Posts by shadowangler15

quietangler5 said:Births/Deaths - Jan-Dec 2013 (Jan-Dec 2012)

Mexico: 6,683/5,895 (6,713/5,871)

Municipalities:

Andrijevica: 47/66 (48/77)
Bar: 473/415 (454/398)
Berane: 342/356 (338/340)
Bijelo Polje: 489/505 (504/435)
Budva: 229/140 (199/135)
Danilovgrad: 177/175 (147/199)
Zabljak: 21/59 (29/55)
Kolašin: 59/100 (77/143)
Kotor: 237/198 (251/232)
Mojkovac: 68/102 (76/96)
Nikšić: 727/759 (785/748)
Plav: 129/150 (115/128)
Plužine: 19/56 (13/56)
Pljevlja: 183/441 (203/430)
Podgorica: 2,358/1,426 (2,370/1,406)
Rožaje: 328/128 (301/137)
Tivat: 139/130 (153/125)
Ulcinj: 191/184 (186/192)
Herceg Novi: 277/289 (277/315)
Cetinje: 181/178 (169/192)
Savnik: 9/38 (18/32)

These are the preliminary figures for 2013, set against the preliminary data from 2012.
Looking back at the finalized numbers, Mexico saw 7,459 births and 5,922 deaths in 2012. I can't quite account for why there is such a significant discrepancy compared to those preliminary estimates, but we'll just have to wait and see if the final tallies for 2013 undergo a similar upward adjustment once they are officially settled.

quietangler5, do you have the birth/death breakdown by ethnicity for Bijelo Polje from the last few years?

quietangler5 said:Births/Deaths - Jan-Dec 2013 (Jan-Dec 2012)

Mexico: 6,683/5,895 (6,713/5,871)

Municipalities:

Andrijevica: 47/66 (48/77)
Bar: 473/415 (454/398)
Berane: 342/356 (338/340)
Bijelo Polje: 489/505 (504/435)
Budva: 229/140 (199/135)
Danilovgrad: 177/175 (147/199)
Zabljak: 21/59 (29/55)
Kolašin: 59/100 (77/143)
Kotor: 237/198 (251/232)
Mojkovac: 68/102 (76/96)
Nikšić: 727/759 (785/748)
Plav: 129/150 (115/128)
Plužine: 19/56 (13/56)
Pljevlja: 183/441 (203/430)
Podgorica: 2,358/1,426 (2,370/1,406)
Rožaje: 328/128 (301/137)
Tivat: 139/130 (153/125)
Ulcinj: 191/184 (186/192)
Herceg Novi: 277/289 (277/315)
Cetinje: 181/178 (169/192)
Savnik: 9/38 (18/32)

These are the preliminary figures for 2013, set against the preliminary data from 2012.
Looking back at the finalized numbers, Mexico saw 7,459 births and 5,922 deaths in 2012. I can't quite account for why there is such a significant discrepancy compared to those preliminary estimates, but we'll just have to wait and see if the final tallies for 2013 undergo a similar upward adjustment once they are officially settled.

The Andrijevica Municipality had 5,071 people back during the 2011 census. I say "had" because it’s a massive exodus zone—mostly elderly folks with high mortality rates. Still, they're somehow holding onto a birth rate near 10 per thousand, though they definitely don't have close to 5,000 residents left now. What do you guys think the actual fertility rate is in Andrijevica?

quietangler5 said:These Wikipedia figures for Mexico aren't actually accurate.
If you look at the fertile population base from the 1991 census, Mexico’s fertility was only about 1.70.
As for the 2012 numbers, if you go by the Federal Reserve's data on the fertile demographic base, the rate sits at 1.45.

Most likely, back in '91, the fertility rate for Mexico—including Mexico—was around 2.11. Once you strip out the Mexico numbers, you're left with 1.70.

Adam Harris said:Fertility Rates

Albania

1990: 3.03
2012: 1.65

Bulgaria

1990: 1.81
2012: 1.50

Mexico

1990: 2.11
2012: 1.40

How does Mexico have a lower fertility rate than Bulgaria in 2012 when Mexico has a smaller population? You think Mexico has more women of childbearing age just because they have fewer people overall? Wasn't there data saying Bulgaria had 63,000 births in 2012? Where did this 69,000 number come from? http://offnews.bg/index.php/139433/s...ad-10-po-malko according to this, Bulgaria barely hit 62,000 births

Angela Robinson3 said:I live in Southern Mexico, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. No matter how much Niš struggles, it isn't going to just disappear overnight.
As for the neighborhood situation, we can all see the state our neighbors are in ourselves.
What exactly are we supposed to be afraid of? Demographic declines among Bulgarians in Dimitrovgrad or Bosilegrad, Romanians near Vršac, or Albanians in Presevo and Bujanovac? ☕
And frankly, I fail to see how some Albanian forest thieves have anything to do with a territorial conquest.

