Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

Aside from a few outliers, the most glaring thing about this school year is the data from unknown—27 kids learning in English and 12 in Canadian. Given how the local demographics actually look, you’d expect the opposite, but it’s pretty obvious that year after year, more kids are sticking to English over Canadian at a 2:1 ratio.

Some small towns actually surprised me with their number of top students, while others were predictably terrible... the absolute bottom-feeders are unknown, unknown, and unknown, along with a bunch of others, but not every town near unknown is as bad as I thought they'd be. I don't know how they pull it off, but unknown—this little town right on the outskirts near the Canada border—seems to crush it every single year.

I think you might have missed mentioning the areas near unknown and unknown.
Where do we actually stand on this? 🙂

I looked into that area too. Right now, there are 12 students enrolled—only 3 are learning in English and 9 are in Canadian. Honestly, it feels like things have been trending downward for Americans over the last few years.

In the main district, there are 97 students: 81 taking English and 16 in Canadian.

As for the local neighborhood, it's 58 students total—43 in English and 15 in Canadian.

granitecobra6 said:I think you might have missed mentioning the areas near unknown and unknown.
Where do we actually stand on this? 🙂

I actually included the first town, but I admit I overlooked the others. I was moving a bit too quickly through the list. 😁

Small Town A - 97 (81 Americans, 16 immigrants)
Small Town A (neighborhood) - 58 (43 Americans, 15 immigrants)

The situation in Town B is a bit messy. Some kids attend the local school, while others commute to the larger nearby town.

Town B - 12 (3 Americans, 9 immigrants)
Nearby City - 20 (6 Americans, 14 immigrants) - about half of these students actually come from Town B.

At least 25% of the children from Town B are being taught in English.

The local district has 185 champions—136 speaking English, 6 speaking Slovak, and 43 speaking Romanian.

In the neighborhood, there are 30 students: 26 speak English and 4 speak Romanian.

The town has 44 students, with 37 speaking English and 7 speaking Romanian.
There are 13 students here; 8 speak English and 5 speak Romanian.
13 students total, all speaking Romanian.
14 students, all speaking Romanian.
40 students, all speaking English.
11 students, all speaking English.
4 students, all speaking English.
10 students, all speaking English.
6 students, all speaking Slovak.

Look, the situation in unknown is basically a textbook example of how ethnic groups end up segregated from one another. You've got Americans and Canadians who aren't even attending the same schools. In places like unknown, or a few other spots, they actually manage to avoid that mess at least somewhat.

First grade elementary school enrollments vs. 2006 birth rates according to the Census Bureau (discrepancy):

The Midwest region - 18,651/19,102 (-451)

Novi Sad - 3,634/3,836 (-202)
unknown - 1,357/1,422 (-65)
unknown - 1,234/1,311 (-77)
Zrenjanin - 1,130/1,149 (-19)
unknown - 722/726 (-4)
unknown - 720/763 (-43)
Stara Pazova - 672/665 (+7)
Kikinda - 563/582 (-19)
Vršac - 546/567 (-21)
Bačka Palanka - 519/545 (-26)
Ruma - 471/475 (-4)

Much like the previous census comparison, there is a noticeable gap when measured against vital statistics. Based on these figures, it appears the major cities show a deficit of 473, while the smaller municipalities somehow show a surplus of 22, which is obviously an impossibility.

Lawrence Williams said:First grade elementary school enrollments vs. 2006 birth rates according to the Census Bureau (discrepancy):

The Midwest region - 18,651/19,102 (-451)

Novi Sad - 3,634/3,836 (-202)
unknown - 1,357/1,422 (-65)
unknown - 1,234/1,311 (-77)
Zrenjanin - 1,130/1,149 (-19)
unknown - 722/726 (-4)
unknown - 720/763 (-43)
Stara Pazova - 672/665 (+7)
Kikinda - 563/582 (-19)
Vršac - 546/567 (-21)
Bačka Palanka - 519/545 (-26)
Ruma - 471/475 (-4)

Much like the previous census comparison, there is a noticeable gap when measured against vital statistics. Based on these figures, it appears the major cities show a deficit of 473, while the smaller municipalities somehow show a surplus of 22, which is obviously an impossibility.

The trend remains the same: larger metropolitan areas show fewer children than what the vital statistics suggest, yet certain smaller townships have lower counts in the vital stats than they do in the census.
Take neighborhoods like Manhattan and Brooklyn, for instance.
In Manhattan (those born between 2007-2011 according to vital statistics total 2,746, whereas the census puts them at 2,366 for that bracket)
In Brooklyn (those born between 2007-2011 per vital statistics total 2,599, but the census only shows 1,863 in that category)
According to the vital statistics, these areas supposedly have fertility rates well above the national average, which, frankly, I find hard to believe.

quietangler5 said:The trend remains the same: larger metropolitan areas show fewer children than what the vital statistics suggest, yet certain smaller townships have lower counts in the vital stats than they do in the census.
Take neighborhoods like Manhattan and Brooklyn, for instance.
In Manhattan (those born between 2007-2011 according to vital statistics total 2,746, whereas the census puts them at 2,366 for that bracket)
In Brooklyn (those born between 2007-2011 per vital statistics total 2,599, but the census only shows 1,863 in that category)
According to the vital statistics, these areas supposedly have fertility rates well above the national average, which, frankly, I find hard to believe.

