Brazil's Plummeting Birth Rate Linked to Influence of Soap Operas

[Petr]

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08073011.html


Brazil's Plummeting Birth Rate Linked to Influence of Soap Operas

Brazilian O Globo TV network partners with population control groups to promote contraceptive ideology

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

BRASILIA, July 28, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Brazil's plummeting birth rate, which has fallen from 6.3 children per woman in 1960 to 2.3 in 2000 and 1.8 in 2006, is being attributed to the influence of pro-contraceptive propaganda delivered to the public through soap operas.

At least two studies published in April of this year have concluded that the influence of soap operas created by the popular Brazilian network O Globo explain the precipitous fertility decline.

A study by the Inter-American Development Bank, "Soap Operas and Fertility: Evidence from Brazil", states that "women living in areas covered by the Globo signal have significantly lower fertility."

"The only other developing country comparable in size to have experienced such a sharp and generalized decline is China, where the decline was the result of deliberate government policy", states the group.

A similar study by the Centre for Economic Policy Research in Britain states that "using Census data for the period 1970-1991, we find that women living in areas covered by the Globo signal have significantly lower fertility. The effect is strongest for women of lower socioeconomic status and for women in the central and late phases of their fertility cycle, consistent with stopping behavior."

The recent data, which has surprised experts, indicates that fertility in Brazil is well below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman. As a result, the population is expected to age rapidly, requiring a smaller working age population to care for a growing population of retired people, as the majority of European countries are experiencing.

"More than a simple revision of the statistical calculation, the verification that Brazil will have increasingly more elderly people and fewer children sooner than was foreseen will have an impact on calculations of retirement, and will bring difficulties for public policy, which must adapt themselves to aging population structure," writes the newspaper Folha de Sao Paulo.

The relationship between exposure to O Globo soap operas and fertility decline is no coincidence. According to the abortionist population control organization, Population Media Center (PMC), the Brazilian television network O Globo has long had an agreement to allow the group to insert its contraceptive ideology into its soap opera programming.

"Due to the popularity of TV Globo's commercially-sponsored serialized dramas, PMC, along with Brazilian NGO Comunicarte, have an agreement with TV Globo that assists the writers of the prime-time telenovelas to weave suggested social issues into the lives of key characters," the organization states on its website.

"TV Globo inserts messages related to reproductive health and other issues in its most popular programs at no cost to Comunicarte/PMC. The air time TV Globo has donated to issues of social concern would have costs tens of millions of dollars within the last year alone. In return, PMC provides pro bono research to the writers regarding the themes they choose to incorporate into the programs."

The PMC is involved with soap opera programming in nations across the globe. It has offices in Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Jamaica, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mexico, Niger, Nigeria, the Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Senegal, and Sudan.

The organization uses what it calls the "Sabido Method" to promote its ideology. It creates characters who embrace pro-family values, who then slowly change to the anti-family position over time as a result of experiences that occur during the course of the show's run. Audience members who may share the views of the characters at the beginning are influenced to change as well.

Brazilian pro-family activist Julio Severo, who has long decried the influence of soap operas in his country, is concerned that the plummeting birth rate will have seriously detrimental consequences in the coming decades.

"As you know, birth rates in Europe are falling, and they are facing a shortage of young workers," he told LifeSiteNews.

"But the birth rates in Brazil are falling very fast! Brazil may face mounting problems with a very large old population. In fact, I think that Brazil will suffer a worse crisis than Europe in the coming years."


Related Links:

Population Media Center
http://www.populationmedia.org

Ms. Magazine Article on Population Media Center's Work
http://www.populationmedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/ms...

Soap Operas and Fertility: Evidence from Brazil
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=15199...

[Notabasher]

Any idea what white v non-white birthrates are in Brazil? The white population was below 50% for the first time in the last census (2006).

I'd imagine that coverage of the O Globo network corresponds with the (whiter) urban areas of the country. The real story may well be that Euro-Brazilians birthrates down to similarly low levels of their kin in Portugal, Italy, Germany etc.

[Petr]

Any idea what white v non-white birthrates are in Brazil? The white population was below 50% for the first time in the last census (2006).

I'd imagine that coverage of the O Globo network corresponds with the (whiter) urban areas of the country. The real story may well be that Euro-Brazilians birthrates down to similarly low levels of their kin in Portugal, Italy, Germany etc.
I actually do not believe that these statistics indicate that the fertility of White half of Brazil's population is sinking.

The three countries in southern South America that are quite "European" in their character and population are Chile, Argentina and Uruguay. It is to these countries that the presumed fertility of White Brazilians should be most logically compared to (and not to European countries like you supposed).

And it seems that the TFR of all these three countries in actually higher than that of Brazil (1,86 according to CIA Factbook):

Argentina:

Total fertility rate:
2.09 children born/woman (2008 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ar.html#People

Uruguay:

Total fertility rate:
1.94 children born/woman (2008 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uy.html#People

Chile:

Total fertility rate:
1.95 children born/woman (2008 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ci.html#People


And so I would assume that the news actually mean that what is actually happening is that the fertility of the colored half of Brazil's population is falling towards the level of Whites. It might still be slightly higher, just like the Black TFR is slightly higher than that of Whites in the USA.

(Btw, in Brazil and Latin America in general, soap operas are usually fodder aimed precisely for lower-class people.)


Petr

[Notabasher]

From the unscientific basis of observing their football teams over the past 20-30 years, Brazil and Argentina are browning somewhat.

Argentina in particular has indio/mestizo immigration at levels akin to the USA.

The demographics of Brazil are quite interesting, as they are not that dissimilar to the USA but there is little immigration.

