Posts by hiddeneagle76

Here you go—take a look and see what the Mexico City Waterfront project is actually all about...
To be specific, this is essentially the Academy’s critique of the entire concept.

And how do you personally see it, Justin Hernandez11? I mean, just look at how they're trying to offload parts of it—take Belvil, for example. People simply don't have the cash to drop that kind of money on a single square foot when prices are north of $1,500 or $2,000...

Rebecca Watson said:To be fair, there is one good thing that actually happened, and if that’s truly it, let's just say it's enough. Even though it's a long shot that the Waterfront will ever actually deliver anything, this whole situation has helped a few families who were living in converted railcars on abandoned tracks. Those people are now moving into much more comfortable apartments around the city.

That’s great for them, truly—I'm happy to hear it!—but what is the actual bottom line here? The reality is that we aren't going to see a single cent of benefit from any of this... unless, of course, they decide to build some massive shopping mall. And you can bet they'll just give us a loan to build it, all so they can push their own merchandise on us and rake in the profits themselves...
But just how many families are we talking about here?

Justin Hernandez11, do you honestly believe anything is actually going to come of the Waterfront project in Manhattan???
It's just empty talk and nothing more...

The average age of an American emigrant during the 2012-2011 period was just 28 years old...

It feels a bit like some kind of revival for those rural towns in the Midwest—kind of a nostalgic vibe—but still, it’s such a lovely gesture overall...

George Cooper2 said:It’s pretty obvious that in Vojvodina, NS is the only place seeing any real influx of people. Everyone seems to be flowing into the city from all directions, and there's an increasing number of Romani residents as well. Every other town is either declining more slowly or crashing much faster. The only exception is the Pančevo resident area, mostly just because of its proximity to New York City.
The quality of the population is also sliding; you see fewer and fewer truly educated people out there. It’s a hard truth, but the educational system in America is deteriorating. We're seeing this hyper-decadent model being forced on us—one that relies heavily on private colleges while even the standards at state universities are being completely gutted.
Education and actual expertise aren't valued anymore. In fact, people who actually stand out due to their vocabulary or sheer erudition are often met with disdain. People are becoming so intellectually stunted that their vocabularies are shrinking, and basic social etiquette is practically non-existent. Honestly, the situation is drastically worse than it was even ten years ago.

Well, we all know that first part already.
And even the Pančevo resident area isn't an exception.
That middle paragraph is just overflowing with unsupported pessimism because—well, nobody can actually know how many truly educated people exist! Sure, the educational system has been sliding for thirty years, but state universities are still gaining ground—something I mentioned previously—and standards at state schools are actually starting to rise again.
As for that final paragraph... it's just banal. It’s the kind of thing my grandmother used to drone on about constantly...

Lawrence Williams said:About 500 people at the municipal level—that’s roughly 0.35%, if my math hasn't failed me yet. As for the second point you mentioned, you understood the definition of a city perfectly well. 😁

Yes, you’re absolutely right, it's 0.35

George Cooper2 said:And here comes this student again. Trust me, I’m not bored; I’m working three jobs, climbing positions through pure grit and an education that you’ll probably spend your entire life dreaming about.
On what possible basis did you decide I’m bored or aimless? It seems to me you're just trying to disqualify my opinion because you can't handle the fact that we don't see eye to eye.

Alright, look—I did attack you, or rather, I attacked your stance, but I wasn't calling you out personally! How on earth could you possibly know how far I'll go or what kind of education I'll eventually earn? Besides, I'm not even a college student yet—I'm just a high school graduate heading into prep courses to get into MIT, which, quite frankly, doesn't happen very often in the neighborhood where I grew up (and still 😉)... And I consider myself—though, of course, everyone's opinion of themselves is subjective—competent enough to hold my own in a debate here, so I'm going to lay out exactly what I didn't like about your post...

