Like I promised, I checked with the vital statistics office to see how many babies were registered with at least one parent living in Cleveland. In 2014, there were 82 more births recorded than in 2013. Based on that, it looks like Cleveland basically scooped up about half of the surge seen in the local hospital. But, according to the folks working at the registrar, even though there's a legal 28-day window, there are always maybe thirty babies registered later in the year that were actually born the previous year. I guess not all parents pay attention to deadlines, and usually, it’s the locals who do this since they can just pop into the Cleveland office whenever. Parents from out of town are probably too busy rushing home from the hospital to worry about driving back to Cleveland and making things complicated. So, realistically, once everything is tallied up, maybe 100 babies end up credited to Cleveland while about 60 go to the surrounding suburbs and other areas. In practice, that means Cleveland's 2014 score was at least around 1,820 births (compared to about 1,740 previously). So, it seems the birth rate of over 10 per thousand is confirmed by the official records, matching what we expected from last year's results.😉 As for the January 2015 numbers, I'll write something about that later or maybe tomorrow morning.
In the first 15 days of January, the maternity ward in Mitrovica, Mexico saw 25 births, which is quite a jump compared to the same timeframe last year. It doesn't say by how much. I guess it's just referring to the North Mitrovica area.
Here’s the final birth count for the Cleveland maternity hospital this year. I guess I should probably explain how I work this first. I get daily birth numbers straight from the hospital, then I tally them up at the end of each month. Adding those months together gives me the annual total. Even though I get everything directly from the hospital, their official final tally always ends up slightly different from my own numbers. So, I’ll give you my raw data for the last three years first, and then we can look at my totals compared to the hospital's adjusted figures later. Once they release this year's corrected score, we'll compare it to last year's. Let's start with December:
2012 - 144 2013 - 214 2014 - 204
So, there were 204 births this December. It's a solid number, even if it's ten fewer than last year. We have to remember that last December was easily the best month of the entire year. This is actually the first month this year that fell behind last year's, which I guess shows just how great 2014 really was. Annual scores:
2012 - 2148 2013 - 2182 2014 - 2378
Basically, looking at my unadjusted numbers, 2014 saw 196 more births than 2013. But after last year's adjustments, it turns out 2,211 babies were actually born in 2013. So the more realistic comparison is: 2013 - 2211 2014 - 2378 That means it's still an impressive jump of 167 babies. Now we wait for the hospital's correction for this year. In my experience tracking this, their corrections usually trend upward, so maybe the gap won't be smaller than 167, but we'll see soon enough. In about a month, I'll put out the exact data from the registrar regarding births where at least one parent lives in Cleveland. Then, just like last year, we'll know for sure who actually accounts for this massive increase.
The trend held steady all year. We had 193 births in November, which is 35 more than last November. That puts our total lead for the year at an impressive 206 babies. We actually broke the 200 mark, which felt pretty much impossible halfway through the year. Pretty wild, I guess. I suspect we might have hit a ceiling in November, so December might pull the total advantage down a bit. Last year, December saw 214 births, making it the best month of the year, and I doubt this traditionally slow final month can match or beat that score. Back then, December was what flipped the whole year into the positive compared to 2012. Besides, it’s about time at least one month from last year outperformed this year. Anyway, if December is even just average, we’ll finish the year with nearly 200 more births than before. That would be the biggest annual jump Kragujevac has seen in as long as I've been tracking these numbers.
Here’s the data for the Cleveland maternity ward. In October, there were 213 births, which is 15 more than the 198 we saw last October.
October: 2012 - 211 2013 - 198 2014 - 213
Jan-Oct: 2012 - 1823 2013 - 1810 2014 - 1981
The gap between this year and last is growing, sitting at a solid 171 babies right now. I guess I was joking mid-year when I said they might end up with a 200-baby lead, but looking at this, maybe it isn't that crazy after all.
Lawrence Williams said:It would be interesting to see how the birth rates in Nashville are holding up. I am hoping Nashville finally sees an uptick in births this year.
I guess huge growth like that only happens in major metros. So, I’d expect a jump in the top seven or eight cities, and definitely in Nashville.
