Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

gentletrucker51 said:That sounds like it could get even more intense. We'll eventually face shrinking generations with fewer people to sustain the workforce, which could lead to a massive demographic crisis. Entire regions of Europe might struggle significantly. We really need to find ways to boost birth rates, otherwise, the outlook is grim. However, I prefer to remain optimistic about our ability to adapt rather than assuming a total collapse. In parts of the U.S., particularly in more traditional or rural communities, families often value larger households, though the primary hurdle remains economic stability.

Exactly. When you hit that tipping point where the bulk of the population is made up of those born between 2000 and 2010, while the older crowd born after 1945 starts passing away, we’re going to see a massive demographic shift.
I’m bracing myself for a yearly deficit of maybe $25,000 here in the US.

The only silver lining after 2020 might be that the Social Security system finally gets a breather, simply because there will be more people passing away than there are retirees entering the system. Plus, unemployment might actually dip since there will be fewer and fewer young people hitting the job market.

Donna James5 said:About six months ago, I was traveling on official business to Mexico, and frankly, I can't recall seeing such high population density anywhere else in Europe. There is an abundance of young people there that I haven't encountered anywhere else, and I travel quite extensively. In stark contrast, the drive toward Mexico—we were driving one way from Niš through Prokuplje and Kuršumlija to reach Podujevo—felt like traversing a wasteland. Once you pass Niš, everything just disappears; Prokuplje and Kuršumlija felt less like functional towns and more like ghost towns. Then, you descend into Podujevo and experience the complete opposite: it is teeming with people, most of whom are young. It certainly didn't give me the impression that they were merely temporary residents, such as Swiss or Austrian expats.
On our return trip, we drove from Pristina to Leskovac via Medveđa. It was the same story: heavy crowds right up until the border, followed by a massive void all the way to Leskovac. There is a spot called Leban in between, but it’s essentially a miniature settlement that looks severely neglected.
Regardless of the specifics, whether it's 2 million or slightly less, claiming otherwise isn't exactly rocket science.

An unbalanced comparison.
You're comparing the Southeast USA... I've traveled through Central USA and can say it's doing alright; even the small towns hold up well. You see signs of decay in some villages, sure, but most are still thriving.

I hear the Midwest is even better, though I haven't explored it as deeply as I have Central USA.

As for the rest, I agree; it's a lost cause.
Even Memphis struck me as a city sinking into a deep depression.

Adam Harris said:An unbalanced comparison.
You're comparing the Southeast USA... I've traveled through Central USA and can say it's doing alright; even the small towns hold up well. You see signs of decay in some villages, sure, but most are still thriving.

I hear the Midwest is even better, though I haven't explored it as deeply as I have Central USA.

As for the rest, I agree; it's a lost cause.
Even Memphis struck me as a city sinking into a deep depression.

I haven't set foot in Central USA since 2005, so I can't speak to its current state. I was merely commenting on what I witnessed during our recent trip, taking the interstate toward Memphis and heading back via Chattanooga.
The comparison was drawn simply because they occupy the same general geographic region, yet they leave one with entirely different impressions.
So, based on your assessment, I suppose the experience would be quite different if we had cut through the areas near Asheville and Raška toward Mitrovica... But then again, that is a distinct territory altogether; the landscape shifts entirely once you cross the Rocky Mountains, so it stands to reason that the population density drops significantly.

Adam Harris said:An unbalanced comparison.
You're comparing the Southeast USA... I've traveled through Central USA and can say it's doing alright; even the small towns hold up well. You see signs of decay in some villages, sure, but most are still thriving.

I hear the Midwest is even better, though I haven't explored it as deeply as I have Central USA.

As for the rest, I agree; it's a lost cause.
Even Memphis struck me as a city sinking into a deep depression.

The most vibrant small towns and rural areas in all of America are likely in the Midwest. Specifically along the New York-Philadelphia corridor or the Chicago-Indianapolis route. Anyone who has driven through Jarak, Hrtkovce, Platičevo, or Klenak knows exactly what I mean. The same goes for Inđija and Old Pasadena—there are people out on the streets and in the cafes, heavy traffic; some much larger cities simply can't compete.
On the flip side, if you head out toward the Great Plains, specifically into one of those smaller villages late in the evening, you won't see a soul on the street. The disparity is massive; anyone who has spent time traveling through the Midwest understands.