[Petr]

http://www.prb.org/Articles/2009/braziltfrdecline.aspx

Brazil's Fertility Falls Below Two-Child Average

by Mary Mederios Kent

(February 2009) Recent population estimates from Brazil's national statistical office (IBGE) peg the national fertility rate at just 1.9 lifetime children per woman in 2007, lower than previous rates estimated by the UN, the U.S. Census Bureau, PRB, and other international organizations that estimate population measures. Notably, this new estimate is below the long-term replacement fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman—and below the 2.1 estimated for the United States in 2007.

Brazil does not have complete registration of births and has not had a national demographic and health survey since 1996, the usual data sources for national fertility estimates. But IBGE analyzed 2000 Census data, vital registration statistics, and household surveys and found evidence of a sharp fertility decline. These new estimates show the rate falling from 5.3 children per woman in 1970 to 2.8 in 1990, and a projected 1.8 by 2010. The rate levels off at 1.5 children per woman by 2030.

This sharp fertility decline in Latin America's largest country has major implications for the region's future population size, and signals significant population aging. Brazil's population, nearly 190 million in 2008 in the new IBGE estimates, is projected to reach 216.4 million by 2030, and then slip to 215.3 million by 2050. While the total population is projected to decline slightly between 2030 and 2050, for example, the number of Brazilians ages 65 or older is expected to grow by 70 percent.

Mary Mederios Kent is senior demographic editor at the Population Reference Bureau.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE), Projeção da População do Brasil por Sexo e Idade—1980-2050: Revisão 2008 (2008), accessed online at www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/projecao_da_populacao/2008/projecao.pdf, on Feb. 12, 2009.

IBGE, Projeção da População do Brasil: População Brasileira Envelhece em Ritmo Acelerado (Comunicação Social, Nov. 27, 2008), accessed online at www.ibge.gov.br, on Feb. 17, 2009.

UN Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2006 Revision, Online Data, accessed online on Feb. 12, 2009; and UN Population Division, Worl Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision (forthcoming).

[DonaldT]

You'd think Brazil would have a high fertility rate seeing as they're Roman Catholic.

[Gregz]

You'd think Brazil would have a high fertility rate seeing as they're Roman Catholic.

Not all Catholics have high rates of demographic growth. :popcorn:

Brazil's economic standing has improved and if more Brazilian women are entering the work force, they are more likely to start having smaller families.

Brazilians are also known for being highly promiscuous and many STD's result in female sterility.

[DonaldT]

Not all Catholics have high rates of demographic growth. :popcorn:

Brazil's economic standing has improved and if more Brazilian women are entering the work force, they are more likely to start having smaller families.

Brazilians are also known for being highly promiscuous and many STD's result in female sterility.

Interesting. I haven't had 'much' experience with Brazilian women, but I'd imagine it would be EXTREMELY dangerous to be promiscuous in a country like Brazil. Particularly with so many HIV ravaged negros floating around.

Are Brazilian women simply depriving themselves of sex due to entering the workforce, or has the increased use of contraception (Ie. Sinning) caused the drop in fertility?

You'd really think Catholics would have high rates of fertility rates if they can't use contraception. They must have whole nations of sinners.

[Gregz]

"Interesting. I haven't had 'much' experience with Brazilian women, but I'd imagine it would be EXTREMELY dangerous to be promiscuous in a country like Brazil. Particularly with so many HIV ravaged negros floating around."

Latin's are like animals, they are even more promiscuous than blacks and about as self discipled. Brazilian women are filthy whores and they are known to fall pregnant with any white guy they meet in order to obtain child support. Which they then promptly spend in clubs and supporting their nigger boyfriends.

"You'd really think Catholics would have high rates of fertility rates if they can't use contraception. They must have whole nations of sinners."

In the past, Catholics feared the dishonor of potentially excommunicational offenses and in strict Catholicism, their is of course. No contraception, no sex out side of marriage and no divorce either. However of course Catholics use contraception. No one with even a modicum of intelligence is going to risk contracting AIDS in this day and age.

[DonaldT]

Latin's are like animals, they are even more promiscuous than blacks and about as self discipled. Brazilian women are filthy whores and they are known to fall pregnant with any white guy they meet in order to obtain child support. Which they then promptly spend in clubs and supporting their nigger boyfriends.

Well no doubt the Latino/native South Americans would be promiscuous, I've heard their culture is very 'social,' but what about Brazilians of European descent? I think you may be being a little unfair to Brazilian women. I'm sure all aren't THAT bad.


In the past, Catholics feared the dishonor of potentially excommunicational offenses and in strict Catholicism, their is of course. No contraception, no sex out side of marriage and no divorce either. However of course Catholics use contraception. No one with even a modicum of intelligence is going to risk contracting AIDS in this day and age.

Fair enough. I just thought Catholics were supposed to be the most devout of all Christians.

[Boleslaw]

I just thought Catholics were supposed to be the most devout of all Christians.
Yes we are, but sadly since the 1960s things have fallen by the waist-side on that score. I have to give credit to the Evangelicals for maintaining sexual morality, even if I don't agree exactly with its nature.

[Draugen]

PC propaganda in Brazil, especially Globo productions, is over the top, despite their Catholicism( if you can call it that in some cases). I don't think they care much about the Vatican's position on contraception. A very large part of their culture is based around promiscuity, although I'm sure this wasn't generalized until a few years ago.

[DonaldT]

Yes we are, but sadly since the 1960s things have fallen by the waist-side on that score. I have to give credit to the Evangelicals for maintaining sexual morality, even if I don't agree exactly with its nature.

What is this credited to? The media? The change of widespread change of social attitudes since the late 1960s?

This is such a shame. To me, Catholics have always been the hope for me that Christians (Ie. Europeans) will always maintain healthy population levels.

