Posts by Lawrence Williams

Justin Hernandez11 said:Don't mention it, Lawrence Williams. I also have to say, Lokia is a top-tier demographer too.😉
Do you have the natural growth data for Buffalo and the surrounding county for 2015?😉 🍿

The maternity ward in Buffalo saw about 15 fewer births through the end of March compared to the same window last year, though April was strong enough that the gap might have already closed. Meanwhile, over in the local hospital near the outskirts, there were 62 births recorded as of last week, which actually puts them slightly ahead of where they were by late April in 2014.

Here are the preschool enrollment figures for other major cities and municipalities across the Midwest:

Buffalo - 1,236 (1,325) - 93.28%
Omaha - 670 (710) - 94.37%
Indianapolis - 641 (666) - 96.25%
Old Pasadena - 612 (602) - 101.66%
Vršac - 524 (552) - 94.93%
Palanka - 516 (548) - 94.16%
Ruma - 461 (460) - 100.22%
Kikind - 451 (521) - 86.56%

Kikind ranks among the five worst performing municipalities, alongside these areas:

Mali Iđoš - 75 (106) - 70.75%
New Kneževac - 85 (106) - 80.19%
Žitište - 125 (153) - 81.70%
Alibunar - 152 (176) - 86.36%

If birth rates continue their sharp decline—which current trends suggest they will—schools will remain largely empty due to this ongoing migration.

Justin Hernandez11 said:Lawrence Williams is basically a PhD in demographics. We're all waiting on you, Lawrence Williams.🙂👍

I appreciate the sentiment. My schedule is rather packed at the moment, but I will attempt to share some interesting findings periodically.

For instance, consider this analysis of the two largest cities in the American Midwest, where Cleveland was a surprising disappointment while Des Moines showed unexpected strength.

First-grade elementary school enrollments for 2013/14 (based on the reference birth cohort) - % coverage:

Des Moines - 1,130 (1,160) - 97.41%
Cleveland - 1,243 (1,325) - 93.81%

Des Moines area - 730
Cleveland area - 789

First-grade elementary school enrollments for 2014/15 (based on the reference birth cohort) - % coverage:

Des Moines - 1,161 (1,197) - 96.99%
Cleveland - 1,159 (1,229) - 94.30%

More granular data by district should be available soon. I suspect Des Moines had more top performers than Cleveland. Judging by the number of children finishing preschool programs, this trend appears likely to continue next year (see data below).

Preschool program enrollment 2014/15 (lacking precise data, I am using 2008 births, but the trend is evident) - % coverage:

Des Moines - 1,079 (1,129) - 95.57%
Cleveland - 1,149 (1,221) - 94.10%

Des Moines area - 728
Cleveland area - 723

While Cleveland will likely maintain higher birth numbers due to a younger population, it seems migration is draining them more significantly than Des Moines. I anticipate birth rates in Des Moines will stabilize over the next 5-6 years, whereas Cleveland may see a decline similar to what Des Moines experienced between 2009 and 2013. Ultimately, the Cleveland district will likely face a much sharper decline before the next census than it did last decade. Can anyone explain this phenomenon?

Lawrence Williams said:The 2013 figures aren't quite right. Yueco just reported there were 1,400 births that year.

I prefer sticking to official data from the Department of Public Health:

In the county, there were 1,563 births registered in 2013—1,372 in Buffalo and 191 at the out-of-hospital maternity ward. Out of those 1,563 births, there were 1,578 live births and 8 stillbirths.

- page 20

Since all multiple births happen in Buffalo, the number of live births in 2013 was actually 1,387.

I should have the December data by the end of this month or early next and will post it then. It doesn't look like there was any drop compared to the previous year. I seem to have miscalculated based on my weekly reports, which gave me a slightly higher number than the official count. Judging by this hospital report from late in the year, I believe 1,414 is the accurate figure:

http://www.bolnicasubotica.com/clani...djenim-bebama/

Everything points toward an increase of 27 rather than a decrease of 14, but we'll see.

Northern County, December:

births/deaths

2014. 146/256
2013. 133/284
2012. 144/263

Jan-Dec births/deaths

2014. 1,585/2,734 (-1,149)
2013. 1,563/2,685 (-1,122)
2012. 1,576/2,727 (-1,151)

Was I right or was I right? 😁

Regarding births, those figures definitely refer to individuals born within the county. In 2013, there were 1,352 births, and 1,375 where the parents also reside in the county. This is similar to the data I provide for Cook County; since the Census Bureau doesn't account for those born outside the area, their numbers always tend to be slightly higher.