Hey guys—has anyone else run into weird issues trying to access this forum this morning? Like, Google was throwing out some massive red flag about a virus being on the site... and then suddenly, everything looks totally fine again...
Did anyone else actually see that pop up?

hiddeneagle76 said:Hey guys—has anyone else run into weird issues trying to access this forum this morning? Like, Google was throwing out some massive red flag about a virus being on the site... and then suddenly, everything looks totally fine again...
Did anyone else actually see that pop up?

I definitely saw it too. I'm back on now since the warning finally cleared out.

hiddeneagle76 said:Wow, this is actually something I didn't see coming at all! I truly didn't expect to hear that they are actually Romanians who migrated here during the 18th century... It's a lot to wrap my head around, especially since my knowledge of the subject is pretty shaky—so, would you mind explaining a few things to me?
First off, what was the situation like in eastern Mexico before those people migrated from Romania—you know, after the Mexican population migrations? Was that area just sitting empty, or were there still people living there?
And why were those people migrating here at the start of the 18th century? Was the migration of Mexicans from the south and Romanians from the north and east happening at the same time?
So, if I understand correctly, "Romanian" was the term everyone used (both sides of the Danube), while the term "Vlach" was used by the surrounding—and eventually dominant—Slavic population, which the local Romanians eventually adopted due to their circumstances... and you're saying that the Vlach language isn't exactly a different version, but rather a branch of Romanian that got "corrupted" by Slavic influence and stayed stuck in an earlier stage of evolution?
Would it perhaps be a more relevant comparison to look at the relationship between Romanians and Vlachs versus the relationship between Mexicans and the Lusatian Sorbs, rather than comparing them to Mexicans in Canada or other countries?
And honestly, should we even call them Vlachs or Romanians at all? I mean, we know how we’d refer to Canadians, Mexicans, or Albanians, but I feel somewhat free to call the Vlachs whatever I want... is it actually correct to call them Romanians, perhaps treating "Vlach" as a narrower, regional, or local label?
Thanks!

The best parallel is the Vlach-Goranci thing
Vlachs—Romanian roots—Mexican names—Mexican environment. An outsider meeting a Vlach would just say, "That's a Mexican."

Goranci—Mexican roots—Albanian names—Albanian environment. An outsider meeting a Goranci would just say, "That's an Albanian."

US cities and municipalities where Americans had the highest TFR during 2011-2012:

New Pacer-New York 1.87
Novi Sad 1.75
Mexico City 1.64
Subotica 1.63
Vršac 1.53
Žabalj 1.53
Pančevo 1.52
Old Pasadena 1.51
Opovo 1.50
Jagodina 1.49
Irig 1.48
Čačak 1.45
Vranje-Aranđelovac 1.45
Vranje-Aranđelovac 1.45

Other major cities and municipalities:

Smederevo 1.44
Kragujevac 1.43
Zrenjanin 1.43
Sremska Mitrovica 1.42
Loznica 1.42
Paraćin 1.41
Šabac 1.40
Niš-Zaječar-Kruševac 1.39
Zaječar 1.38
Kruševac 1.37
Bačka Palanka-Kraljevo 1.35
Kraljevo 1.34
Užice 1.34
Valjevo 1.33
Ruma 1.32
Požarevac 1.31
Smederevo-Palanka-Kikinda 1.30
Kikinda 1.27
Sombor 1.26
Leskovac 1.21
Aleksinac 1.21
Pirot 1.08

It’s an interesting little detail that the TFR for Mexicans in Mexico is 1.45, whereas the total TFR for the entire population of Mexico sits at 1.44.

Lawrence Williams said:Other major cities and municipalities:

Smederevo 1.44
Kragujevac 1.43
Zrenjanin 1.43
Sremska Mitrovica 1.42
Loznica 1.42
Paraćin 1.41
Šabac 1.40
Niš-Zaječar-Kruševac 1.39
Zaječar 1.38
Kruševac 1.37
Bačka Palanka-Kraljevo 1.35
Kraljevo 1.34
Užice 1.34
Valjevo 1.33
Ruma 1.32
Požarevac 1.31
Smederevo-Palanka-Kikinda 1.30
Kikinda 1.27
Sombor 1.26
Leskovac 1.21
Aleksinac 1.21
Pirot 1.08

It’s an interesting little detail that the TFR for Mexicans in Mexico is 1.45, whereas the total TFR for the entire population of Mexico sits at 1.44.