Do you suppose all hope is lost for Christianity? I'm not a Christian myself (Baptized that is. My mother is a Catholic and my father belongs to the church of England), but it would be a shame to see it disappear. Others may like to see the rise of Paganism again throughout Europe. Didn't Fredrich Nietchze oppose Christianity because he believed it was weak?

The absolutely WORST thing that could happen in Europe would be the rise of Islam. The worst.

[Petr]

What is this credited to? The media? The change of widespread change of social attitudes since the late 1960s?

This is such a shame. To me, Catholics have always been the hope for me that Christians (Ie. Europeans) will always maintain healthy population levels.
The brutal fact is, generally speaking, that as soon as RC populations get in touch with modern urban civilization and its accessories (like contraception), their fertility goes down the toilet - the pontifications of the pope and magisterium making relatively little difference to it at the end of the day.

It's same with the Muslims, actually, as their TFR collapse is happening right now in the Middle East.

Now, Protestants have gotten reputation as infertile loose-livers mostly only because they met the modern industrial civilization earlier than the RCs (or Muslims) did, and thus have just been influenced longer by it. Protestant working ethics played a big part in creating that civilization, so one might say that Prods became victims of their own success. Like a famous (U.S.) Southern Presbyterian writer R.L. Dabney put it back in the 1890s:

The best argument for any creed is the godly living of its professors. Protestantism used to have a grand and victorious advantage on that point. She is ceasing to wield it. The wealth begotten by her very virtues of industry, thrift, and probity has debauched many of her children. 'Jeshurun has waxen fat, and kicked.' And unbounded flood of luxury sweeps Protestant families away.
http://www.chalcedon.edu/blog/2008/03/dabney-on-decline-of-protestantism.php

The fact is that today nominally-Protestant Scandinavian countries have clearly higher birthrates than nominally RC countries like Spain and Italy!


Petr

[Gregz]

Petr

European Catholic states like Protestant states now have aging populations. However the Latin states negative demographics are not as bad as they first seem, since these nations have also been far less subjected to so-called "immigration".

Socio-economic factors: Such as, the break up of the family (increased divorce). The decline of close nit suburban, industrial communities. The rise of secularism, moral decline and social degeneracy are all contributing factors.

However by far the greatest factor is that far to many women, whom are actively participating in the work force are deferring having children to far to late an age. Late motherhood, whilst in many respects socially beneficial, also has serious and well documented dysgenic effects. The same is also true of men, who sire children past their prime.

Female fertility declines by 50% above the age of 35 and the ideally biological, female reproductive age is in the early 20's. Hence the solution is to encourage the 'productive union' of 20 something Europeans.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

I guess China's one child policy, not letting people evacuate before the big quake, locking masses of children inside burning buildings etc. has not been as effective as a simple soap opera could have been.

[Petr]

I guess China's one child policy, not letting people evacuate before the big quake, locking masses of children inside burning buildings etc. has not been as effective as a simple soap opera could have been.
You're jesting, but it's actually profoundly true that in population control, carrot has proven itself much more efficient than stick.


Petr

[DonaldT]

I guess China's one child policy, not letting people evacuate before the big quake, locking masses of children inside burning buildings etc. has not been as effective as a simple soap opera could have been.

Sad but true. The media is an extremely powerful tool. Or in other words, the pen is mightier than the sword.

[Petr]

Asia is generally getting its population explosion under control, Latin America even more so, and thus the "last frontier" of population control is in sub-Saharan Africa. But even there, the process has started to get rolling:

(Africa's) population has grown from 110m in 1850 to 1 billion today. Its fertility rate is still high: the average woman born today can expect to have five children in her child-bearing years, compared with just 1.7 in East Asia.
...

Yet Africa is also starting out, a little late, on a demographic transition that others have already traced: as people get richer, they have fewer children. In 1990 the continent’s total fertility rate was over six, compared with two in East Asia. By 2030, according to United Nations projections, the total fertility rate in sub-Saharan Africa could fall to three. By 2050 it could be below 2.5. It is surely no coincidence that the past 15 years have seen Africa’s fastest-ever period of economic growth. Africa, exceptional in so many ways, does not seem to be an exception to the rule that, as countries get richer, they experience a demographic transition.
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14302837


Petr

[Kuniklo Nigra]

You're jesting, but it's actually profoundly true that in population control, carrot has proven itself much more efficient than stick.

Absolutely. I heard that Singapore's program used TV commercials (perhaps with some plugs in the shows themselves), and the results were criticized for being too dramatic.

China's situation is very interesting demographically. You could say that Chinese are taking over the world, perhaps as much as the Arabs. Chinese is the most spoken language in the world, hands down.

So I don't think Chinese population control is what it claims to be. It's really just an extension of the race war. It applies almost restrictively to Hans, while other minorities freely breed. The often cited 1.3 billion figure for China's official population stat is an utter lie (the real figure is 1.6 to 1.7 billion). Even the official stats say that the Han population has dropped 6 percentage points over only the ten years that I've been here, from 96 to 90% (though the real drop is more dramatic than this).

Incidentally, most of these burgeoning minority populations in China are Muslim.

[Gregz]

Incidentally, most of these burgeoning minority populations in China are Muslim.

Am I correct in assuming that these are Muslim ethnic Chinese converts like the Chinese Malaysians. As the Uighurs in western China are maintaining that they are being displaced by Han expansion.

I highly suspect that China's demographic growth has peaked and like primitive feudalistic India, that it is no longer able to support it's population. Asia has a long history of famine and even if the PRC or India, where to expand territoriality. I'm less than convinced that the matter would resolve it's self.

[Petr]

So I don't think Chinese population control is what it claims to be.
Western scholars have studied this issue, not accepting uncritically the claims of Red China:

The Chinese government’s one-child policy has effectively reduced the country’s birth rate to well below replacement levels, triggering an impending demographic crisis, researchers at the University of California, Irvine, have found.

