Quote:
|
Quote:
It was so long ago, so I don't remember really..It was from an environmental book and highlighted by our instructor. I mean, it could only be a hypothesis that she quoted, but it was genuine and taken from a hardcover science book. Quote:
|
Quote:
Any way, back to population data. The New York/Michigan populations are for July 1, 2019 and the Ontario/Quebec figures is from July 1st, 2020. The population change over the previous year is in brackets. Will New York ever get to 20 million and will Michigan ever get to 10 million? Maybe not. If trendiness continue, Ontario will have more people than New York by 2034. Quebec would pass Michigan by 2035. As with all extrapolations, it's more a statistical analysis rather than a prediction. One thing is clear, there's a re-balancing occurring between central Canada and Great Lakes states. There's also a re-balancing occurring between the US Northeast Corridor and the adjacent Quebec City - Windsor Corridor on the Canadian side. Not too long ago there were roughly 3 times more people in the US corridor but we're moving towards a 2:1 population ratio. New York: 19,453,561 (-76,790) Michigan: 9,986,857 (+2,785) Ontario: 14,745,040 (+260,798) Quebec: 8,552,362 (+104,753) New York: -76,790 X 15 = -1,151,850 Ontario: +260,798 X 14 = +3,651,172 New York population in 2034: 19,453,561 - 1,151,850 = 18,301,711 Ontario population in 2034: 14,745,040 + 3,651,172 = 18,396,212 Michigan. +2,785 X 16 = +44,560 Quebec: +104,753 X 15 = +1,571,295 Michigan population in 2035 = 9,986,857 + 44,560 = 10,031,417 Quebec population in 2035 = 8,552,362 + 1,571,295 = 10,123,657 https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pres...st-nation.html https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1710000901 |
Michigan's population peaked at 10,055,315 in 2004
|
I see. Thx.
|
Quote:
It happens under every economic system. It certainly happened under Marxist Communism just as under western Capitalism . . . and also on desert islands among shipwrecked survivors. |
Quote:
I understand 1 billion Earth with all parts losing population proportionally. Everybody sees 80% of population vanishing and that's certainly not a good thing. You, for one, are nationalist person and in several occasions manifested a desire twice as much as people in your country. Quote:
|
As we're waiting the first results of 2020 Census:
U.S. Population Growth In 2019 Is Slowest In A Century I don't think the US will ever again see natural growth above 1 million/year. In 2018 it droped below 1 million for the first time since 1937 (when the country had only 128 million inh.) and in 2019 another drop, to 890k. Needless to say 2020 will be a disaster. 1Q/2020 numbers are already available dropping to 113k compared to 149k in the previous year. From now on, the US will become Europe: population growth will depend almost exclusively from immigration. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I don't think so, there's still an endless amount of people who are willing to move to the US or desperately want to, not even considering the huge amount of refugees we could take in.
I mean this country is definitely the biggest developed shit-hole on earth and would be the last place I'd ever migrate to, don't get me wrong. But we have pretty much a monopoly on the world economy and that will always bring tons and tons of people here if we allow it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Cherry picking immigrants like Canada does is not conceivable for 300 million, 500 million people countries/continents. Needless to mention, those polls of immigrants will be producing smaller surpluses of people as they will be also facing their own demographic issues. Moreover, many middle-income regions are not prone to migration. While Mexico & Central America is a reliable source for immigration to the US, South America with its 420 million inh., for example, send very few and they're shared between the US and W. Europe. |
Quote:
It’s an interesting topic too, considering that a lot of people in the Western World don’t want people from the developing world to come here and compete with them for resources. Yet, the West may need these people to maintain growth. It’s gonna be interesting how things will progress this century. As for the future domestic growth of the US, I am now solid in my belief that the non-Hispanic White population will be a minority while Latinos will take their place. I’ve seen many babies and kids during my time doing a rotation at a pediatric clinic and most of my patients are probably of Mexican descent. Yeah, this is just in Southern California, but I can see the trend projected across the country. Even as the US declines a bit, it will not be the same country that the older generation knew. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
1,500,000 gain over 10 years seems rather healthy. |
Quote:
|
As far as fertility, a lot of poorer countries have high rates, but also high rates of infant and maternal mortality. The replacement rate of 2.1 is for developed nations. Some nations in Africa need upwards of a 2.7 rate to replace their populations. Nonetheless, as fertility goes down, so does mortality.
It is true we are a very territorial and resource scouring race, that’s what capitalism is built upon. A lot of your development since 1800 was due to rapid population growth, that’s how we needed to do it. It’s now our decision on whether to be brave enough to continue our advancement, built upon a new framework and vision. My worry is that the very large population we’re talking about will make that transition monumentally difficult or even impossible. The countries with low fertility need to show the world how to thrive with low/slow population growth. The thing is we’re greedy and the developing world don’t really trust our intentions any longer. This is their time now. And clearly immigrants have even less patience for their piece of the pie. This earth would probably do fine with about 3-4 billion semi-responsible beings. That’s probably our best hope. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.