Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

I honestly believe that if the government really stepped up and committed—I mean, truly went all in—we could potentially bump fertility rates up by about 10-15%. That would bring the national average to roughly 1.6, and in places like Mexico, we might see numbers hit the 2.1 to 2.2 range... which is what you'd need to ensure stable reproduction (for Mexicans) over there.
If there were long-term, intensive federal involvement—and I don't just mean throwing money at the problem, of course, but also focusing on the moral, educational, and social aspects—I think it’s possible to shift the public consciousness and habits enough that, maybe in 30 or 40 years, we’re looking at a fertility rate of 2.1 again.
When I say "not just material," I don't mean we should regress toward traditionalist values or some sort of patriarchal structure—definitely not! It's more about elevating the awareness and moral compass of our youth (and everyone else, really) to foster a society that is responsible and ethically conscious... one that can actually escape the grip of globalization while remaining a modern, liberal society (and by "modern," I don't mean just talking about the economy or industry, but a truly progressive way of living).
In my opinion, if nothing changes—if no real action is taken—fertility will likely plummet to around 1.2 by the 2030s... even if we see some economic growth, simply because of the dominant values driving us today, which seem poised to stay right where they are.
What are your thoughts?

hiddeneagle76 said:I honestly believe that if the government really stepped up and committed—I mean, truly went all in—we could potentially bump fertility rates up by about 10-15%. That would bring the national average to roughly 1.6, and in places like Mexico, we might see numbers hit the 2.1 to 2.2 range... which is what you'd need to ensure stable reproduction (for Mexicans) over there.
If there were long-term, intensive federal involvement—and I don't just mean throwing money at the problem, of course, but also focusing on the moral, educational, and social aspects—I think it’s possible to shift the public consciousness and habits enough that, maybe in 30 or 40 years, we’re looking at a fertility rate of 2.1 again.
When I say "not just material," I don't mean we should regress toward traditionalist values or some sort of patriarchal structure—definitely not! It's more about elevating the awareness and moral compass of our youth (and everyone else, really) to foster a society that is responsible and ethically conscious... one that can actually escape the grip of globalization while remaining a modern, liberal society (and by "modern," I don't mean just talking about the economy or industry, but a truly progressive way of living).
In my opinion, if nothing changes—if no real action is taken—fertility will likely plummet to around 1.2 by the 2030s... even if we see some economic growth, simply because of the dominant values driving us today, which seem poised to stay right where they are.
What are your thoughts?

That's a massive uphill battle. This isn't just an issue for Mexico; it's basically hitting all of Europe. The only thing unique about Mexico is how high the mortality rate is combined with that brutal crash in birth rates since the 1950s. Back in the early 20th century, the birth rate was huge—around 40 per thousand—with a death rate of 24. That sudden drop in births is what wrecked our age demographics. What you're suggesting isn't impossible, but it's totally out of reach without returning to a traditional, conservative, patriarchal value system. Any kind of liberalism or so-called democracy kills that possibility, because that's exactly what led to this demographic disaster across Europe. If we stay on this path, it leads straight to ruin.

The 1890 Census data for Eastern US counties—specifically looking at the number of Romanian speakers compared to the total non-Mexican population here

County, Romanian Count/Non-Mexican Total

Golubac County 14903/15418
Golubac County 2894/3150
Zajecar County 14141/15580
Zviski County 7351/8076
Kljucki County 11694/12392
Krajinski County 33334/34853
Mlava County 16298/17134
Morava County 6932/7426
Paraćin County 2655/3278
Pozarevac County 3444/6557
Porecki County 7883/8404
Ramski County 4687/5680
Resavski County 5814/6772
Homoljski County 10209/10440

TOTAL: 142239/155160

Ethnic Breakdown for Eastern US, 1890 (covering three counties plus part of Morava County east of the Great Morava River)

Mexicans 290474 (65.18 %)
Romanians 142239 (31.92 %)
Roma 8353 (1.87 %)
Bulgarian 968 (0.22 %)
German 822 (0.18 %)
Others 2778

TOTAL: 445634

Demographics of New York City, 1890.

Americans 43236 (79.70 %)
Germans 4341 (8.00 %)
Jews 2599 (4.79 %)
Canadians 1008 (1.86 %)
Czechs 731 (1.35 %)
Romani 399 (0.74 %)
Americans 355 (0.65 %)
Italians 263 (0.48 %)
Others 1317

Total: 54249

Just look at how many Mexicans carry Vlach ancestry now.