A team of sociologists from the United States and China collaborated on the study, published in the current issue of the journal Population and Development Review, which is the first to use local data on fertility policy and population growth collected from 420 Chinese prefectures.

In what is being called the first systematic examination of the policy and effects of China’s population control program, the study found that the one-child policy has been “remarkably effective” in forcing the birth rate down close to the government-approved level of 1.47 children per couple, including permitted exemptions across the country.

Lead researcher Wang Feng, a sociologist professor at UC Urvine, said the actual birth rate of 1.5 children per couple shows an “extraordinary” convergence between policy and reality, “even for China,” in an University press release.
http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2447&highlight=irvine

It's really just an extension of the race war. It applies almost restrictively to Hans, while other minorities freely breed. The often cited 1.3 billion figure for China's official population stat is an utter lie (the real figure is 1.6 to 1.7 billion). Even the official stats say that the Han population has dropped 6 percentage points over only the ten years that I've been here, from 96 to 90% (though the real drop is more dramatic than this).

Incidentally, most of these burgeoning minority populations in China are Muslim.
It may be that the population of China may be somewhat higher that what official statistics say, but otherwise this is mere paranoid gibberish.


Petr

[Gregz]

Whilst the PRC has relaxed it's one child policy and the Chinese are now free to "buy" more kids. China's demographic growth has peaked and stabilized. However like India it is no longer able to support it's population and even if the PRC where to expand territoriality. I'm less than convinced that the matter will somehow resolve it's self. Given the fact Asia has such a long history of famines.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

It may be that the population of China may be somewhat higher that what official statistics say, but otherwise this is mere paranoid gibberish.

Official figures are way too low

My quote of 1.6 to 1.7 billion is first instructed by my observation that more and more Chinese that I meet are unaccounted for (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/14/world/rural-flouting-of-one-child-policy-undercuts-china-s-census.html), that the TV propaganda campaign to stress that census officials could even get to all these places and people to count them went overboard and seemed to prove the opposite, and that these distant friends of mine who work for 江蘇衛視 (Jiangsu Provincial Satellite TV) worked on an exposé series which stated 1.6 to 1.7 billion as the true figure. This isn't stating that the true population figure is somewhat higher, but rather higher to the tune of more than 300 million, the total US population figure.

This seems impossible but population numbers here are on a totally different scale than the US. A town in the US is less than 100,000 people, whereas in China under 1 million (ten times more) is considered a "town" (鎮). I live in a city of 7 million, and most Americans have never even heard of it - though Denver only has 1.5 million (less than 1/4th the size).

Mass immigration of non-existent people

There are hundreds of millions of people who do not have residency. Some 80% of China is mountainous territory, I would guess. It is just common knowledge here that "farmers" (people distant from city centers) can have as many kids as they like, and that most of these farmers belong to ethnic minorities. These people then move to the cities as immigrants (and you thought immigration just meant people crossing national borders!).

I would estimate that at least half of my friends in Nanjing do not have residency. They can be kicked out of the city at will. Technically non-residents are illegal aliens. I have worked in one part of Nanjing for 9 years, yet every two weeks nearly all the workers there are different, and about every 1.5 years each business clears out and gets refurbished for a new one. I've been in this city for 9 years, yet everyone I see on the street is totally new to this place. People are pouring in from the outskirts, and many of them are ethnic minorities. The Xinjiang Uighurs steal so many bikes, that most bikes in the city have changed hands more than five times. Most women "lose" their cell phones four or five times....The population of Nanjing has doubled in this time (from 3 or so million to 7 million), and we don't see the population figures going down for nearby cities.

Official numbers are meaningless under anarchy

Second, I have met several people with two or more ID cards and two or more legal names. This issue was brought up in the Olympics, when the gymnastics girls (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-flumenbaum/scandal-of-the-ages-docum_b_118842.html) were obviously much younger than their official ages. The politburo simply issued them fake passports (what isn't fake in China?) Also, data is completely decentralized. I could get a Chinese visa in Shanghai that is fake and use it in Nanjing. They have no way of checking it. When I bought my flat, if I had wanted to take out a lot more in loans, I could take out four or five loans for the same property from different banks on the same street. The banks have no ability to share data. There are no credit ratings, and hence the difficulty of making credit card use common here. It is anarchy. If you want to believe in these official numbers, then go ahead and say that those girls were 16 or older. Official numbers, cards, residency, invitation letters, license plates etc. are useless as data in the People's Republic.

As a Chinese man responded (http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081117064208AAPQM1R) to this question:

Unfortunately, some places in this country have a history of poor record-keeping, particularly in rural areas, where families may have as many as 10 children....Usually, those regional officials have been doing this by lowering the number of people, especially number of children, to make it look like these places have had successfully enforced one-child policy in order to avoid from being punished or sacked. Also, when the census taker visit every household to count everybody once every ten years (the last one was taken in 2000), members of households who have more than one child only wanted to count themselves and their first-born child by hiding the rest of their children in concealed places for fear they would be arrested during counting. Despite reassurance from census takers that the collected data will not be used as evidence against households violating one-child policy, many households are unconvinced, since they have a negative impression on what the government officials have done since the passage of one-child policy.

Not even Chinese can penetrate mountainous bandit regions

It doesn't impress me if the propaganda is international. "Forinjers" can't penetrate these mountainous bandit regions better than Chinese. This man (http://www.stevenqfrost.net/main.html) worked right next to me, and on his trip to the beautiful mountains of Guizhou and got kidnapped for 30,000 RMB. If it was dangerous for him, how did these other forinjers get through there without a scratch?