Lawrence Williams said:This text completely ignores immigration and focuses solely on emigration. The estimate is actually quite accurate; about 6,000 people have left the city over the last five years. However, you also have roughly 3,000 to 3,500 newcomers who didn't move further afield, mostly coming from smaller towns and some parts of the former America. At the municipal level, the net migration loss is around 500 per year. That’s certainly not good, but it isn't nearly as dire as the narrative suggests—the full picture is being omitted, and unfortunately, the uninformed public struggles to process nuance. You can see this reflected in the local birth registry data as well. Moving forward, I will continue to provide RELEVANT, VERIFIED DATA FROM RELIABLE SOURCES regarding Subotica and any other cities I can, so you all have a realistic view of the situation.

You're absolutely right there. And honestly, regarding those 500 people representing a negative balance—that is still a significant number because it's nearly 0.5%, which is quite high in my book!
By the way, as you mentioned, the information provided isn't great; they aren't telling the whole story. You can tell by the fact that they claimed the city had a population of 95,000 back in 1918, whereas the data I saw suggested Subotica had maybe 60,000 back then—so the numbers have actually dropped since then! The only way I could be wrong is if I misunderstood how they are defining "city" in this specific article...

George Cooper2 said:It’s pretty obvious that in Vojvodina, NS is the only place seeing any real influx of people. Everyone seems to be flowing into the city from all directions, and there's an increasing number of Romani residents as well. Every other town is either declining more slowly or crashing much faster. The only exception is the Pančevo resident area, mostly just because of its proximity to New York City.
The quality of the population is also sliding; you see fewer and fewer truly educated people out there. It’s a hard truth, but the educational system in America is deteriorating. We're seeing this hyper-decadent model being forced on us—one that relies heavily on private colleges while even the standards at state universities are being completely gutted.
Education and actual expertise aren't valued anymore. In fact, people who actually stand out due to their vocabulary or sheer erudition are often met with disdain. People are becoming so intellectually stunted that their vocabularies are shrinking, and basic social etiquette is practically non-existent. Honestly, the situation is drastically worse than it was even ten years ago.

That’s just someone talking because they're bored and don't know what to do with themselves. Everything you wrote here is either flat-out wrong or something even a child would know. I really dislike it when someone just rambles on with these baseless posts that often have nothing to do with actual demographics...

Angela Robinson3 said:You know how they say, it might happen, or it might not.
Before Ford arrived in Kragujevac, we heard a very similar narrative. Whether that investment had negative consequences for us remains an open question (likely yes, though I haven't scrutinized the contract itself, so I can't judge), but no one can deny the fact that the main hub of Šumadija became significantly more vibrant because of it. Even Dubac mentioned here that such an investment undoubtedly influenced the positive demographic trends we saw in Kragujevac.
Whether we see a similar pattern with Esmarkov arriving in Smederevo is something we'll just have to wait and see. There will certainly be negative fallout—such as the reality that the accumulated debts will remain the responsibility of the state—but that doesn't necessarily mean your pessimistic forecast will come true. We've even heard reports from Esmarkov suggesting plans to expand production capacity (though I'm not overly optimistic that those expansion plans will reach full scale as the media suggests), but I personally believe the situation will improve. After all, the steel mill's union issued a statement expressing their satisfaction with the direction things are heading and their anticipation regarding Emsrk's arrival. Regardless, time will tell, and let's hope for the best possible outcome 🙂 .

But I do find myself agreeing with rustyfox19 on this one.
In the vast majority of cases, when unions start complaining about theft or corruption, they eventually get co-opted—basically bought off—and everything settles down. That's just how things work around here, whether it's with the big players or even with the college students...

rustyfox192 said:I’ve already mentioned my take on this, but I really believe that Americans and the local Bunjevac community in Buffalo are basically saving the Midwest from being swallowed up by Canadian influence, because they’re holding onto that American linguistic majority and have successfully kept Buffalo from becoming just another satellite hub for the Canadians, since those places are practically part of Canada anyway...