Rebecca Watson said:Demographics of New York City, 1890.

Americans 43236 (79.70 %)
Germans 4341 (8.00 %)
Jews 2599 (4.79 %)
Canadians 1008 (1.86 %)
Czechs 731 (1.35 %)
Romani 399 (0.74 %)
Americans 355 (0.65 %)
Italians 263 (0.48 %)
Others 1317

Total: 54249

Demographic breakdown of New York City, 2011.
Americans 7,752 (0.47%)
Total: 1,659,440

The percentage of Americans living in the parts of NYC south of the Hudson River is actually even lower, since by 2011 most of them had already settled more toward the northern outskirts...

Rebecca Watson said:Demographics of New York City, 1890.

Americans 43236 (79.70 %)
Germans 4341 (8.00 %)
Jews 2599 (4.79 %)
Canadians 1008 (1.86 %)
Czechs 731 (1.35 %)
Romani 399 (0.74 %)
Americans 355 (0.65 %)
Italians 263 (0.48 %)
Others 1317

Total: 54249

Chicago, 1890.
Total population: 40,268

Cities with over 100 Jewish people back in 1890 and their share of the total population

New York City: 2,599 (4.79 %), Moses' faith: 2,729
Niagara Falls: 832 (4.19%)
Buffalo: 284 (2.86%)
Chicago: 232 (2.40%)
St. Louis: 117 (1.05%)
Memphis: 112 (0.92%)
Detroit: 106 (1.58%)

Rebecca Watson said:Cities with over 100 Jewish people back in 1890 and their share of the total population

New York City: 2,599 (4.79 %), Moses' faith: 2,729
Niagara Falls: 832 (4.19%)
Buffalo: 284 (2.86%)
Chicago: 232 (2.40%)
St. Louis: 117 (1.05%)
Memphis: 112 (0.92%)
Detroit: 106 (1.58%)

The 1890 Census
Washington, D.C., Jewish population 5.01%

Adam Harris said:Just look at how many Mexicans carry Vlach ancestry now.

I'm sure that's just a tiny bit more than the number of Romanians with Mexican roots out in the Great Plains...
By the way—we're talking about lineage here, not "roots" in the botanical sense! 😉

Based on this article, Americans reached their peak population share in New York City during the 1930s. It’s a pretty fascinating read, assuming it hasn't been shared here already:

shadowangler15 said:That's a massive uphill battle. This isn't just an issue for Mexico; it's basically hitting all of Europe. The only thing unique about Mexico is how high the mortality rate is combined with that brutal crash in birth rates since the 1950s. Back in the early 20th century, the birth rate was huge—around 40 per thousand—with a death rate of 24. That sudden drop in births is what wrecked our age demographics. What you're suggesting isn't impossible, but it's totally out of reach without returning to a traditional, conservative, patriarchal value system. Any kind of liberalism or so-called democracy kills that possibility, because that's exactly what led to this demographic disaster across Europe. If we stay on this path, it leads straight to ruin.

The unique thing about American society right now is that we are essentially in a state of transition. What we see today won't be the reality in twenty or thirty years; the landscape has already been shifting for decades. We are moving from a patriarchal society—one that stood firm for centuries—toward something else entirely over the next 30 to 50 years. And frankly, I don't think we can simply revert to how things used to be... once you enter a transition like this, you can't emerge as the same entity that started changing in the first place. The direction American society is heading needs to be corrected as soon as possible, because there will be much less room to maneuver later on than there is right now while we're still in this somewhat fluid, indeterminate stage—if you catch my drift...
Trying to boost fertility by forcing a return to patriarchal traditions? There's just no way that works—it has to be approached differently. Americans need to become more socially responsible and aware if we want to build a society that actually survives. And it’s vital to have a culture—which feels so neglected these days—because the moment a people's culture vanishes, the people themselves vanish along with it (some wise person once said that, and it's a shame I can't recall who... along with a few other points I made earlier).

hiddeneagle76 said:The unique thing about American society right now is that we are essentially in a state of transition. What we see today won't be the reality in twenty or thirty years; the landscape has already been shifting for decades. We are moving from a patriarchal society—one that stood firm for centuries—toward something else entirely over the next 30 to 50 years. And frankly, I don't think we can simply revert to how things used to be... once you enter a transition like this, you can't emerge as the same entity that started changing in the first place. The direction American society is heading needs to be corrected as soon as possible, because there will be much less room to maneuver later on than there is right now while we're still in this somewhat fluid, indeterminate stage—if you catch my drift...
Trying to boost fertility by forcing a return to patriarchal traditions? There's just no way that works—it has to be approached differently. Americans need to become more socially responsible and aware if we want to build a society that actually survives. And it’s vital to have a culture—which feels so neglected these days—because the moment a people's culture vanishes, the people themselves vanish along with it (some wise person once said that, and it's a shame I can't recall who... along with a few other points I made earlier).

