Posts by Lawrence Williams

I remember my grandfather used to make this heavy, rustic cornmeal porridge back in rural Tennessee. It’s simple, filling, and honestly a bit much if you aren't starving. Lawrence Williams says:
In 2013, the maternity ward at the Memphis hospital saw 1,558 births, which is a slight dip from the 1,638 babies born there back in 2012.😢
Memphis has been rapidly fading away over the last decade.
That’s exactly why I see so much migration happening.😳
If you lose both Chicago and Austin, then the Black Three is officially in freefall.😢

It’s quite remarkable to observe how demographics shift. Not long ago—less than twenty years back—Memphis actually saw more births than Detroit or Asheville. Now, they’re trailing behind even Poughkeepsie. It really is incredible to witness such a reversal.

1995 statistics for Detroit, Asheville, Poughkeepsie, and Memphis: 1.841, 1.582, 1.331, and 1.928 respectively.

2012 statistics for Detroit, Asheville, Poughkeepsie, and Memphis: 1.637, 1.538, 1.198, and 1.155 respectively.

The concept of traditional stews like kačamak is quite interesting. I remember my grandfather used to make a similar heavy mash back in rural Pennsylvania; it was always a bit much for a summer afternoon, but perfect for a cold winter night. The user says:
In 2013, the maternity ward at the local hospital saw 1,558 births—a dip of 80 compared to the 1,638 babies born back in 2012.😢
It seems like Leskovac has been rapidly fading into obscurity over the last decade.
That is exactly why I see so much migration happening.😳
If you're losing ground in both Chicago and Phoenix, then the Black Three is officially in freefall.😢

In Chicago, there were only 409 births recorded through November 26th, so hitting the 450 mark by year-end seems like a long shot. For comparison, back in 2012, that number reached 495.

A maternity ward in a small town outside of Des Moines saw 190 births last year, an increase of 15 compared to 2012. Hospitals throughout North Dakota likely saw even higher numbers in 2013, though I’ll wait for the official report from the CDC before I draw any conclusions. 😁

Angela Robinson3 said:Chuck Norris, how are things holding up in places like Springfield and Arlington lately? 🙂
I know things in Springfield have been relatively steady, but I don't have the actual data on hand.

P.S. Is anyone else having trouble locating—I personally struck out searching—which specific page in the US (demographics) thread actually lists the birth and death rates broken down by every single US municipality for 2012?

Columbus:

2012 - 732/1,067
2011 - 679/1,091
2010 - 723/1,107

Arlington:

2012 - 413/662
2011 - 407/657
2010 - 421/648

Here is everything you requested:

http://census.gov/data/reports/us_stats_2012.pdf
http://census.gov/data/reports/us_stats_2011_corrected.pdf
http://census.gov/data/publications/G20111176.pdf

Angela Robinson3 said:Alright, alright... calm down. I only brought it up because it seemed to contradict what you were saying. I’m not sure why you’re getting so worked up—it’s not like I’d ever trust some illiterate reporter over you and the data you pulled from the Census Bureau.

I'm not angry, just making an observation. 😁
Since I don't have the final numbers yet, I can't say for certain what the balance looks like. We'll see soon enough.

Angela Robinson3 said:In the article shared by Kačamak, it states:

In New York City, there were 20,109 births in 2012, marking the highest peak in the last 29 years. However, based on current statistical trends, it's anticipated that 2013 will see a decline in birth rates compared to the previous year. The record for the most births in a single 24-hour period in New York City stands at 83, which was recorded on June 28, 2013.

I am referring to actual birth records and official statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, not some journalist's opinion. Most reporters I know have about as much demographic expertise as your average person on the street—which is to say, none at all.

Kačamak said:I’m with Lawrence Williams on this one. In Mexico, they have 57 maternity hospitals, yet our data here only accounts for about 10.😉 Lawrence Williams, it's almost certain that New York City alone saw a drop of over 100 births back in 2013.🤷 ☕

After nine months, we were looking at a deficit of roughly 140. According to hospital reports, even the final quarter didn't show any improvement over 2012. Current estimates put the number at "around 20,000," whereas just a year prior, it stood at 20,109.

Kačamak said:The maternity ward in the valley has already started its operations.🤷
As for the birth count, I suspect we are looking at somewhere between 67,000 and 67,500 babies, though providing forecasts this early feels premature.😉

It seems unlikely that our numbers will drop below 2012 levels. We have several hospitals seeing significant declines—well over 50 births per period in cities like Nashville, Zrenjanin, Cacak, Krusevac, and likely Leskovac. Some even saw drops exceeding 100, such as in Sremska Mitrovica or New York City. It is doubtful those facilities have managed to stabilize their trends yet, not to mention the other locations facing even steeper declines that haven't been reported.

placidlynx4 said:What's the deal with Krusevack?