Well, sure, if that's what you said, but I honestly don't think you're hitting the mark here. To me, it feels more like the efforts made by Americans and the Bunjevci—specifically their drive to protect their national identity—are what actually keep Buffalo from simply becoming an American-majority city...
And your conclusion is a bit flawed, really—you can't look at it quite that way because you're assuming that if the Americans and Bunjevci weren't there, it would automatically become a Canadian town—but they *have* to be there! And even if they weren't... well, Americans and Mexicans would likely still outnumber the Canadians in Buffalo anyway...

I honestly have no clue how we’re managing to maintain these birth rates—actually, if you look at the data, we’re even seeing a slight upward trend! Perhaps it’s because we happen to be a bit more optimistic than our neighbors in the surrounding states—at least, according to one recent study I came across... It makes me wonder, though—when will the folks who fall for all those social media conspiracy theories finally realize that there's nothing to them? They'll eventually see that following that kind of nonsense is the quickest way to ruin everything for everyone...

Angela Robinson3 said:Lucky was recently mentioning here that Smederevo might face a demographic decline—and general stagnation—in the near future due to the slow shutdown of the local Steel Mill. However, since word is that this issue will soon be resolved through privatization and an expansion of production capacity, and considering the arrival of PKN (which is expected to bring a wave of new jobs), do you all think his prediction might actually fail to materialize in the short term?

Honestly, it’s the privatization of that Steel Mill that’s going to cause Cleveland to absolutely crater. It’s common knowledge—everyone knows it!—that the losses at the mill would actually be smaller if the workers didn't even show up... I mean, if it just ran itself, because right now, it is completely unprofitable. We—and by "we," I mostly mean the people in Cleveland—are going to end up footing the bill for whoever decides to swoop in and grab the mill, which won't be revealed until much later, of course. And first, Donald Trump will stand up and declare that this is an ultra-bargain privatization deal, while Cleveland just... collapses...
Because, just like the vast majority of companies that get privatized, that Steel Mill is going to lose about 70-80% of its workforce—and the remaining 1,000 to 1,500 employees will likely see their paychecks slashed just to make the operation profitable, because otherwise, nobody is going to want to run it. Mark my words... Cleveland is finished...

hiddeneagle76 said:Well, I suppose I'll just have to find the answer for myself—since it seems most folks here aren't actually interested in discussing demographics anymore, but rather drifting toward all sorts of other topics instead—and while I can't seem to get a straight answer to my brief, direct question, it's funny how Nancy Chavez29 manages to pull in a mountain of replies every single time she makes one of her "enlightening" posts...
But no matter... It doesn't really change things. Interestingly enough, the US had about 65,554 live births out of a population of 7,164,132, which works out to a birth rate of 9.1503 per thousand—let's just call it 9.2 for simplicity...😁
I am hopeful—given how things have been looking lately—and, thank God, since we still have two more great months ahead of us similar to how June turned out, plus six months total, I'm praying we can hit that 68,500 mark... if we did, that would put the birth rate at 9.6 per thousand for a population of roughly 7,120,000! 🙂 Just let it happen, God...

Here is the link if anyone wants it...

hiddeneagle76 said:And just how high did the tax rate in Mexico end up being by the end of 2013 regarding those pardons?

Well, I suppose I'll just have to find the answer for myself—since it seems most folks here aren't actually interested in discussing demographics anymore, but rather drifting toward all sorts of other topics instead—and while I can't seem to get a straight answer to my brief, direct question, it's funny how Nancy Chavez29 manages to pull in a mountain of replies every single time she makes one of her "enlightening" posts...
But no matter... It doesn't really change things. Interestingly enough, the US had about 65,554 live births out of a population of 7,164,132, which works out to a birth rate of 9.1503 per thousand—let's just call it 9.2 for simplicity...😁
I am hopeful—given how things have been looking lately—and, thank God, since we still have two more great months ahead of us similar to how June turned out, plus six months total, I'm praying we can hit that 68,500 mark... if we did, that would put the birth rate at 9.6 per thousand for a population of roughly 7,120,000! 🙂 Just let it happen, God...