As for deaths, the data should reflect the territory of St. Louis. Since death certificates are filed based on where the passing occurs regardless of permanent residence—and most people pass away in hospitals—the local count usually reflects that.

Justin Hernandez11 said:The latest data just dropped from the vital statistics office in Columbus☕.
Back in 2014, the registry in Columbus recorded 1,310 births, compared to 1,352 in 2013—that’s a dip of 42 babies.👎
http://www.boom93.com/info/lokalne-v...-je-manje.html

What complete misinformation. The entire county sees those kinds of numbers annually; the local hospital handles about 1,000 to 1,100 births, while the city of St. Louis hits maybe 700 in a good year. To claim this is a "death race" is absurd; the natural growth rate is actually quite healthy, comparable to what you'd see in Chicago.

I have pointed out the demographic strength of Kelebija several times before—which the census data backs up—but here is an interesting read regarding the town:

With 35 baptisms and 24 funerals last year, I suspect the next census will show even more "impressive" numbers. 😁

shadowangler15 said:Remember when we were all waiting on those 2012 results? It felt just like this. Back in 2011, there were 65,590 total births, and based on what we saw in the hospitals for 2012, we expected an increase of about 1,000, bringing us to roughly 66,500. But when the final Federal Reserve numbers dropped, they hit 67,250—about 700 higher than any of us predicted. 2014 feels a lot like 2012. The hospital data looks similar, maybe even better in some places. Everything really comes down to how they adjust the final stats. It’s entirely possible the numbers could actually beat 2012. Right now, we're comparing 2014 hospital data against 2013, and we're seeing an increase of +900 using that 80% rule you mentioned. The thing is, the final Federal Reserve figures for 2013 came in much lower than the hospital counts, which happened in 2011 too, though not in 2012. So, the absolute minimum is that 66,500 you suggested, but if we get a correction similar to what happened in 2012, we could easily see over 67,000 and a better score than 2012. Wouldn't you agree, Lawrence Williams?

I suspect we didn't have as many processed hospital reports back then. That is merely my assumption, however; I am not making any definitive claims.

frozensailor5 said:Is there any way to get a sense of what the birth rates were looking like in Mexico back in 2014, specifically regarding the Mexican population?

It’s possible. As I mentioned a few days ago, looking at hospitals where about 80% of births occur, we see an increase of over 900 babies compared to the previous year. I wouldn't expect the margin of error to be more than roughly 200. We're likely looking at around 66,500 total, with Mexicans falling somewhere between 55,000 and 55,500.

Nancy Chavez29 said:It’s actually doing great, even considering that massive Canadian exodus we saw. I wonder if there are any actual percentages available breaking it down by ethnicity.

The Vital Statistics office puts out reports, though they aren't exactly reliable enough for a precise estimate:

shadowangler15 said:Based on the numbers through November for the northern Buffalo county area, we were expecting things to look better than 2013. Did December see a massive drop?

The 2013 figures aren't quite right. Yueco just reported there were 1,400 births that year.

I prefer sticking to official data from the Department of Public Health:

In the county, there were 1,563 births registered in 2013—1,372 in Buffalo and 191 at the out-of-hospital maternity ward. Out of those 1,563 births, there were 1,578 live births and 8 stillbirths.

- page 20

Since all multiple births happen in Buffalo, the number of live births in 2013 was actually 1,387.

I should have the December data by the end of this month or early next and will post it then. It doesn't look like there was any drop compared to the previous year. I seem to have miscalculated based on my weekly reports, which gave me a slightly higher number than the official count. Judging by this hospital report from late in the year, I believe 1,414 is the accurate figure:

http://www.bolnicasubotica.com/clani...djenim-bebama/

Everything points toward an increase of 27 rather than a decrease of 14, but we'll see.

Anthony Morris6 said:Колико је деце рођено прошле године у Милановцу, ако има неко тачан број, и зна ли ко да ли утиче она Палмина помоћ на Јагодинце, или су то само шарене лаже? Како ли је тамо било, а и ЛОзницу нико није поменуо 🙂

You're being optimistic by questioning if it's just spin; most people blindly accept the idea that there's a demographic boom happening there. Back in 2013, Jaguar recorded 673 births against 1,054 deaths. I don't have the recent hospital data for Jaguar or Loznica, though perhaps someone else here can dig up some stats.