Hui and Uighur are Turkic/Arab-Han mixes

As for the question of the Muslims: there is both a racial and conversion aspect to Chinese Muslims. Chinese Muslims are racially different enough to usually have curly hair, brown hair, brown eyes or green eyes. They often try to hide these traits by changing their appearance. I knew a writer from Kashi (Xinjiang) who had naturally curly, brown hair, and a face that could be considered a Han/Russian mix. She dyes her hair black to hide her differences, and most Chinese buy it that she is Han. This "makes life easier" for her.

So I wouldn't go calling these Muslims "Arabs", but they aren't exactly Han, either. A couple years ago there was a major riot revolving around a Hui (Muslim) taxi driver who hit a Han. It was said in western media that over a hundred people died in the riots. (http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2004/10/ethnic-clashes-erupt-in-china-leaving-150-dead/) The Han father of the girl who was hit and killed went looking for that Hui driver, which was a lawless, de facto autonomous zone for Hui nationals. Boom, race riots.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/04Mo0X5eZr82N/610x.jpg

http://hiphotos.baidu.com/v_%D0%A6%B0%C9_v/pic/item/11225616ad1606204b90a7f2.jpg

I couldn't find any close-ups where you could see eye-color differences or curly hair. Hans typically cannot grow beards, because they do not have the testosterone nor sufficient hair follicles. Their beards typically grow out very thin and with little or no hair on the cheeks or even at the sides of the mouth. Hui's can typically grow nice beards.

From Ziopedia:

Prior to 1949, the definition of Hui referred to Chinese Muslim with Turkic ancestry which later extended to non-Turkic Muslim such as Southern Chinese Muslim who were predominantly Malay and Arabic origins.

[Petr]

[This isn't stating that the true population figure is somewhat higher, but rather higher to the tune of more than 300 million, the total US population figure.
You offer essentially nothing but a bunch of anecdotal insinuations. Living in China doesn't make you any kind of special expert.


Petr

[Kuniklo Nigra]

You offer essentially nothing but a bunch of anecdotal insinuations.

I've offered a link to the Jew York Times, if you had bothered to check. Don't worry, there are Jews who agree with this position, too, so you can go ahead and believe it. We wouldn't expect someone like you to get their head out of a book and actually look around themselves.

Living in China doesn't make you any kind of special expert.

The experience of all the people who live here is way more important than your scholartards. Ask anyone who lives in China what they think about the issues I've raised. Sorry, but mass under-reporting of population in China is common knowledge.

You know nothing about China, Petr. You've never been here and you can't speak the language.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Wang’s co-authors are Gu Baochang from Renmin University of China, Guo Zhigang from Peking University, and Zhang Erli, former Director of Statistics and Planning of the State Family Planning Commission of China.


Translation: pathological liar (Chinese) Wang's co-authors are two other pathological liars from Chinese universities (whose diplomas aren't recognized anywhere in the civilized world) and the former director of the Chinese state forced abortion department.

Study's methods:

[Using] data on fertility policy and population growth collected from 420 Chinese prefectures....

I.e., they collected existing data from the books of different prefecture government offices. Since everything in China is fake, counterfeit or a lie, since they are pirating all of your software, movies and books, since Chinese universities are such huge liars and the students such plagiarists and cheaters that their diplomas are completely worthless, since large numbers of Chinese illegally immigrate to your country, since many of the "legal" immigrants lie about refugee status...do you think they'd suddenly tell you the truth from some BFI office about their own efficacy in implementing a policy?

Study's amazing results: 63 percent of Chinese couples are strictly limited to one child. I would say for a lie that's a pretty amazing admission. I would not call that as Wang did, "a convergence between policy and reality." I would call 27% non-compliance a dramatic divergence. In the civilized world, laws are obeyed by far more than an alleged 63%.

Conclusion: the people conducting the study are seriously biased. The methods of the study are invalid, being based on zero objective and physical observations and entirely on existing official numbers produced by famously corrupt and dishonest officials.

[Petr]

The experience of all the people who live here is way more important than your scholartards.
Spare me from your anti-intellectual pap. I recall you are the same weirdo who doesn't trust Western medicine either.


Petr

[Petr]

Study's amazing results:

63 percent of Chinese couples are strictly limited to one child.
I would say for a lie that's a pretty amazing admission. I would not call that as Wang did, "a convergence between policy and reality." I would call 27% non-compliance a dramatic convergence. In the civilized world, laws are obeyed by far more than an alleged 63%.
Could you indeed be so ignorant that you don't know that China's one-child policy does not actually apply to nearly all Chinese couples?

It officially restricts the number of children married urban couples can have to one, although it allows exemptions for several cases, including rural couples, ethnic minorities, and parents without any siblings themselves.[2] A spokesperson of the Committee on the One-Child Policy has said that approximately 35.9% of China's population is currently subject to the one-child restriction.[3] The policy does not apply to the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macao.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

The severity of China's one-child policy has thus been quite exaggerated by many ignorant Western commentators. And it looks like all your Chinese experience couldn't help you to know even this elementary factoid. Thank you for exposing your ignorance.


Petr

[Petr]

The experience of all the people who live here is way more important than your scholartards. Ask anyone who lives in China what they think about the issues I've raised. Sorry, but mass under-reporting of population in China is common knowledge.

You know nothing about China, Petr. You've never been here and you can't speak the language.
I'm beginning to suspect that Kuniklo is a some sort of fraud, or at least some role-playing internet-oddball. A person who would really live in China would have to have known that only a fraction of Chinese population is under literal "one-child policy".

Despite its name, the one-child rule applies to a minority of the population; for urban residents and government employees, the policy is strictly enforced, with few exceptions. The exceptions include families in which the first child has a disability or both parents work in high-risk occupations (such as mining) or are themselves from one-child families (in some areas).