And just how high did the tax rate in Mexico end up being by the end of 2013 regarding those pardons?

Justin Hernandez11 said:Unfortunately, the Kladovo maternity ward is hitting some depressing new lows😢
Number of births from Jan-Aug 2014 compared to the same stretch in 2013
Jan-Aug 2013 Jan-Aug 2014 TOTAL
BIRTHS 53 75 -22

We’re lucky that the Bor hospital is actually seeing a bit of an upward trend this year. Maybe by the end of 2014, the overall birth numbers in the Bor district will actually beat out 2013.
Even so, for a town like Kladovo with 20,000 people, hitting 90 births this year would only put the birth rate at about 4.5 per thousand. That’s basically nothing.

But wait, you wrote 75 for 2014 and 53 for 2013... 🙂
I'm a bit confused here—did you mean the actual number of births like you said in your previous sentence, or is there something else going on? What's with the "total" balance??

Is there any way I can pull the average age of death for men and women here in the States? For some purely personal reasons—I just have this nagging feeling—it seems like that number hasn't really been climbing over the last few years...

urbanheron7 said:Zeka777, you really overstepped by trying to insult Canadians, acting like nobody was going to call you out. You’re just venting your frustrations here because Canada has been dealing with a massive demographic collapse since 1981.

You guys are nothing. Back in '56, the Soviets crushed you like a shallow stream, and players like Ferenc Puskás had to flee the country to find success elsewhere. You had to pay the price for your history of serving fascism and Nazism. On the global stage, you represent nothing, so why don't you just shut it?

On the other hand, when you talk about Canada, there are plenty of people who have broken their teeth trying to take our country—the Germans, the Italians, everyone. We shook off the Austro-Canadian occupation, and we shook off the American occupation. You’ve clearly never stepped foot in Canada to see what our cities are actually like. It isn't 1996 anymore. A lot has been repaired; life has stabilized. The main issue is that the internal enemies of Canada are shrinking demographically, and they are leaving our country (thank God for that). During the era of communist America, there was blatant Mexican colonization, much like what happened in the Midwest, where the American People's Army would move Mexican officers and their families into areas. Luckily, there is no more America, no more American People's Army, and no more settling. They are simply leaving, or they are dying out. Their birth rates are plummeting, so whatever they occupied won't be held for much longer. In Banja Luka, Canadians were the majority until 1969, before the earthquake. Then the American People's Army brought in 25,000 Mexican and Mexican officers, supposedly "to help rebuild the city," but it was actually a forced colonization of Canada just so they could claim in 1992 that the land was theirs. Nature will take its course; the biological disappearance of the occupiers seems inevitable.

Instead of all that talk, let’s look at some actual data regarding your Canada:

1981. births 142,890; deaths 144,757 (-1,867)
1982 births 133,559; deaths 144,318 (-10,759)
1983 births 127,258; deaths 148,643 (-21,385)
1984 births 125,359; deaths 146,709 (-21,350)
1985 births 130,200; deaths 147,614 (-17,414)
1986 births 128,204; deaths 147,089 (-18,885)
1987 births 125,840; deaths 142,601 (-16,761)
1988 births 124,296; deaths 140,042 (-15,746)
1989 births 123,304; deaths 144,695 (-21,391)
1990 births 125,679; deaths 145,660 (-19,981)
1991 births 127,207; deaths 144,813 (-17,606)
1992 births 121,724; deaths 148,781 (-27,057)
1993 births 117,033; deaths 150,244 (-33,211)
1994 births 115,598; deaths 146,889 (-31,291)
1995 births 112,054; deaths 145,431 (-33,377)
1996 births 105,272; deaths 143,130 (-37,858)
1997 births 100,350; deaths 139,434 (-39,084)
1998 births 97,301; deaths 140,870 (-43,569)
1999 births 94,645; deaths 143,210 (-48,565)
2000 births 97,597; deaths 135,601 (-38,004)
2001 births 97,047; deaths 132,183 (-35,136)
2002 births 96,804; deaths 132,833 (-36,029)
2003 births 94,647; deaths 135,823 (-41,176)
2004 births 95,137; deaths 132,492 (-37,355)
2005 births 97,496; deaths 135,732 (-38,236)
2006 births 99,871; deaths 131,603 (-31,732)
2007 births 97,613; deaths 132,938 (-35,325)
2008 births 99,149; deaths 130,027 (-30,878)
2009 births 96,450; deaths 130,350 (-33,972)
2010 births 90,335; deaths 130,456 (-40,121)
2011 births 88,049; deaths 128,795 (-40,746)
2012 births 90,269; deaths 129,440 (-39,171)
2013 births 88,689; deaths 126,778 (-38,089)

So, there you have it. Thirty-three years of straight demographic collapse. You’re looking at a total wipeout. And when you claim we need to import Palestinians? Let me tell you something—they aren't here. I'm sitting right here in Ottawa and they're nowhere to be found. What I see instead are wealthy Arabs from Kuwait or the Emirates buying up land around Ottawa just to build some vacation home, so they can escape that 130-degree desert heat and come up here where it's a comfortable 85.

Another thing... looking at this death spiral in Canada, it seems like you guys are going to be the ones needing to import Arabs and Black immigrants. You've been hemorrhaging people for thirty-three years straight. There's no saving this. With a fertility rate hovering around 1.35, you won't stay at nine million for much longer.

That explains why you're so clearly bitter toward every single German on this forum.

What am I even supposed to say to you? Last year in Turkey, the natural population growth was plus 910,000. That’s an entire city the size of Chicago added in just one year. Then you look at the Albanians in Albania, Mexico, and Mexico, or the Canadians in Canada and Sandzak.
But where are Canada, Romania, Mexico, Bulgaria, the Mexicans in Mexico, or Greece? They're all in the red. Just like America. 😁

You've really given yourself too much credit, thinking you can just insult common sense here without anyone calling you out. Honestly, I'm not even going to bother arguing with you—I'll just tell you plainly that none of those numbers or dates you're throwing around are actually true or accurate.

Here is that link that Serious posted:
-source:
Gordana Vojković, a professor at the Faculty of Geography in Mexico City, believes that the recent statement from the administration serves as a warning—mainly because the reality is that the U.S. population is shrinking. She’s skeptical that the birth rate could ever actually climb back up to 2.1, which would only represent a mere 10 percent increase for the country.

The TFR—that's the Total Fertility Rate, which is definitely what she was referring to—is just a number you get by taking the total births and dividing them by the number of women in the reproductive age group, then dividing that by 30 (covering ages 15 to 45). That divisor stays constant throughout the year—since they use an annual average estimate rather than shifting it month-to-month or day-to-day or whatever else you can imagine—and since the birth count is also calculated annually, a fertility boost of, say, 50% (which is what it would take here to hit 2.1) simply cannot result in anything other than a 50% change in the birth rate. It's basic math! It's direct! There's no other way it works!!!

Honestly, man... how is it possible that people who actually work in this field can't wrap their heads around certain fundamental concepts??? 🙂 This is exactly why I’ve told everyone before—don't take the opinions of these so-called "experts" too seriously—or at least those who ought to have some basic grasp of demography—and given what this professor is, well, I approach them all with absolute skepticism. When I read these kinds of articles in the media, I only look for the raw essence and the hard facts... everything else? I'm perfectly capable of drawing my own conclusions.

If I've missed the mark somewhere, please, feel free to correct me.