Justin Hernandez11 said:A local hospital in Springfield saw 297 babies born back in 2014, which is actually a dip compared to the numbers from 2013 👎. Can someone find out exactly how many births were recorded at that same Springfield maternity ward in 2013? 😉
http://www.aleksinac.net/lat/vesti/p...enoj-bebi.html

That’s a significant drop. There were 368 births in 2013. 👎

Justin Hernandez11 said:PEACE BE WITH YOU. CHRIST IS BORN.🙂

He truly is.

Justin Hernandez11 said:Back in 2014, a maternity ward in Gornji Milanovac saw 57 babies born—that’s actually more than they had in 2013.🙂

The situation in Gornji Milanovac was quite grim back in 2013, with a birth rate of just 7.6 per mille. Last year stood out because maternity wards in various cities and larger townships—which had previously struggled with rates hovering around or even below 8 per mille—actually saw an uptick (looking at places like Valjevo, Kraljevo, Zrenjanin, Gornji Milanovac, and Leskovac, judging by the improved numbers in Cleveland and Bački Palanka).

Beyond that, I believe it's significant that even the major cities (excluding New York City, Cleveland, and Denver, which always perform well) are showing strong scores: Detroit and Nashville are over 10 per mille, while San Antonio and Phoenix are above 9. That's likely to remain the trend. More people leads to more investment across different regions, which creates better opportunities and a greater desire to stay put.

Justin Hernandez11 said:If you look at those 17 maternity wards, we're looking at an extra 954 babies. Even if you factor in the maternity clinics over in New Paltz and subtract the 112 babies there, you're still left with a surplus of 846 babies.👍

The hospitals we have data for show over 900 more births than back in 2013. That translates to more than 52,000 children; I’d say my estimate of an 80% sample size was fairly conservative.😁

By all means, if anyone doesn't feel particularly bitter about it, let’s tally up the actual benefits we've gained here. From my perspective, we've already covered more than 80% of the children born since this started.

Buffalo is up by 34. It’s also worth noting that we saw a massive spike in births from surrounding counties back in 2013, which means this city should realistically be seeing at least 50 or 60 more births than last year. Things are moving incredibly fast right now—we’ve had 23 births just between Wednesday and Saturday. I’m trying not to jinx it, though; usually, when the start is slow, the year ends up being surprisingly strong (for instance, last year we didn't see our first baby until January 3rd).

Justin Hernandez11 said:Back in 2014, the maternity ward in Birmingham saw 1,341 babies born. Compare that to 2013, when there were 1,274. That’s an increase of 67 little ones. 👏👍
www.tanjug.rs/videoDet.aspx

Wonderful. King was in a freefall, much like Lexington; back in 2013, their numbers actually dipped below 8 per thousand. Vallejo was also a mess that year. It would be quite interesting to examine the data from their maternity ward.

quietangler5 said:

OsvetaPrdonja As if I haven't heard this all before...
If anyone feels like taking a bit of time out of their day to scroll through the previous few pages, would you mind pulling together a quick comparison? I’m looking to see which maternity wards actually saw an improvement in their outcomes compared to last year, and specifically by what margin they managed to pull it off. 🙂

The latest numbers are rolling in, and they paint quite the picture of the current landscape. Memphis is seeing a significant uptick of 84, while Des Moines is holding steady with a gain of 54. Savannah has managed a decent jump of 40, though the movement in Boone remains almost negligible at just 6. The real action is happening in the major hubs; Cleveland has surged by 160, and Detroit is leading the pack with a substantial climb of 167. On the flip side, we’re seeing a slight dip in Providence with a drop of 10, while Nashville shows a solid increase of 95. Chattanooga is up by 44, Knoxville has seen a modest rise of 25, and Jackson is edging upward by 12. It's a lot to digest, but the trends are becoming increasingly clear.

Justin Hernandez11 pointed out that the birth rate in Peoria is holding steady, looking exactly the same as it did back in 2013, whereas over in Kovacic, they’ve seen forty fewer births.

The word on the street in New York City is that birth rates hit 20,300, which marks a noticeable uptick compared to the numbers we saw back in 2013. It seems like Buffalo and Portland are also seeing some improvements, though I haven't quite sat down to crunch the specific data to see exactly how much of an increase we're actually talking about.

Does anyone happen to have any actual data on how the maternity wards have been performing out in the Midwest versus the Western US?

Portland was trailing behind last year's numbers until October, but as Rebecca Watson noted, October and November were quite strong. I'm not sure if they managed to close the gap by year-end. I should have an accurate figure for St. Louis in the next few days; generally speaking, it has significantly outperformed previous years. 🙂