In rural areas, where approximately 70 percent of the people live, a second child is generally allowed after five years, but this provision sometimes applies only if the first child is a girl — a clear acknowledgment of the traditional preference for boys.3 A third child is allowed among some ethnic minorities and in remote, underpopulated areas.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/353/11/1171


The stuff Kuniklo has mentioned about China, even Chinese language skills, could have been easily gathered by (say) some person living in the US.

http://www.flamewarriors.com/Assets/imposter.jpg

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/impostor.htm


Petr

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Now petrol thinks I'm lying about being in China because he trusts Chinese people so much.

Despite its name, the one-child rule applies to a minority of the population

So some scholartards say it applies to a majority, and petrol cites them. Then other scholartards say it applies only to a minority, and petrol still cites them. How could petrol ever think for himself, when two groups of scholartards he's following say contradictory things? The same thing must go on in his head when he sees a contradiction in the Bible. "Uh...huh.huh...uh :tard:"...then he just goes on as if he didn't see anything.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Global-warming/ScholarTard.gif

[Julian Curtis Lee]

I'm beginning to suspect that Kuniklo is a some sort of fraud, or at least some role-playing internet-oddball.
Funny.
A person who would really live in China...
Funnier.
The stuff Kuniklo has mentioned about China, even Chinese language skills, could have been easily gathered by (say) some person living in the US.
Funniest!

(Kind of reminds me when Craig Cobb couldn't believe I actually wrote and sang my songs, and began posting theories about were they really might've came frum. :D )
Western scholars have studied this issue,
Of course. What else are they gonna do?

I mostly trust scholars to tell me what's really goin' on. Maybe you could hire some scholars to tell you where Kuniklo really lives?

[brendon]

Kuniklo lives in China, me too, put your money where your mouth is and come pay a visit if you don't believe.

[Petr]

Kuniklo lives in China, me too, put your money where your mouth is and come pay a visit if you don't believe.
Whatever the case, he is BS-spewing amateur all the same. And there are few things more annoying than a pretentious mediocrity.


Petr

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Whatever the case, he is BS-spewing amateur all the same. And there are few things more annoying than a pretentious mediocrity.

How about spouting BS about how others are lying about their location, without doing even a cursory internet search? Sounds like an amateur to me.

[Julian Curtis Lee]

Whatever the case, he is BS-spewing amateur all the same. And there are few things more annoying than a pretentious mediocrity.
Kuniklo's anything but a mediocrity.
Petr's chief distinction is, on the other hand, being an amateur gnat strainer on the internet.

[Petr]

Kuniklo's anything but a mediocrity.
Petr's chief distinction is, on the other hand, being an amateur gnat strainer on the internet.
Yeah yeah. Now shut up and stop hijacking the thread.


Petr

[Petr]

Who started this with the Kuniklo conspiracy on a thread about population control? Why, it's Petrol! You're hijacking the thread with obnoxious posts and bizarre, off-topic conspiracy theories.
Quit your self-centered whining, narcissist.


Petr

[Julian Curtis Lee]

Now Kuniklo's a "narcissist"? Analyze him some more.

Why all the personal attacks, Pert?

[Petr]

Now Kuniklo's a "narcissist"?

Why the heavy personal attacks, Pert?
Because your celibate squad has hijacked my thread.


Petr

[Julian Curtis Lee]

"Celibate squad"?

Oh, I forgot. Guys who practice Christian virtues annoy you. Except for gnat straining.

[Petr]

"Celibate squad"?
My playful name for your cultic networking. You swarm an outsider who offends one of your fellow cultists - like Jews do, incidentally.


Petr

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Brendon is in the squad, too? Awesome! :beerchug:

[Julian Curtis Lee]

My playful name for your cultic networking. You swarm an outsider who offends one of your fellow cultists - like Jews do, incidentally.

Your swarm has been gettin' kinda thin lately I guess, Petr. Your swarming buddy Nikolai seemed to cause Empty Hive Syndrome.
I'm happy to leave you alone Petr, but don't be rude.

[Petr]

I now return to the original topic of this thread, before it was hijacked by morons - namely, the fall of fertility in Latin America.


After 50 years of Communism (which we know from Eastern European experience to be a fertility-destroyer) Cuba now has first-worldian elderly demographical structure:

http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=49294

Fewer Storks Visiting Shiny Maternity Clinics

Patricia Grogg

HAVANA, Nov 17 (IPS) - Women in Cuba cite a variety of reasons to explain their decision to have only one child, ranging from the housing shortage to the rising cost of living and the many work responsibilities they have to shoulder. But many say that if things were different they would have a bigger family.

"In health matters we behave like the developed world, and now women only start to think about having children once they're established in their careers," Luis Ernesto Formoso, director of the "Ramón González Coro" Obstetrics and Gynaecology Hospital in Havana, said to IPS.

Dr. Formoso illustrates this assessment with his own personal history. "My grandmother had 16 children; my mother, four; and I have only one child," he said, highlighting a trend in demographics that is at the root of the low fertility rates of a country with a public health system that provides free medical care for all women throughout pregnancy and childbirth.

...

Fewer babies on the horizon

The high level of education attained by women, the widespread use of birth control, and the high number of abortions - decriminalised in 1965 - are among the leading causes in the drop in Cuba's birth rate over the last decades. Experts also point to economic difficulties and the rising divorce rate, which in 2008 stood at 3.2 per 1,000 inhabitants.

In a study on Cuba's new social policy challenges, made available to IPS, social researchers Patricia Arés and María Elena Benítez note that since 1978 Cuban couples are having less than the 2.1 average births necessary to guarantee the replacement of the ageing population.

According to the study's authors, Cuban women "really want to have children," but at the same time they want to be able to choose "when and who to marry, when to become a mother and how many children they'll have, and whether they will marry or just live together." However, they put off motherhood for "when things get better."