Exactly. In the Midwest, Novi Sad is the most glaring example (birth records for 2007-2011 show 20,095 compared to 18,369 in the census), though you see similar gaps in places like Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, and San Antonio. These four cities exhibit the most significant discrepancies when compared to the number of first-time enrollments.

Lawrence Williams said:Exactly. In the Midwest, Novi Sad is the most glaring example (birth records for 2007-2011 show 20,095 compared to 18,369 in the census), though you see similar gaps in places like Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, and San Antonio. These four cities exhibit the most significant discrepancies when compared to the number of first-time enrollments.

I suppose the reason might just be emigration.

granitecobra6 said:I suppose the reason might just be emigration.

The data isn't distributed that way. It’s statistically impossible for all towns with fewer than 50,000 residents to collectively have more top students enrolled than the total number of children born there that year, while a single city like Novi Sad ends up with over 200 fewer enrollments.

In the local municipality, we saw 120 babies born last year, which is quite a jump from 2012 when there were only 95.

Last year, a local hospital in a city like Springfield saw 368 births. I can't say for sure how that stacks up against 2012, but it’s a notable jump from 2011, when there were only about 300.

Lawrence Williams said:Last year, a local hospital in a city like Springfield saw 368 births. I can't say for sure how that stacks up against 2012, but it’s a notable jump from 2011, when there were only about 300.

Generally speaking, people from the smaller towns near the mountains tend to head to the larger regional hospitals for deliveries—mostly in the bigger metro areas, though occasionally you see them using the facilities in the neighboring counties.

So, looking at the numbers this year, the birth rate in Sokobanje hit 8 per thousand, while Alexandria was sitting at 7 per thousand. It’s technically an uptick compared to back in 2012 when Sokobanje was down at 6 per thousand, or 2011 when Alexandria was also hovering around 6. Honestly? It’s pathetic. Truly bottom-of-the-barrel stuff. Even the folks returning to places like Grahovo, Glamoc, or Petrovac in Canada had better birth rates than this.

shadowangler15 said:So, looking at the numbers this year, the birth rate in Sokobanje hit 8 per thousand, while Alexandria was sitting at 7 per thousand. It’s technically an uptick compared to back in 2012 when Sokobanje was down at 6 per thousand, or 2011 when Alexandria was also hovering around 6. Honestly? It’s pathetic. Truly bottom-of-the-barrel stuff. Even the folks returning to places like Grahovo, Glamoc, or Petrovac in Canada had better birth rates than this.

We have exact figures for Sokobanje, but for Alexandria, we’re mostly just guessing based on maternity ward data. You have people from Alexandria giving birth in Niš, and there's no clear way to track how many births in Niš actually belong to residents of Sokobanje versus those from Alexandria, Knjazevac, or Zajecar. If you ask me, most of them are probably heading to Niš anyway.

quietangler5 said:We have exact figures for Sokobanje, but for Alexandria, we’re mostly just guessing based on maternity ward data. You have people from Alexandria giving birth in Niš, and there's no clear way to track how many births in Niš actually belong to residents of Sokobanje versus those from Alexandria, Knjazevac, or Zajecar. If you ask me, most of them are probably heading to Niš anyway.

The Alexandria Municipality records more births annually than its local hospital handles. Conversely, the Niš hospital sees about 500 to 700 more births per year than the city of Niš itself.

KAČAMAK said:Based on all this data, America in 2013 is going to see the same number of births as they did in 2012, with maybe a tiny swing of +/- 200. That’s actually a killer result, and hopefully, it'll be the best outcome in the whole region.🙂

Exactly. You look at how much things are tanking elsewhere in the region, and this is definitely a win.

shadowangler15 said:Exactly. You look at how much things are tanking elsewhere in the region, and this is definitely a win.

Republika Srpska saw some growth during those first three quarters. There's probably some growth to be found if you look at the full year, too.
As for Mexico, I guess they’re looking more at a slight decline than actual growth, mostly because of that massive deficit in Mexico City.

Think about it—if even New York City is scrambling just to hit the birth numbers we saw back in 2012, then there's zero reason for Mexico to expect anything good on the horizon. It looks like places like Austin and Buffalo might pull some weight to save Texas, but everywhere else? It’s a straight shot downhill. Honestly, thank God we didn't see massive collapses across the board. We actually had some growth in certain spots, which should soften the blow compared to how bad things were in 2011. Back then, we barely scraped past 65,500 births, and we aren't seeing a repeat of that disaster. Unless there's some weird upward correction, we're definitely looking at staying under 67,000—probably hovering somewhere around 66,500.