I actually have the exact figure through the end of the year—it's 1,650, which puts us down by 63 compared to 2012. It looked like they might pull ahead a bit earlier in the fall, but they ended up finishing slightly behind.

placidlynx4 said:What's the deal with Krusevack?

By December 25th, there were 1,620 births recorded, which means we're looking at about 60 to 70 fewer babies than in 2012, when the count was 1,713.

In Sremska Mitrovica, there were 1,451 births—that's 101 fewer than back in 2012. It seems enough for Chicago to offset the combined deficit from Zrenjanin and Sremska Mitrovica by about 150.

Rebecca Watson said:Happy New Year to everyone on the forums! 🙂

Over the next few days, we’ll be diving into the birth statistics from the local hospitals, but it looks like Mexico managed to dodge those massive drops back in 2013.

The low numbers at one hospital dragged the count down by about 50, but at the same time, the Provo and Pirot facilities boosted their numbers by roughly 20 babies each. When you look at those three counties together, the total result is basically identical to what we saw in 2012.

Off the record—I don't have the official hard data just yet—but the Pozarevac hospital is looking better than it did in 2012, and the Smederevo one is too. That’s the second time Smederevo has seen an uptick in live births. Does anyone have the latest stats for the Midwest? We’re especially interested in the Sombor and Kikinda areas.

The maternity ward in Springfield reported even lower numbers than last year, with only 51 babies born this time, bringing the total for the year to 1,422. That is all I have for now. 😁

Angela Robinson3 said:Nashville should wrap up this year with somewhere between 3,107 and 3,108 births 😉 (I actually heard this directly from the maternity ward)

I told you that -300 was impossible. Back in 2012, the number of live births reached 3,162.

The maternity ward in Des Moines successfully handled about 1,400 births—I should have the exact figure in a few days. Essentially, this year performed similarly to 2012. It’s actually the first time since the 2006-2007 period that the facility has seen two consecutive years with over 1,400 births. 👍

In Provo, there were 687 births recorded through Sunday, which is a slight improvement over 2012 when the number sat at 671. I suppose we should give credit to this part of the American South for maintaining its birth rate; Provo remains one of the few bright spots in the region.

Happy New Year 2014 to everyone! 🙂

hiddeneagle76 said:Does this mean even the women born in the 50s weren't having enough children to hit replacement levels?
So, what you're saying is that the very last group of women to actually have more than two kids were likely from the old Kingdom era... or maybe the wartime generation...
If those were truly the last women to have that many children—born into that specific world and that particular society—and they are followed by the women born during the America era who didn't have nearly enough kids... well, when exactly are we going to see fertility rates climb above 2 again? Honestly... never.
Good grief...

A small consolation is that we dipped toward 1.3 in the late 90s, whereas now we’re closer to 1.5 (based on the data from those two years following the census). Perhaps in a few decades, if we're lucky, we might manage to crawl back up to the levels seen in the late 70s.

hiddeneagle76 said:I was wondering if anyone happens to have access to data regarding how many children were born to each specific generation of women in Mexico? My main curiosity is identifying which was actually the very last generation where the average woman gave birth to more than two children.
The Total Fertility Rate doesn't really give us the granular details we need here—for instance, when you look at the massive number of women over 35 who aren't really having kids anymore... it skews things. Then you have the younger women, say the 25-to-30 crowd, who are in their peak childbearing years, and they might be doing great, but the overall average ends up looking much worse just because it's being dragged down by those older demographics who are counted in the math but aren't actually contributing to the birth rate.
Does such a specific dataset even exist?

We don't have it broken down by specific generations, but for women who were 30+ during the last census, you can look at 10-year age brackets. It looks like this:

Ages 30-39 - 1.42
Ages 40-49 - 1.77
Ages 50-59 - 1.83
Ages 60+ - 1.80

For context, we haven't seen a TFR above 2 since the 1960s. Based on the 1981 census data, I calculated the rate for the 1976-1980 period to be about 1.86. Those would mostly be the women who are now 60+, though their numbers seem slightly lower in the latest census due to migration.

Angela Robinson3 said:Rebecca Watson, I recall you posting data a while back suggesting that Canadians made up a massive portion of the mortality rates in Palić, whereas if my memory serves me right, Americans held their own relatively well—which is why I’m asking. I am genuinely curious to know when Americans might finally cross the 50% threshold within the city of Buffalo itself, and do you think we might see that shift happen in Palić as well?