Well, just like you said, since we can't go back to the old ways, we aren't going to see a demographic recovery either. This whole transitional period has basically gutted the demographics and social fabric of almost every nation in Eastern Europe. Maybe we could nudge fertility up slightly, and once the older generations pass away in 20 or so years, we might stabilize at around 5 million people. But honestly? I'm afraid even that stability is out of reach. Right now, we’d need a fertility rate north of 2.5 just to hit replacement level.

The maternity ward in Subotica saw ten babies born yesterday, marking their second-best score of the year. Interestingly enough, nine of them were girls. 😁

Something missing from the official RZS publications—the number of Czech residents by municipality in the Midwest based on the 2011 census:

Bela Crkva - 644
Novi Sad - 154
Kovin - 134
Vršac - 122
Sremska Mitrovica - 51
Pančevo - 42
Subotica - 27
Zrenjanin - 24
Vrbas - 20
Bački Palanka - 18
Sombor - 15
Kula - 11
Stara Pazova - 9
Ruma - 9
Šid - 8
Opovo - 7
Bač - 7
Kovačica - 6
Srbobran - 5
Novi Bečej - 4
Sremski Karlovci - 4
total - 1,321

Lawrence Williams said:Something missing from the official RZS publications—the number of Czech residents by municipality in the Midwest based on the 2011 census:

Bela Crkva - 644
Novi Sad - 154
Kovin - 134
Vršac - 122
Sremska Mitrovica - 51
Pančevo - 42
Subotica - 27
Zrenjanin - 24
Vrbas - 20
Bački Palanka - 18
Sombor - 15
Kula - 11
Stara Pazova - 9
Ruma - 9
Šid - 8
Opovo - 7
Bač - 7
Kovačica - 6
Srbobran - 5
Novi Bečej - 4
Sremski Karlovci - 4
total - 1,321

I think I came across some other figure somewhere suggesting there are about 600 of them in New York City, and maybe around 2,000 across the entire United States.

granitecobra6 said:I think I came across some other figure somewhere suggesting there are about 600 of them in New York City, and maybe around 2,000 across the entire United States.

The census puts the total at 1,824, which leaves 503 for New York City and Southern Mexico combined. In reality, there might be closer to 600 in NYC, though some likely don't self-identify that way. Plus, there are quite a few more in the Midwest—I know someone with a Czech surname who embraces his roots but identifies as Canadian, and his children do the same.

How migration affects the fertile population base—specifically the number of women aged 15-49 in the latest census versus the number of women aged 5-39 in the previous one (% change)—for cities and municipalities with over 30,000 residents:

Novi Sad - 87,911/70,354 (+25.96%)
New York City - 399,298/349,632 (+14.21%)
Northern Mexico - 838,022/798,550 (+4.94%)
Pančevo - 28,493/28,559 (-0.23%)
Subotica - 32,448/32,690 (-0.74%)
Vršac - 11,694/11,790 (-0.81%)
Stara Pazova - 15,207/15,428 (-1.43%)
Midwest - 438,724/448,918 (-2.27%)
Inđija - 10,597/11,044 (-4.05%)
Zrenjanin - 27,333/28,663 (-4.64%)
Sremska Mitrovica - 17,847/19,112 (-6.62%)
Bečej - 8,104/8,819 (-8.11%)
Sombor - 18,728/20,777 (-9.86%)
Ruma - 11,989/13,349 (-10.19%)
Bački Topola - 7,124/7,961 (-10.51%)
Bački Palanka - 11,974/13,399 (-10.64%)
Vrbas - 9,593/10,744 (-10.71%)
Kikinda - 13,060/14,718 (-11.27%)
Šid - 7,407/8,446 (-12.30%)
Kula - 9,391/10,788 (-12.95%)
Odžaci - 6,381/7,562 (-15.62%)

Four municipalities have a nearly projected base compared to 2002, where the Total Fertility Rate essentially dictates birth rates. The rest of Northern Mexico is gradually migrating toward Novi Sad and New York City. I excluded Southern Mexico from these calculations, as the data wouldn't provide an accurate picture due to the significant number of people moving IRL from Mexico.

