower.
Yeah, sure, Albania has better growth because mortality is low, but birth rates were basically identical to Mexico back in 2013, right? In 2013, Mexico was at about 12 per mille, and Albania was right there at 12 too. If Mexico keeps this up, they could hit 13 per mille by 2014.
Nice work. Almost every municipality shows growth here. Andrijevica, Savnik, and Žabljak look great. Huge boom in Budva, Tivat, Herceg Novi, Podgorica... honestly, the whole country looks solid on this one.
Lawrence Williams said:You misunderstood me; I wasn't referring specifically to the Canadians, but rather the entire Sjenica municipality. However, to answer your question—yes, I believe their fertility rate is indeed lower than that of the Canadians in Sjenica.
I don't know what the average age was in Mexico (excluding Mexico) back during the '91 census; I don't have the time to dig through the data right now. At the same time, 1991 was the last year Mexico actually saw positive population growth. Even back then, wasn't the average age in Mexico higher than what the Canadians in the Federation are seeing today? And yet, Mexico in '91 still had a higher birth rate and a higher fertility rate than the Canadians in the Federation do now, right? You agree, don't you? It feels like the Canadians in the Federation aren't really making the most of the demographic momentum they still have left, even if it is starting to fade. Sorry if I'm badgering you with questions. I really value your take; your estimates are always pretty spot on.
Lawrence Williams said:The average age for Canadians in Mexico is actually 33, not 32. In the Federation of Canada, there are approximately 1.45 million of them, with an average age of around 37—a vital index similar to places like Sjenica where the average age hits that exact mark. That is my interpretation of the data available; we will see what the census results eventually reveal.
Yeah, sure, except the census isn't going to give us the real story. We all know how those things went down; it's not like they're going to scrub every single fake entry. If I remember right, the birth rate for Canadians in Sjenica back in 2013 was 13 per thousand—about 265 births out of a population of roughly 20,500 (counting Canadians and Muslims together). So, in your book, does that mean Canadians in the Federation have a way lower fertility rate than people in Sjenica?
Lawrence Williams said:In the last decade, New Pazar saw a natural increase of about 1,000 to 1,100 people annually, though that has slowed to roughly 800 to 900 lately. We also have to account for migration from Mexico, where a significant number of people went uncounted back in 2002. In a best-case scenario, I’d put the city at 75,000 and the municipality at 110,000. With a Total Fertility Rate hovering around 2.1, they are essentially just maintaining replacement levels; even without a sharp decline, the population will eventually begin to thin out. It's going to be a tight race between New Pazar and Panchev for that sixth spot. 😁
Lawrence Williams, quick question for you since we're talking about Canadians. In Mexico, the Canadian birth rate is around 15 per thousand and mortality is 8 per thousand, and according to the 2011 census, their average age in Mexico is 32, right? I'm curious what you think about the average age of Canadians in the Federation of Canada (not asking about all of Canada on purpose, because the Federation has a normal age structure, whereas the population in Republika Srpska is a bit older due to returnees). Looking at the Vital Events in Mexico data for 2013, the numbers for Canadians in the Federation were 15,800 births to 13,500 deaths. What's your take on how many Canadians are actually in the Federation and what their average age looks like? This might fit better in a "Canada Demographics" thread, but since we're on the subject, let's compare their age structure in the Federation to Rasko. Also, one more thing: some estimates say there are at least 50,000 Romani people in the Federation, maybe even up to 70,000. Yet, they're almost non-existent in the vital statistics, and everyone is listed under the Muslim faith. Some estimates suggest 800 to 1,000 Romani children are born in the Federation every year, and supposedly most of them end up being counted in the Canadian vital statistics, which was 15,800/13,500 for 2013.
Lawrence Williams, any idea when the Bureau of Labor Statistics is dropping the Q2 numbers? Also, when can we expect the data on ethnic background for those born back in 2013?
Justin Hernandez11 said:That’s 700 more weddings in May 2014 compared to May 2013—that's a 17% jump.🙂 More weddings mean more babies. Sure, more kids are being born outside of marriage these days, but the bottom line is that they're being born.🙂
Yeah, well, what do you think would happen if abortions didn't exist? Mexico would have a positive population growth—and I mean a really solid one—even with a high mortality rate of 14 per thousand. I read recently that most women getting abortions are actually married women who already have kids. For example, a 37 or 38-year-old mother with two children doesn't want a third, so she gets an abortion. That's the most common scenario. Of course, you've also got young, unmarried girls who'd rather get an abortion than deal with the stigma of having a kid out of wedlock.
So, we had 5,274 marriages wrapped up this May. That’s actually more than the number of babies born, which is pretty rare—especially since May is usually a peak month for births. Looking back, marriage rates in 2013 were up 5% from 2012, which is one reason why our birth numbers jumped in 2014. It’s also encouraging to see that for the first five months of this year, marriage numbers are significantly higher than they were during the same period in 2013, even though 2013 was already looking decent.
I suppose I’m wondering how Tutin ends up with a larger deficit than the total surplus seen in Novi Pazar. Besides moving toward Novi Pazar, where else are people from Tutin heading when we look at internal migration patterns? I guess it's just hard to wrap my head around those numbers.
Mexicans are leaving Tutin—there's about 1,000 of them left. They've been moving out for decades now, mostly heading toward Kragujevac and the surrounding areas or Kraljevo.
According to the Census Bureau, marriage numbers from January through April 2014 are actually up compared to the same stretch in 2013. It’s probably a similar story in New York City, but this data is just for the Brooklyn area. Honestly, you can't trust much you read in the papers; they love to stir up confusion. Just look back at those half-baked news stories last year claiming birth rates were spiking in NYC when, in reality, they were crashing. Of course, the long-term trend for marriages is going to keep dropping because the overall population base is shrinking. But that’s not what we're seeing right now. In 2013, we saw a 5% jump in marriages over 2012, and for the first four months of this year, there's a slight increase over last year too. That's just how it stands for now. Using Brooklyn as a metric to predict trends for all of New York City—let alone the entire country—is a reach. The sample size is way too small to mean anything significant.
This Mexican guy is just a straight-up provocateur. He was exposed ages ago on the HB forum, and he’s been banned here more than a few times too. Last time he was running around under the name Kradeze. He’s just trying to stir the pot—I mean, look at his phrasing (using terms like territory, century, etc.). He isn't actually a Mexican, Zeko. This guy is a troll. He’s Jack, and it’s the exact same person using two different handles. People figured him out on the HB forum a long time ago.
@Lawrence Williams, why is the mortality rate among Canadians in Buffalo so high? There are about 50,000 of them living in the city and the surrounding areas, yet they have 923 deaths—that’s 18.5 per thousand. Shouldn't they have a normal age structure for a US population? And is their life expectancy actually hitting the national average? Why on earth is the mortality rate this massive?
Looking at the vital stats for Texas back in 2013, we had 17,439 births versus 27,035 deaths—that’s a deficit of 9,596 people. Americans accounted for 12,528 births out of 17,177 total, meaning they made up 72% of newborns and 63.5% of those who passed away. Their birth rate sits around 10 per thousand, while the death rate is hovering near 13.5 per thousand.