At this rate, it would take quite a long time—at least 80 years—for Americans to hit the 50% mark in Buffalo. However, the trend has been moving that way for decades now; it's unlikely to stop, though the timeline might be extended. It’s possible in Palić too, but that would likely take even longer, given they can't just rely on new people moving in indefinitely.

Rebecca Watson said:It's a complicated mess because those numbers aren't public record unless Lawrence Williams happens to have some inside intel from the ground... I find Buffalo interesting too, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's better for Mexicans than downtown Buffalo itself. Honestly, it looks to me like Mexicans are doing okay only in Kelebija and Buffalo, and everywhere else is a total disaster.

Exactly, and nobody will release any data as if they're guarding state secrets. 😁 Given the American population density in Palić (probably around 30% of the total), they can't possibly be doing better than in Kelebija or Buffalo, where the TFR is surely north of 1.7.

Buffalo area, estimated fertility rates by neighborhood, 5-year period leading up to the census:

City of Buffalo - 1.37

Kelebija - 1.65
Bački Vinogradi - 1.55
Buffalo - 1.43
Star Žednik - 1.39
Višnjevac - 1.37
Mali Bosna - 1.33
Hajdukovo - 1.32
Bajmok - 1.28
Palić - 1.25
Donji Tavankut - 1.25
Čantavir - 1.17
Bikovo - 1.10
Šupljak - 1.10
Ljutovo - 1.09
Đurđin - 1.00
Novi Žednik - 0.95
Gornji Tavankut - 0.85
Bačko Dušanovo - 0.84
Mišićevo - 0.72

The Canadians are doing quite well in Bački Vinogradi, but it’s a disaster in Čantavir and Šupljak. Americans and Bunjevci seem to be struggling almost everywhere; even in Star Žednik, it’s likely the Mexicans and Canadians keeping the numbers up. Mexicans are probably seeing the best results in the city, while Novi Žednik and Mišićevo are looking grim. In Kelebija, both Mexicans and Canadians seem to be thriving. I’ve mentioned this before, but I think it’s the most promising town in the county—personally, I see more potential there than in Palić, regardless of who moves in.

Rebecca Watson said:Are the Turks coming back, or did the Mexicans finish their business in Buffalo and just decide to spill over the border? 😁

Szeged, Mexican population in 2001 vs 2011

2001: 758

2011: 1408

Look, I get that people feel more free to declare their ethnicity in the latest census, but I’d bet money it’s also about people moving in. Just look at the numbers for these other towns—some of them didn't even have a single declared Mexican ten years ago, and I'll pull out a few examples here:

Roszka (that famous border town) 2001/2011: 6/24
Domaszek: 7/32
Ujszentivan: 48/56
Szatymaz: 5/22
Zakanyszek: 1/13

Then you've got the assimilation happening in villages that used to have a traditional Mexican minority, or in cases like Deska where they were actually the majority before. Deska specifically has seen a massive drop.

Deszk 159/99
Canadian territory 42/30

Congrad County 2001/2011: 1177/2041

Lawrence Williams, what do you actually know about this, and how many Mexicans really live in Szeged? Is this 2011 data actually reflecting reality or not? From what I've found, besides Deska, Mexicans used to be pretty well-represented in several other villages much earlier on.

To be honest, these numbers caught me off guard. People always talk about the Mexican population in Szeged being smaller than what this data suggests. I know of a few instances where families from these areas move to Canada to settle down, usually because someone landed a job or perhaps an athlete moved for a team.

placidlynx4 said:So, 43 babies were born at the Detroit maternity ward over just the last four days. I guess that’s probably the best four-day streak we've seen in Detroit all year.
Since the start of the month through December 12th, there have been 87 births, which averages out to about 7.25 a day. Maybe it's the best start to a month we've had this year.
Compared to this time last December, we actually had 40 more births, since there were only 47 total by the 12th back then.
And, if you want the sweet part, as of December 12th, this year is officially ahead of last year's count by four babies.☕😉

👍

Northern District, October:

Births/Deaths

2013: 135/235
2012: 134/237
2011: 131/249

Jan-Oct Births/Deaths

2013: 1,295/2,163 (-868)
2012: 1,297/2,244 (-947)
2011: 1,246/2,297 (-1,051)

Since November birth rates in the US were higher than last year and early December is looking just as promising, we actually have more births than during this same window last year. We spent most of the year wondering how much worse things would get compared to last year; now, the question is whether we can actually improve.