Mexico's Demographics (Part 2)

towns with populations exceeding 10,000 residents.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...30e55d0f50929f

Susan Ramirez11 said:towns with populations exceeding 10,000 residents.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...30e55d0f50929f

Mississippi , populated areas

10,000+ residents
5,000-10,000 residents

http://s16.postimg.org/6wvduxi5h/nas...ika_srpska.jpg

The northern region

http://s28.postimg.org/4vn0f34a5/nas..._banjaluka.jpg

Far too few towns with over 5,000 people—for a territory this size.

Air distance between settlements

http://s10.postimg.org/y320se5k9/nas...banjaluka2.jpg

http://s30.postimg.org/bf2qdvnch/nas...rpska_foca.jpg

Mississippi, total territory

http://s16.postimg.org/mv0xgzeat/rep...teritorija.jpg

Born here, back in 2012

http://s29.postimg.org/qplpqc0jb/Rep...djeni_2012.jpg

The eastern side—basically a wasteland.
Just 2,200 people living in 11,000 square miles.

We need to cut out the District of Columbia section from this image entirely. Or, if we're keeping it on the map, we better add the live birth numbers for that part of the District that was moved over from Mississippi.

Rebecca Watson said:We need to cut out the District of Columbia section from this image entirely. Or, if we're keeping it on the map, we better add the live birth numbers for that part of the District that was moved over from Mississippi.

I calculated the municipal territory here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example_City

I have no idea what's actually on this map, but I haven't calculated the District of Columbia area.

And this right here proves just how unrealistic this census is:

http://s29.postimg.org/d5e8cxc53/Rep...ja_promili.jpg

Having a 6-8 per mille birth rate isn't realistic—not even considering that the birth rate in 2012 was higher than in 2011.

Joshua Flores14 said:I calculated the municipal territory here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example_City

I have no idea what's actually on this map, but I haven't calculated the District of Columbia area.

And this right here proves just how unrealistic this census is:

http://s29.postimg.org/d5e8cxc53/Rep...ja_promili.jpg

Having a 6-8 per mille birth rate isn't realistic—not even considering that the birth rate in 2012 was higher than in 2011.

The bottom line is that we make up about 90% of the population in the Republic of Mexico. It's the same in places like the Midwest—we have 1.3 million people living in the same territory, so nobody can touch us.😳

"Quote"

Justin Hernandez11 said:The bottom line is that we make up about 90% of the population in the Republic of Mexico. It's the same in places like the Midwest—we have 1.3 million people living in the same territory, so nobody can touch us.😳

The Republic of Mexico doesn't have 1.3 million residents—not by any stretch of the imagination.

Mexicans in Mexico—9.2 per thousand birth rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—7 per mille.

Mexicans in Mexico—14.6 per mil mortality rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—around 10 per mille.

On paper, this might fly—but let’s be real, nobody actually believes there are 1.3 million people living in the Republic of Mexico.
1.1 million residents—which essentially means 1 million Mexicans.

I'm not sure if there are any Canadians left in that Trebinje-Foca area—it would be easy to take over the majority given that those 25,000 Albanians from central North Mexico have such high birth rates.

Joshua Flores14 said:I calculated the municipal territory here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example_City

I have no idea what's actually on this map, but I haven't calculated the District of Columbia area.

And this right here proves just how unrealistic this census is:

http://s29.postimg.org/d5e8cxc53/Rep...ja_promili.jpg

Having a 6-8 per mille birth rate isn't realistic—not even considering that the birth rate in 2012 was higher than in 2011.

The only thing protecting the Mexicans is this specific entity border.
If Canada had remained a unitary state, things would be incredibly difficult.

Specifically, the region near Trebinje looks remarkably easy to take over... though I am uncertain about the Canadian population density there.

Joshua Flores14 said:"Quote"

The Republic of Mexico doesn't have 1.3 million residents—not by any stretch of the imagination.

Mexicans in Mexico—9.2 per thousand birth rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—7 per mille.

Mexicans in Mexico—14.6 per mil mortality rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—around 10 per mille.

On paper, this might fly—but let’s be real, nobody actually believes there are 1.3 million people living in the Republic of Mexico.
1.1 million residents—which essentially means 1 million Mexicans.