This trend is combined with the accelerated ageing of the population, almost a fifth of which (17 percent) is already 60 years or older. By 2025 one in every four Cubans is expected to be in this age group.

[Crusader]

Sad but true. The media is an extremely powerful tool. Or in other words, the pen is mightier than the sword.

At the same time, imagery is more powerful than the pen.

For example, just writing and speaking about how White people should either race mix would have mixed results. However, producing a television show, movie or commercial that features an attractive, happy interracial couple is a much more effective method to get people to race mix.

The same can be said for population control. Producing a soap opera that features an attractive, wealthy, happy White couple with NO children plants the seed in people's minds that wealth and happiness go hand in hand with no children. Whereas a person giving a speech, telling the audience in plain language that children are a burden, again would have mixed results.

Soap operas are effective propaganda for the imagery more than the dialog.

[President Barbicane]

Interesting. I remember reading somewhere that education of females is the true reason that richer countries have lower birthrates than poor countries. Richer countries tend to have more education of females than poorer countries; however poor countries where females are educated (like most of eastern Europe) tend to have low birthrates, whereas rich countries where females are forbidden from being educated (like Saudi Arabia and much of the middle east) have relatively high birthrates. Once you correct for female education the rich/poor fertility gap disappears (I should point out that I read this in a magazine and haven't looked at the data myself).

These results suggest to me that a limiting factor in reproduction is women's time. If other things (like education and careers) are competing with having children for women's time then the birthrate will go down. If most women spend their time having children then the birthrate goes up.

The Mormons highly value having children, yet as far as I'm aware they don't discourage women from going to high school or college. This means that as high as the birthrate is among the mormons, it isn't as high as it could be with some cultural changes.

I also wonder if this effect could be used for eugenic purposes. Right now, intelligent women are able to get into college, and thus less likely to have time for children. This could be described as dysgenic. Unfortunately, I can't think of a way to reduce this disparity other than removing educational opportunities from women.

[Petr]

It seems that birthrates are quickly heading towards replacement-level even in the most backward and Indian/Mestizo dominated South American nations (Paraguay has only a vanishingly small minority of pure Whites):

Fertility Decline in Paraguay

Kanako Ishida, Paul Stupp, and Mercedes Melian

Recent reproductive health surveys show that the fertility rate in Paraguay decreased precipitously from 4.3 lifetime births per woman in 1995–98 to 2.9 births in 2001–04. In this study, we establish data consistency between the 1998 and 2004 surveys by comparing a series of cohort-specific period rates and use the Bongaarts framework of proximate determinants of fertility to demonstrate that an increase in the contraceptive prevalence rate (CPR) between 1998 and 2004 fully accounts for the fertility decline. Decomposition of rates shows that changes in group-specific CPRs explain a greater proportion of the change in the overall CPR than do changes in population composition by educational attainment, urban residence, region, and language spoken at home. Finally, we show that younger cohorts of women in 2004 reported ideal completed fertility desires of less than 2.9 births, suggesting that the fertility rate is likely to continue to decrease. (Studies in Family Planning 2009; 40[3]: 227–234)
http://www.popcouncil.org/publications/sfp/sfpabs/sfpabs403.html

Compared to Africa (and South Asia), Latin America's population explosion is already well under control.


Petr

[President Barbicane]

Yes, the population explosion is running out of steam. I'm not sure exactly why (there are probably multiple factors), but population growth is not nearly what it was.

This is a good sign. The population overshoot may not be as severe as it appeared it would be.

[Petr]

A curiously un-PC expression here from an otherwise PC person; a Guatemalan birth-control advocate tries to shame her people by comparing them to Africans:

"We are the Latin American country with the third highest level of maternal mortality and the highest population rate; we are more comparable to the countries of Africa than to Latin America," Mirna Montenegro with the Observatory on Reproductive Health, a local NGO, told IPS.
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49436

This comment reflects the Latin American consciousness that they are today in "different league" compared to Africans.


Petr

[Petr]

According to Mexican official statistics, Mexico's TFR is falling below the replacement rate right about now:


El descenso de la fecundidad en México, 1974-2009

Según estimaciones y proyecciones realizadas por el CONAPO, la Tasa Global de Fecundidad (TGF)3 pasó de poco más de seis hijos por mujer en 1974 a 3.43 en 1990, 2.77 en 2000 y 2.08 en 2009 (véase gráfica 1),4 lo que significa una reducción de casi dos terceras partes. Grosso modo se pueden identificar tres etapas en el descenso de la fecundidad durante estos 35 años: a) una primera fase de rápido descenso, entre 1974 y 1980, cuando la TGF se redujo en 1.4 hijos, con un decremento medio anual de 0.2 hijos; b) una segunda fase de descenso más moderado, entre 1981 y 1998, cuando la TGF disminuyó en 1.84 hijos, con un decremento anual de 0.1 hijos; y c) una tercera fase en la que se da un ligero ascenso para posteriormente volver a descender, entre 1999 y 2009, cuando la TGF se redujo en 0.66 hijos, con un decremento anual de 0.06 hijos.
http://www.conapo.gob.mx/publicaciones/sdm/sdm2009/02.pdf


Petr

[Hartmann von Aue]

These results suggest to me that a limiting factor in reproduction is women's time. If other things (like education and careers) are competing with having children for women's time then the birthrate will go down. If most women spend their time having children then the birthrate goes up.

The Mormons highly value having children, yet as far as I'm aware they don't discourage women from going to high school or college. This means that as high as the birthrate is among the mormons, it isn't as high as it could be with some cultural changes.