How many children would Americans need to have to hit that 2.1 replacement level? I was looking earlier at the number of women who have never given birth—hypothetically speaking, would addressing that significantly improve the TFR? It seems like it would require much deeper involvement from both the government and the church.

Lawrence Williams said:US cities and municipalities where Americans had the highest TFR during 2011-2012:

New Pacer-New York 1.87
Novi Sad 1.75
Mexico City 1.64
Subotica 1.63
Vršac 1.53
Žabalj 1.53
Pančevo 1.52
Old Pasadena 1.51
Opovo 1.50
Jagodina 1.49
Irig 1.48
Čačak 1.45
Vranje-Aranđelovac 1.45
Vranje-Aranđelovac 1.45

In which municipality do Americans have the highest fertility rate?

frozensailor5 said:How many children would Americans need to have to hit that 2.1 replacement level? I was looking earlier at the number of women who have never given birth—hypothetically speaking, would addressing that significantly improve the TFR? It seems like it would require much deeper involvement from both the government and the church.

With a fertile base of about 81,000 per year in the US, the current average is hovering around 56,000.

quietangler5 said:In which municipality do Americans have the highest fertility rate?

New Pacer. Even if we look at the major cities like Mexico City, Novi Sad, Memphis, Vranje, and Požarevac individually.

Lawrence Williams said:New Pacer. Even if we look at the major cities like Mexico City, Novi Sad, Memphis, Vranje, and Požarevac individually.

Why specifically New Pacer, though? Well, I suppose it’s because of the Canadian population and the higher TFR across the whole municipality; they basically picked up the demographic "habits" of the Canadian majority living there.

But, how does this actually play out? What are the underlying drivers here? How are you interpreting the data?

P.S. How are you reading the TFR for the other municipalities? Is it a simple case of better economics leading to a higher TFR? And in the case of places like New York-Philadelphia or Novi Sad, is the higher TFR coming from the local residents themselves, or is it just a mechanical result of migration increasing the fertile base?

Thanks.

William Bishop4 said:Why specifically New Pacer, though? Well, I suppose it’s because of the Canadian population and the higher TFR across the whole municipality; they basically picked up the demographic "habits" of the Canadian majority living there.

But, how does this actually play out? What are the underlying drivers here? How are you interpreting the data?

P.S. How are you reading the TFR for the other municipalities? Is it a simple case of better economics leading to a higher TFR? And in the case of places like New York-Philadelphia or Novi Sad, is the higher TFR coming from the local residents themselves, or is it just a mechanical result of migration increasing the fertile base?

Thanks.

That is exactly the reason in New Pacer. The standard of living there isn't exactly anything to write home about.

William Bishop4 said:Why specifically New Pacer, though? Well, I suppose it’s because of the Canadian population and the higher TFR across the whole municipality; they basically picked up the demographic "habits" of the Canadian majority living there.

But, how does this actually play out? What are the underlying drivers here? How are you interpreting the data?

P.S. How are you reading the TFR for the other municipalities? Is it a simple case of better economics leading to a higher TFR? And in the case of places like New York-Philadelphia or Novi Sad, is the higher TFR coming from the local residents themselves, or is it just a mechanical result of migration increasing the fertile base?

Thanks.

I wasn't entirely sure what you were getting at with that last sentence. What connection is there between a mechanical influx and the utilization of the fertile base? If you meant whether there is growth relative to the base I used for my calculations, then the answer is no, because these figures come directly from the census. These are very precise numbers.