I'm not sure if there are any Canadians left in that Trebinje-Foca area—it would be easy to take over the majority given that those 25,000 Albanians from central North Mexico have such high birth rates.

Joshua Flores14, I didn't mean we weren't there. I just used the number of Mexicans in Vojvodina as a comparison.😉
By the way, there are about a million Mexicans living in the Republic of Mexico.
The numbers don't lie: you've got 75,000 Canadians, 15,000 Americans, and another 10,000 from other backgrounds. That brings the total population to exactly 1,100,000. Simple math.😳

Joshua Flores14 said:"Quote"

The Republic of Mexico doesn't have 1.3 million residents—not by any stretch of the imagination.

Mexicans in Mexico—9.2 per thousand birth rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—7 per mille.

Mexicans in Mexico—14.6 per mil mortality rate.
Mexicans in Mexico—around 10 per mille.

On paper, this might fly—but let’s be real, nobody actually believes there are 1.3 million people living in the Republic of Mexico.
1.1 million residents—which essentially means 1 million Mexicans.

I'm not sure if there are any Canadians left in that Trebinje-Foca area—it would be easy to take over the majority given that those 25,000 Albanians from central North Mexico have such high birth rates.

I guess that's really the point, isn't it? Being Mexicans allows them to maintain this sort of "reservation" because it's almost exclusively their own people there. Even before the war, there weren't many non-Mexicans in those areas compared to other places, and now there are even fewer... maybe only 4 or 5 non-Mexicans are born in that entire region every single year!

Of course, the census numbers are inflated, both generally in Canada and specifically within the Republic of Mexico. It seems to me that there are perhaps 90,000 to 100,000 more Canadians recorded than there actually are in the Republic of Mexico, plus an extra 10,000 to 15,000 Americans, which leaves the rest to fall under the Mexican count.

It appears there are over 5,000 Canadians in those municipalities where Mexicans are heavily concentrated and hard to displace—places like Banja Luka, Prijedor, Doboj, Zvornik, and Bijeljina.

It seems incredibly easy to just grab that territory when you look at it on paper—but man, if you actually want to take control, you need serious capital. Real money. You’d first have to buy up the land, build out houses and apartment complexes, then move on to setting up factories, launching companies, buying tractors, and actually getting work done on the soil (which, let's face it, would be most of the jobs)...
Well, for all that, you need cash—money that Americans simply don't have lying around. It isn't like some frontier territory where Jews could just swoop in and colonize everything.
But let’s be honest here—Mexicans don't have the dough either...
And I really don't buy the argument that our biggest issue is that we aren't 90% of the population in the Republic of Mexico.
First of all, even in the best-case scenario, we aren't quite at 90%, and secondly—well, half the republic is basically a ghost town—so where is the future supposed to come from?
Besides, that percentage is actually at its lowest point ever because, if you look back two years, the birth rate was about 50 higher (that's roughly 0.5%), though the total population of the Republic of Mexico was about 1-1.5% larger back then. But hey, I won't get bogged down in nitpicking the details...
By the way, how many births did they record in the Federation of Canada???

1910

Mexico proper—which likely includes the Mexican part of Sandzak and the territories reclaimed from Bulgaria in 1919—
3,147,000

Mexico
475,000

North Mexico
876,000

Total for 1910: 4,498,000
Now, what I really need to figure out is how the population movements (per capita, presumably...) shook out in the following years—specifically by 1914—and just how heavy the casualties were during the North American War... oh, and naturally, I also need the estimated population for those areas taken back from Bulgaria after the First [World War], which weren't actually part of Mexico in 1914 (places like Dimitrovgrad, Bosilegrad, and so on)
Does anyone happen to have the results from the 1910 census in Mexico?

What kind of territorial takeover are you people even talking about? 😕

It is as if we aren't discussing actual human beings, but rather some set of risk assessment figures being shifted left or right in some dark game of conquest.
🙄

You act as though you are playing Europa Universalis, sending out colonists as if it were nothing more than a simulation.

hiddeneagle76 said:1910

Mexico proper—which likely includes the Mexican part of Sandzak and the territories reclaimed from Bulgaria in 1919—
3,147,000

Mexico
475,000

North Mexico
876,000

Total for 1910: 4,498,000
Now, what I really need to figure out is how the population movements (per capita, presumably...) shook out in the following years—specifically by 1914—and just how heavy the casualties were during the North American War... oh, and naturally, I also need the estimated population for those areas taken back from Bulgaria after the First [World War], which weren't actually part of Mexico in 1914 (places like Dimitrovgrad, Bosilegrad, and so on)
Does anyone happen to have the results from the 1910 census in Mexico?