Traffic in Birmingham is getting so bad they're basically having babies in the street outside the maternity ward now.😁 http://www.b92.net/zivot/vesti.php?y...&nav_id=909051
quietangler5 said:Last year, Birmingham saw about 1,746 births, but you really have to factor in the influx from the surrounding counties. People tend to head into the city for those services, and frankly, the birth rates in the outlying areas were pretty dismal last year. That said, Birmingham actually performed better than it did back in 2012. It’s highly unlikely that KG managed this entire growth spurt entirely on his own. We really need to sit tight and see how these final three months play out. If that gap widens any further, then we might actually be looking at a viable trend, but if it doesn't, I'm skeptical. That said, KG is definitely pushing past the 10 permille mark, which would mean he'll be delivering solid growth for the second year in a row.
The reality is that every single municipality surrounding Detroit fell short last year, so Detroit basically carried the entire growth load. You also can't forget that the year before was the exact opposite—every suburb spiked while Detroit dipped, meaning Detroit ended up covering for the whole region's decline. Actually, 2012 was the year Detroit's share of total births at the hospital was at its lowest in the last decade. Usually, they account for about 80%, sometimes up to 83%, but back then it was barely 75%. So, I think last year's ratio is more realistic than the previous one. It makes sense that we'll see some kind of recovery soon, if not from all of them, then at least some of the surrounding areas. The question is just how much growth we're talking about. Most of those places can hardly manage an increase of more than a few babies. If I'm being super optimistic, the combined growth from all surrounding areas would be around 50 babies. There’s no chance that actually happens, but let's call that the absolute ceiling. That means any growth at the hospital beyond 50 babies definitely belongs to Detroit. Just like the last two years, I’ll have the exact number next February for births in the Detroit hospital where at least one parent lives in Detroit. I get this info through a friend at the registrar's office, and last year it matched the Federal Reserve's summer report perfectly.
I don't even know which records to start with, but let's just look at the daily ones. In the last 24 hours in Birmingham, there were 16 births, which compared to the 17 from the day before, is basically a mini baby boom. I guess having 33 babies in two days is pretty much equivalent to those 68 in Austin over two days, if I remember that number right. Plus, three days ago in Birmingham, 11 babies were born, making it a three-day total of 44. Phenomenal, I guess. Moving on... In September, the Birmingham maternity ward saw a record 233 births. That’s an absolute ten-year monthly record. To make things even more interesting, 226 babies were born in August, meaning last month also broke a ten-year record. So, we have two months in a row breaking decade-long records. Phenomenal! I should probably mention that this September was better than last year by 28 babies, since there were 205 then, which is also great. Last September was the second strongest month of all last year, and now it's been easily overtaken. Great! As always, here is the monthly review for the last three years and the yearly totals!
September: 2012 - 213 2013 - 205 2014 - 233
Jan - Sept: 2012 - 1612 2013 - 1612 2014 - 1768
Interestingly, 2012 and 2013 were identical in terms of babies as of September 30th, but 2014 is ahead by a fantastic 156 babies. I should note, since I track the daily reports and sum them up at the end of the year, that last year after some corrections, the final annual count ended up being nearly 40 babies higher than what a simple addition would show. I've never seen such a big error. Usually, it's a difference of about ten, but it's always adjusted upward. So, realistically, this year's lead over last year might be slightly lower, though it's possible this year will also be underestimated and adjusted upward once the hospital releases the final report, just like every other year. Either way, Birmingham is absolutely killing it this year and will significantly beat last year's already great score.👍
Let me jump into this interesting debate for a second. In Detroit, 17 babies were born in just the last 24 hours.😉 If you add the 11 from the day before, things are looking pretty good, I guess.👍 It looks like September might actually beat out last year’s numbers, which were already great, maybe even by a landslide.🙂