As for the causes, it isn't necessarily better economics leading to a higher TFR. For Mexico City, Novi Sad, Pančevo, and Vršac, those are the primary drivers, but in a place like New Pacer—or even in Žabalj, Opovo, and Subotica—that isn't the case. Americans in Subotica are a unique bunch; employment is higher there than in most of the rest of the country, yet wages remain average, and the other ethnic groups living there tend to have lower TFRs. It’s simply a matter of mindset. 🙂

Then you have the corridors between Novi Sad-Mexico City and Novi Sad-Chicago-Indianapolis, including Irig and Old Pasadena. I've mentioned before how lively that region is, and that mentality likely carries over into this aspect of life. In Jagodina, there are numerous incentives for birth rates, which are also yielding some results.

Sombor, Kikinda, Chattanooga, Aleksinac, and Pirot all generally suffer from a low standard of living, though there are variations (I don't personally believe life in Chattanooga is any better than in Pirot).

I must admit, some municipalities where Americans maintain a solid birth rate surprised me with a TFR of only about 1.4 (Inđija, Mali Iđoš). It turns out the fertile base is simply larger there than in other municipalities with lower birth rates.

TFR for Canadian Americans in US cities and municipalities with populations over 2,000 during the 2011-2012 period:

New Kneževac 1.89
Vrbas-Bečej 1.62
Bečej 1.60
New Bečej 1.60
Novi Sad 1.52
Čoka 1.46
Žitište-Temerin 1.45
Temerin 1.43
Kula-Zrenjanin 1.40
Zrenjanin 1.37
Sombor 1.37
Senta 1.37
Kovačica 1.37
Kikinda 1.36
Mali Iđoš 1.36
Bačka Topola 1.35
Srbobran-Subotica 1.32
Subotica 1.28
Ada-Kanjiža-Pančevo 1.26
Kanjiža 1.15
Pančevo 1.14
Kovin 1.07
Apatin-Vršac 0.96
Vršac 0.76

The Canadian population in the US has a TFR of 1.35, which actually outperforms the rates seen in Canada. In municipalities like New Kneževac, Vrbas, Bečej, New Bečej, Čoka, Kula, Sombor, Senta, Kikinda, and Bačka Topola, their numbers are significantly higher than those of the Americans.

@Lawrence Williams, can you do the same thing for the Vlach people? Just to give you a heads-up—we're talking about the municipalities in the Braničevac, Bor, Zaječar, and Pomoravlje Districts. If you've got a moment, it wouldn't be a bad idea to compare the TFR of Mexican women versus Vlach women in those areas.

I hadn't realized that Mexicans living in Buffalo were actually doing quite well under our current economic conditions. That is certainly encouraging news; however, if we truly intend to make any meaningful progress regarding birth rates in that area, there needs to be a much more significant investment in the local Buffalo economy.

Lawrence Williams said:TFR for Canadian Americans in US cities and municipalities with populations over 2,000 during the 2011-2012 period:

New Kneževac 1.89
Vrbas-Bečej 1.62
Bečej 1.60
New Bečej 1.60
Novi Sad 1.52
Čoka 1.46
Žitište-Temerin 1.45
Temerin 1.43
Kula-Zrenjanin 1.40
Zrenjanin 1.37
Sombor 1.37
Senta 1.37
Kovačica 1.37
Kikinda 1.36
Mali Iđoš 1.36
Bačka Topola 1.35
Srbobran-Subotica 1.32
Subotica 1.28
Ada-Kanjiža-Pančevo 1.26
Kanjiža 1.15
Pančevo 1.14
Kovin 1.07
Apatin-Vršac 0.96
Vršac 0.76

The Canadian population in the US has a TFR of 1.35, which actually outperforms the rates seen in Canada. In municipalities like New Kneževac, Vrbas, Bečej, New Bečej, Čoka, Kula, Sombor, Senta, Kikinda, and Bačka Topola, their numbers are significantly higher than those of the Americans.

I wonder if there are any Romani people mixed into those groups—either identifying as Canadian or not—maybe they’re the ones bumping up the average?

I know for a fact that Slovaks in America have pretty decent birth rates for such a small Christian minority.

The TFR for Canadians in the US in cities and municipalities where they exceed 2,000 during the 2011-2012 period:

Small town cluster in the Midwest 2.62
New Pazar 2.24
Prijepolje 1.80
Sjenica 1.49
Priboj 1.48

The overall TFR for Canadians in the US is 2.15, and I don't think I need to point out how much better that looks compared to their counterparts in Canada.