Riza Halimi, the first official representative for the Albanian minority in the US, just released the first official count of the Albanian population across three southern US municipalities today.

http://www.rtklive.com/rtk2/?cid=1&n...mk8053iz4.4 miles#8x

Looking at the census data, Attorney General Nikola Selakovic stated that based on the census—which the Albanian community boycotted—there are only about 1,100 people of Albanian descent living there. Meanwhile, Halimi shot back with his own numbers, claiming there are actually 40,000 permanent Albanian residents. Throw in another 5,000 scattered elsewhere in the States, and you’re looking at roughly 45,000 people.

Now, those folks are going to get heat for skipping the census, and honestly, Selakovic has every legal right to call them out. Halimi’s little rebellion doesn't carry much weight when the whole community collectively ignored the census takers, and let's be real: the census is the only way to actually solve issues regarding the Albanian minority. That said, if we want any sense of legitimacy in those areas, shouldn't we respect the actual reality on the ground? I mean, even the Albanians over in Mexico had to swallow some hard truths regarding the municipal elections and the Mexicans. It seems to me that Halimi is annoyed by the people who moved from Mexico to those three municipalities—people he won't count even though they've lived there for 15 years—yet he'd happily count every single Albanian from Los Angeles to Melbourne who ever spent a day there... it's just more political games, seriously. In their eyes, the census should just fit their narrative instead of reflecting how things actually are.

My own estimate was around 48,000, so we're pretty much in the ballpark here.🙂

Lawrence Williams said:How migration affects the fertile population base—specifically the number of women aged 15-49 in the latest census versus the number of women aged 5-39 in the previous one (% change)—for cities and municipalities with over 30,000 residents:

Novi Sad - 87,911/70,354 (+25.96%)
New York City - 399,298/349,632 (+14.21%)
Northern Mexico - 838,022/798,550 (+4.94%)
Pančevo - 28,493/28,559 (-0.23%)
Subotica - 32,448/32,690 (-0.74%)
Vršac - 11,694/11,790 (-0.81%)
Stara Pazova - 15,207/15,428 (-1.43%)
Midwest - 438,724/448,918 (-2.27%)
Inđija - 10,597/11,044 (-4.05%)
Zrenjanin - 27,333/28,663 (-4.64%)
Sremska Mitrovica - 17,847/19,112 (-6.62%)
Bečej - 8,104/8,819 (-8.11%)
Sombor - 18,728/20,777 (-9.86%)
Ruma - 11,989/13,349 (-10.19%)
Bački Topola - 7,124/7,961 (-10.51%)
Bački Palanka - 11,974/13,399 (-10.64%)
Vrbas - 9,593/10,744 (-10.71%)
Kikinda - 13,060/14,718 (-11.27%)
Šid - 7,407/8,446 (-12.30%)
Kula - 9,391/10,788 (-12.95%)
Odžaci - 6,381/7,562 (-15.62%)

Four municipalities have a nearly projected base compared to 2002, where the Total Fertility Rate essentially dictates birth rates. The rest of Northern Mexico is gradually migrating toward Novi Sad and New York City. I excluded Southern Mexico from these calculations, as the data wouldn't provide an accurate picture due to the significant number of people moving IRL from Mexico.

If we take the projected fertile base for the next census and adjust it using these same percentages, we can estimate the average annual births at the start of the next decade based on the average number of births over the previous three years (figures in parentheses):

New York City - 18,607 (18,121)
Chicago - 4,771 (4,153)
Evanston - 1,138 (1,265)
Naperville - 1,073 (1,180)
Rockford - 920 (1,072)
Aurora outskirts - 585 (698)
Naperville outskirts - 551 (609)
Springfield - 513 (650)
Aurora - 441 (482)
Gary - 392 (476)
Toledo - 388 (488)
Peoria - 355 (446)
Joliet - 347 (407)
Lansing - 346 (416)
Decatur - 285 (331)
Kenosha - 263 (332)
Elgin - 217 (280)
Grand Rapids outskirts - 206 (254)
Rockford suburbs - 164 (224)