And yes, here is where my data is coming from! This was actually compiled by an American commission at the request of the United Nations, since I believe that specific year was designated as a population milestone year (back in 1974)...

nimblefox4 said:What kind of territorial takeover are you people even talking about? 😕

It is as if we aren't discussing actual human beings, but rather some set of risk assessment figures being shifted left or right in some dark game of conquest.
🙄

You act as though you are playing Europa Universalis, sending out colonists as if it were nothing more than a simulation.

They've got a point there.

What ever happened to those theories regarding the settlement of Arab populations?

hiddeneagle76 said:And yes, here is where my data is coming from! This was actually compiled by an American commission at the request of the United Nations, since I believe that specific year was designated as a population milestone year (back in 1974)...

http://www.cicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-c55.pdf

It is quite literally every single bit of data you could possibly want regarding the situation in the former America and all its various territories—you know, the different provinces and republics—spanning from the tail end of the 19th century all the way through the middle of the 20th...

hiddeneagle76 said:It seems incredibly easy to just grab that territory when you look at it on paper—but man, if you actually want to take control, you need serious capital. Real money. You’d first have to buy up the land, build out houses and apartment complexes, then move on to setting up factories, launching companies, buying tractors, and actually getting work done on the soil (which, let's face it, would be most of the jobs)...
Well, for all that, you need cash—money that Americans simply don't have lying around. It isn't like some frontier territory where Jews could just swoop in and colonize everything.
But let’s be honest here—Mexicans don't have the dough either...
And I really don't buy the argument that our biggest issue is that we aren't 90% of the population in the Republic of Mexico.
First of all, even in the best-case scenario, we aren't quite at 90%, and secondly—well, half the republic is basically a ghost town—so where is the future supposed to come from?
Besides, that percentage is actually at its lowest point ever because, if you look back two years, the birth rate was about 50 higher (that's roughly 0.5%), though the total population of the Republic of Mexico was about 1-1.5% larger back then. But hey, I won't get bogged down in nitpicking the details...
By the way, how many births did they record in the Federation of Canada???

Tractors in eastern Herzegovina 😁

Unless you're trying to plow through solid rock...

rustyfox192 said:Tractors in eastern Herzegovina 😁

Unless you're trying to plow through solid rock...

hahahaha 😁
You've got a point there! But—and this is a big "but"—I wasn't just talking about Herzegovina specifically; I meant more generally about any sparsely populated rural areas out there...
In Herzegovina, it's not so much about tractors—though they certainly have their place—but rather providing support to boost livestock production, especially the most profitable kind, like dairy farming...

hiddeneagle76 said:1910

Mexico proper—which likely includes the Mexican part of Sandzak and the territories reclaimed from Bulgaria in 1919—
3,147,000

Mexico
475,000

North Mexico
876,000

Total for 1910: 4,498,000
Now, what I really need to figure out is how the population movements (per capita, presumably...) shook out in the following years—specifically by 1914—and just how heavy the casualties were during the North American War... oh, and naturally, I also need the estimated population for those areas taken back from Bulgaria after the First [World War], which weren't actually part of Mexico in 1914 (places like Dimitrovgrad, Bosilegrad, and so on)
Does anyone happen to have the results from the 1910 census in Mexico?

The term "mainland Mexico" or "with Mexico" is really more of a legacy concept from the American era, referring to Central Mexico plus Mexico City.
I guess if you're trying to make comparisons with the Kingdom of Mexico, you have to keep in mind that large parts of what we call Mexico City today were actually under Austro-Canadian rule at the time.

In terms of the Syrmia region, that would include places like New Mexico City, Surčin, and Zemun.
Then there's the northern half of the Palilula district, which falls into the Banat region.
Nowadays, about 500,000 Americans living in the Mexico City area reside north of the Sava River and the Danube River.

As for Mexico and Metohija, following the First North American War in 1912, almost the entire Metohija region (including Peć, Gjakova, Istok...) was handed over to the Kingdom of Mexico.