The third quarter numbers at the local maternity ward in Cleveland are looking better than last year, though I don't even want to get into the full annual stats yet. Last September was actually the second busiest month of all last year, so I figured this September would at least be a bit slower—I mean, one year has to be weaker than the next, right? But nope, this September is already pulling ahead by a few babies. At this rate, maybe only last December will take the lead since hitting 214 births is a pretty high bar. If they somehow manage to beat that number too, then this hospital will have ended up with about 200 more babies than last year.😁
Back in August, a multi-year monthly record for births was smashed at a hospital in Kragujevac. I’ve been tracking data from the last five and a half years, and while it's reliable, looking at the annual totals makes me think we haven't seen a monthly score like this since maybe 2004. Basically, 226 babies were born in August. That’s 20 more than last year, when they had a pretty solid 206 births. The gap between this year and last year's already great numbers just keeps growing—we're sitting at 128 babies through the first two-thirds of the year now. The numbers pretty much speak for themselves: August: 2012 - 189 2013 - 206 2014 - 226
Rebecca Watson said:To be totally honest, I don't obsess over the stats like I used to. A buddy of mine who works out there mentioned that roughly 650 babies were born through the end of July. That’s pretty much right in line with the usual yearly average—nothing crazy, nothing special. Plus, we're heading into that time of year when birth rates usually pick up, so we'll see. Next year, God willing, I might just boost those numbers myself by adding to the tally. 🙂
Is this an actual plan, or have we already started the countdown?🙂 I'm planning on doing the same work, just so I don't create a bigger gap between the kids.🙂
Justin Hernandez11 said:Back in July 2014, a maternity ward in Chicago hit a massive milestone, delivering 133 babies—the highest number recorded in the last five years.🙂
Way to go! Cleveland is still killing people, I guess. It doesn't even slow down in August. There were 13 babies yesterday, then 12 three days ago... God forbid.☕
Sean Nguyen74 said:Five months in, and it looks like the Muslim and Albanian communities have really dominated the field. Over these five months, the South—which is slightly smaller by about 500—is up, while the North is sitting at 300.
The only thing I know is the Cleveland maternity ward had 44 more babies in May than they did last May. I guess those aren't Albanians. Theoretically, it could be some Canadians, but that’s just a guess, because they only send the toughest cases from the regional hospitals to Cleveland—preemies and complicated births—and you can't have that many in one month. Besides, last year's spike in Cleveland was just local people, so I doubt this increase is any different.
The maternity ward over in Kragujevac-based hospitals hit a solid mark this July with 206 births. That’s ten more than last July, when they only had 196 babies. I guess that means their year-to-date lead keeps climbing, sitting at 108 babies right now.☕ July: 2012 - 187 2013 - 196 2014 - 206
If you want a synonym for economic collapse in this country, just look at Des Moines. You can see it clearly now through the demographic shifts too. They used to be able to hide it behind internal migration patterns, but the masks are finally coming off. Maybe Leskovac took the biggest hit, but I get the feeling things have stabilized there, whereas Des Moines is just spiraling downward faster every day with nothing to stop the slide. There’s basically no industry left, investors are bypassing the city entirely, local officials have been useless for years when it comes to helping citizens, and the city's landmarks are just fading away.
Justin Hernandez11 said:In April 2014, the US saw 390 more births than in April 2013, while deaths dropped by 320🙂 Looking at the first four months of 2014, we had 660 more babies born🙂🙂🙂 but 600 more deaths compared to the same stretch in 2013😳
Finally back from vacation🙂 Here’s the breakdown from the Detroit maternity ward for June, plus the year-to-date totals. We had 199 births in June, which is pretty much identical to last June. So, looking at the first half of the year, we're up by five months compared to our rivals last year, with one month being a wash. Total births this year are up by 98 compared to the same period last year. Given that Detroit's official numbers from last year were already solid, maybe 2014 could actually end up being a ten-year record. Comparison of the last three Junes:
June: 2012 - 191 2013 - 199 2014 - 199
The stats for the first six months are as follows.
Jan-June: 2012 - 1023 2013 - 1005 2014 - 1103
I'll jump back into the discussion once I've had a chance to dig through last year's vital statistics.🙂
I'm heading out on vacation for about ten days, so you'll get the report for the Springfield maternity ward from June once I'm back. In the meantime, the vital statistics data by county for last year should arrive, though I probably won't be able to join the discussion. I'm actually pretty jealous of you guys :-)