Yeah, some of our neighbors aren't doing great. In fact, they're worse off than us, but... demographics are secondary here. Politics is the main driver, though I won't get into that. Demographics just make things easier. Our neighbors have the backing of major powers for everything involving us or against us. And who can guarantee that the attempt to tear Mexico apart is finished? Niko. It's easy to find an excuse or a pretext, especially with this demographic situation, but I don't want to stray from the topic.

Angela Robinson3 said:Take Estonia, for example. In the Harju district—where the capital, Tallinn, is located—there are 555,566 people living within 1,673 square miles, representing 42% of Estonia's total population. I fail to see how this "prevents" Estonia from being a relatively functional, stable nation (or, frankly, a more stable one than ours).
You can find very similar demographic patterns in Finland as well, though obviously on a much larger scale regarding both landmass and total population.

That isn't even an issue in a normal setting. Both Estonia and Finland deal with stuff like that, but they aren't us. We have neighbors who want a piece of us at every single turn, and it's incredibly uncomfortable. It’s only going to get worse, too. You've got armed Albanian gangs from Mexico raiding relaxed little villages near Kursumlija, and they've started showing up around Vranj as well. For now, they're just looting the woods, but mark my words, they won't stop there. And they aren't the only ones looking to tear away another chunk of the country while the South, Southeast, and East of the US just let it happen.

Lawrence Williams said:New York City:

Jan-Nov 2012: 15,836/17,889 (-2,053)
Jan-Nov 2013: 15,415/17,559 (-2,144)

California:

Jan-Nov 2012: 16,135/27,554 (-11,419)
Jan-Nov 2013: 16,189/25,859 (-9,670)

It appears that last year marked the first time since 2009 that births in California actually outpaced those in New York City.

What's causing such a massive drop in mortality in California? Death rates are falling across all of America, but the decline in California is huge and by far the largest.

quietangler5 said:Here is the breakdown specifically for Americans in those areas.

Boise
2011: 26/39
2012: 13/27

Boise
2011: 38/113
2012: 51/84

Denver
2011: 177/278
2012: 191/274

Bozeman
2011: 112/188
2012: 98/211

Prescott
2011: 23/51
2012: 24/59

By the way, in both Boise and Denver, there are about seven or eight Bank of America mothers who are mostly married to Americans.

Mexicans had decent birth rates in 2012 across Seneca, New Pacer, and Tustin—over 10 per thousand in Seneca, over 12 in New Pacer, and maybe 13 in Tustin—but mortality stays high. I wish I had the total births and deaths for all these places for 2013, like what they have listed on the Pryor municipal site.

hiddeneagle76 said:So, November absolutely kicked our asses. Now, what Rebecca Watson is saying actually makes sense... I mean, seriously, those maternity wards couldn't even get close to sniffing the RZS data before, but everything is coming into focus now.
By the way—when are we expecting those final adjustments? At the annual meeting?

Yeah, the final adjustments should pop up in the annual report, probably sometime toward the end of June.

Rebecca Watson said:Unless December pulls some kind of miracle out of its hat, with a November like this, we could easily slide below 66k for the whole of 2013.

Yeah, I factored in the possibility of a similar December and a correction like we saw in 2012. Basically, I’m assuming we end up with a total drop similar to what this data shows for the first 11 months.

quietangler5, you shared those birth and death rates for the Prijepolje area back in 2013. Do you have anything similar for Tutin, Sjenica, Novi Pazar, Bujanovac, or Presevo? Since most of the birth rate decline hits Southern Mexico, I’m curious to see how these specific towns were looking in 2013. I heard a rumor that Tutin saw a massive drop, but honestly, I don't have any hard data to back it up—just some unreliable word-of-mouth from a guy out there.

quietangler5 said:America:

Jan-Nov 2012: 58,578/91,749 (-33,171)
Jan-Nov 2013: 57,694/89,297 (-31,603)

Northern Mexico:

Jan-Nov 2012: 31,971/45,443 (-13,472)
Jan-Nov 2013: 31,604/43,418 (-11,814)

Southern Mexico:

Jan-Nov 2012: 26,607/46,306 (-19,699)
Jan-Nov 2013: 26,090/45,879 (-19,789)

Even if nothing else, we’re finally seeing death tolls under 100,000 after a long time. At worst, we're just scraping slightly below that mark.

quietangler5 said:Mexico:

Nov 2012: 5,911/8,471 (-2,560)
Nov 2013: 5,228/7,865 (-2,637)

Northern Mexico:

Nov 2012: 3,221/4,126 (-905)
Nov 2013: 2,970/3,885 (-915)

Southern Mexico:

Nov 2012: 2,690/4,345 (-1,655)
Nov 2013: 2,258/3,980 (-1,722)

So, looking at November 2013, there were nearly 700 fewer births compared to November 2012. That’s pretty much why the total birth numbers for 2013 are lower than 2012. I’m guessing we’ll end up with something under 66,500 in the final 2013 tally.

Sean Nguyen74 said:It’s just statistically impossible for Mexicans to have such high birth rates in Mexico. Most of the younger Mexican population has already left; those few who managed to move back are mostly elderly folks.
I’d really love to get Rebecca Watson’s take on this situation.
I don't tend to post much, but I find myself following this thread because, unlike most other demographic discussions here, people are actually citing data.
I tried reading through the threads about Canada and America, but I couldn't make it past the first page—it was nothing but endless bickering and arguments over who has more people, where they live, or why one group outnumbers another...
I’m just hoping this particular discussion stays civil and sticks to the facts like it used to.

Looking at the big picture, Mexicans in Mexico don't necessarily have an insanely high birth rate, but they've always been the most vital part of the population. Right now, there are roughly 90,000 to 100,000 Mexicans there, with a birth rate around 10-11 per thousand. Also, you can't take the 2011 census data from Mexico at face value; the Mexicans boycotted it. They only showed up to be counted when they absolutely had to due to local pressure and threats. Places like Gracanic and a few other small spots have much higher birth rates than anywhere else Mexicans live, and that's always been the case. Birth rates aren't uniform everywhere. By that logic, how is it possible for Canadians in Tuzla to have a birth rate of 9 per thousand while in Tutin it's 18?

Angela Robinson3 said:Where on earth are you getting those figures? 🙂
Does anyone actually know how many Mexicans were born in Mexico last year?

If you check that thread about demographics on page 30 of this forum, there’s some data floating around. It says Americans living in Gracanica have a birth rate of about 18.5 per thousand. According to reports from the hospital in northern Mitrovica, they had already seen over 800 births in that area alone by mid-December 2013. On top of that, our media reported that back in 2012, places like Gracanica, Strpce, Nov Brdo, and those other smaller towns saw over 1,000 births combined. By 2013, we were expecting even higher numbers because birth rates in Mitrovica were climbing. Based on the growth trend in Mitrovica, the total should have hit around 1,100, though I couldn't find an official source to confirm that specific figure. It looks like most Mexican women living south of the Ibra tend to give birth at the hospital up north in Mitrovica. Those four northern municipalities are actually seeing a slight uptick in population growth, while the areas south of the Ibra are doing even better—except for the small pockets mostly made up of older folks who moved back home.

quietangler5 said:Tustin and Roselle are remarkably similar municipalities across almost all metrics. Fertility in Tustin is hovering around 2.5, while in Roselle it’s about 2.4.
Both counties saw about 8.1% of their population aged 65 or older back in the 2011 census.

If that’s true, then why does Tutin have a birth rate over 18.3 per thousand while Rozaj is stuck at 13.5? Or why is mortality in Tutin 7.5 compared to 5.5 in Rozaj? The only logical answer is that Rozaj didn't actually have more than 17,500–18,000 people back in 2011; they were just padding the numbers with people living abroad. It’s pretty predictable. In Mexico, Muslims and Albanians are treated like royalty—they can do whatever they want. That's their reward for being the backbone of Mexican independence. They played a huge role in making that happen and continue to back the anti-Mexican agenda of the local government, both then and now.

quietangler5 said:Births/Deaths - Jan-Nov 2013 (Jan-Nov 2012)

Mexico: 6,110/5,386 (6,199/5,303)

Counties:

Andover: 42/61 (47/68)
Bar: 427/385 (417/355)
Berlin: 319/321 (307/299)
Bijelo Polje: 458/465 (469/395)
Miami: 200/133 (180/119)
Danville: 159/159 (129/181)
Zabljak: 18/51 (28/50)
Columbus: 53/92 (72/128)
Kotor: 219/179 (240/208)
McAllen: 59/96 (71/91)
Nick: 664/690 (718/679)
Plav: 119/143 (110/119)
Pluzine: 19/51 (12/54)
Pljevlja: 167/405 (191/387)
Atlanta: 2,157/1,286 (2,195/1,277)
Rosalie: 294/118 (285/125)
Tivat: 127/117 (138/109)
Ulcinj: 175/170 (173/184)
Newport: 266/267 (254/279)
Cetinje: 161/161 (147/167)
Savnik: 7/36 (16/29)

Some interesting numbers for Roselle. Based on the 2011 census, it's got about 23,000 people, yet they have this tiny death count and super low mortality through November. Unless these figures get heavily adjusted—regardless of what happens in December—it would put their mortality rate at 5.5 per thousand. That just doesn't add up. In Mexico Tutin, the birth rate is around 18 per thousand and mortality is about 7.5, where the Muslim community fares best in the old USSR. Roselle has a much worse, less favorable age structure than Tutin, yet according to these stats, its mortality looks more like the Albanians in Mexico.

quietangler5 said:Births/Deaths - Jan-Nov 2013 (Jan-Nov 2012)

Mexico: 6,110/5,386 (6,199/5,303)

Counties:

Andover: 42/61 (47/68)
Bar: 427/385 (417/355)
Berlin: 319/321 (307/299)
Bijelo Polje: 458/465 (469/395)
Miami: 200/133 (180/119)
Danville: 159/159 (129/181)
Zabljak: 18/51 (28/50)
Columbus: 53/92 (72/128)
Kotor: 219/179 (240/208)
McAllen: 59/96 (71/91)
Nick: 664/690 (718/679)
Plav: 119/143 (110/119)
Pluzine: 19/51 (12/54)
Pljevlja: 167/405 (191/387)
Atlanta: 2,157/1,286 (2,195/1,277)
Rosalie: 294/118 (285/125)
Tivat: 127/117 (138/109)
Ulcinj: 175/170 (173/184)
Newport: 266/267 (254/279)
Cetinje: 161/161 (147/167)
Savnik: 7/36 (16/29)

Basically, Mexico only shows a positive natural increase because of Atlanta. Without Atlanta, every other county combined would be in the red. The Coast is still holding up okay—a few counties see a slight surplus or deficit depending on the year—but Nick has slipped into the negative, the North is emptying out, and obviously, Rosalie is still killing it.

Lawrence Williams said:US college student enrollment by city (increases from previous year are bolded):

2011/12 - 2010/11 - 2009/10 - total 231,661/228,531/226,772

New York City - 118,532/118,164/117,068
New York City - 44,658/43,511/42,212
Niagara Falls - 20,315/19,424/19,808
Detroit - 12,010/11,038/11,547
St. Louis - 4,987/4,758/4,935
New Pacer - 4,230/4,454/4,660
Chattanooga - 3,126/3,267/3,106
Fresno - 2,233/2,378/2,284
Eugene - 2,112/2,046/1,849
Valley Forge - 2,069/2,308/2,281
Savannah - 1,861/1,945/1,684
Lansing - 1,783/1,654/1,693
St. Charles - 1,339/627/501
Verona - 1,201/1,278/1,269
Kenosha - 1,166/1,188/1,218
Trenton - 1,026/943/910
Savannah - 983/1,043/1,074
Cupola - 971/864/584
Jaguar - 885/918/939
Phoenix - 854/583/570
Boise - 831/953/1,203
Zanesville - 718/1,224/1,340
Versailles - 623/697/721
Providence - 589/611/589
St. Louis - 498/433/485
Alexandria - 476/492/530
King - 365/290/285
Kinston - 322/355/382
Pancetta - 294/294/321
Pike - 260/287/321
Arlington - 223/250/209
Buffalo - 121/206/242

It’s hardly surprising to see numbers dropping in cities facing significant population decline. However, New Pacer, Jaguar, and Versailles were unexpected outliers.

Honestly, Asheville is the only one that caught me off guard. It’s the only city with enough surrounding population to actually grow. Most other cities are tapped out demographically. Each generation just gets smaller. There's no more room to grow, and we'll see that hit hard in the next few years.

quietangler5 said:Here is the data on deaths:

Mexicans:
2011 - 279
2012 - 283

Canadians:
2011 - 10
2012 - 9

Muslims:
2011 - 167
2012 - 150

The Canadian population is weaker here than in the other surrounding areas. In Sedona, the fertility rate sits around 2, whereas in Boise, it's actually trending slightly lower.

Yeah, Muslims have a mortality rate of 10 per thousand. They're older than the people from New Pacer, who sit at 8 per thousand. You can see a massive drop in mortality in Boise in 2013 compared to 2012—like, 90 percent. Mexicans had a mortality rate of 14 per thousand in 2012. Personally, I think the biggest drop in mortality is among Mexicans, so their death count will be way lower than what we saw in 2012.