I also wonder if this effect could be used for eugenic purposes. Right now, intelligent women are able to get into college, and thus less likely to have time for children. This could be described as dysgenic. Unfortunately, I can't think of a way to reduce this disparity other than removing educational opportunities from women.

Absolutely true. There are few things more damaging to the long-term health of society than the so-called "higher education" of women. Iran is having the same problem. Ever notice how much more emphasis is laid on women "getting an education" than men? This is true even in countries like Iran. Iran's ruling elite is much more liberal than most think. It's the common people who are conservative, IMO.

Here's the poem of an Iranian girl:

On the wings of brain
It is a sad story hear hear
the account of what costs us so dear
We are a suffering nation a religious one,
you can blame on mollahs what you have done.
We want to have nothing in common with cats,
nor to do that which is for dogs and for rats.
We are made to think and to argue,
to study and research for all things new.
So from the tip of the mountains of knowledge,
where we glory in our schools and college,
where we are trying to do something human
to be totally a brain not a man or a woman,
we fell into brothels, fell lower than the demons
we carry dirty clips saved in our cell-phones.
reaching your puberty is a sin to avoid,
better to be gender-less till 17 year old,
So you can study your math with a better mind,
you can learn physics and things of this kind.
Woe to a girl who has it at 11,
when she should be concerned with papers and pen.
she has to wait for decades and decades,
till her youthful bloom wanes and fades.
First have your diploma them your BA,
then have a job so that you can pay.
graduated? it's too soon still,
beauty standards must be fulfilled.
go on a diet till you are slim,
subsribe also in a baseball team.
woe to a man whose wife is fat,
he will fall into sin, that is that.
It takes 2 years till you lose enough weight,
by the time you are almost 28.
for in addition to all that stuff,
you have to learn about rogues and puffs.
get rid of your acnes by creams and laser.
noroush your nails and hair locks later.
A man without such a wife is prey to devil,
So, do all of this if his good you will,
Now it comes to learn etiquettes.
how to treat people, flowers and pets.
wait till you are perfect and blameless.
with no pride no anger and not jealous.
kill sloth, gluttony and all the vice.
Since they can kill your marriage all at once.
now you are thirthy. is it the time?
It is your summer and gone is the prime.
then it is the time to go take a course,
In marriage clasess with good grades ofcouese.
to see a conselor to teach you about life.
to learn the equality between husband and wife.
At last your patience is rewarded at 33.
In the same age they crucified the three.
Now all psychologists tells you to wait,
to know each other before procreate.
"sorry ma'm you have a bad disease.
you have to use this drug for your health and ease.
Don't get pregnant for a year from now,
or else the child's IQ will be very low".
By the time you have finished the ordeal.
you are 35 and that is all.
You have to forget about motherly joy.
to have a little girl or a baby boy.
35 is high risk doctors say so.
fructomy's good children are a no no.
It is all the price we have to pay.
to compete with the west, it is our way.
then VOA and BBC will congratulate.
a nation whose women they did educate.
"we are humans free from the body.
only for the brain, mind and study."
To do away with God, morals and babies.
to give us technology freedom and ecstacies.
I will weep for you my dear land.
I will be your jeremias, God take your hand

Some more links on the topic:

http://books.google.com/books?id=xzIEAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=feminism+its+fallacies+and+follies&source=bl&ots=ZjHTTtOOH_&sig=rWpgpOJDdj1gw9koLyGnpkGMzEg&hl=en&ei=XyV6S6DtKoGDnQfl1qWxCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/fert.pdf

[Petr]

It seems that birthrates are quickly heading towards replacement-level even in the most backward and Indian/Mestizo dominated South American nations (Paraguay has only a vanishingly small minority of pure Whites):
Here's some fresh demographic info about Paraguay, showing just how rapidly TFRs can fall in third-world countries today - a decline from 4,3 births per woman to 2,5 in just one decade (1998-2008), if these figures are correct:

http://www.prb.org/Articles/2010/paraguaytfrdecline.aspx

South American Transition to Low Fertility Spreads to Paraguay

by Mary Mederios Kent

(April 2010) Paraguay does not seem a likely candidate for rapid fertility decline: The population is poorer, more rural, and has lower educational levels than its neighboring countries. A large percentage of the population speaks Guarani, an indigenous language, rather than Spanish, the official language. Yet despite a large population that is traditionally hard to reach with reproductive health information and services, Paraguay recorded a remarkable increase in contraceptive use and a sharp decline in fertility over the past decade. A recent study of Paraguay's fertility transition through 2004 documented a fall in the total fertility rate (TFR), or lifetime number of births per woman, from 4.3 in 1998 to 2.9 in the 2001-2004 period, and suggested continued decline because younger women said they wanted fewer children.1 A new survey seems to confirm that assertion, showing the TFR down to 2.5 children per woman by 2008, a faster decline than projected in the most recent United Nations' population projection series.2 The percentage of married women ages 15 to 44 using contraception increased impressively, from 57 percent to 79 percent between 1998 and 2008.

There is a wide gap in TFRs between the more modern and educated populations and the more traditional population groups. The TFR was down to 2.2 children per woman among urban residents, while it was still 3.0 among rural residents in 2002. Similarly, Spanish-speaking women averaged just 2.2 children, compared with 3.3 among Guarani-speaking Paraguayans. The most dramatic differences were by education: Women with less than five years of education averaged 3.6 children, while those with at least 12 years of education averaged just 2.0 children.

...

[Columnist]

Similarly, Spanish-speaking women averaged just 2.2 children, compared with 3.3 among Guarani-speaking Paraguayans.
Guarani becoming the national language of Paraguay.

[Petr]

Guarani becoming the national language of Paraguay.
It already is - apparently that figure was about monolingual Guarani-speakers, peasants that don't know Spanish:

Guaraní, specifically the primary variety known as Paraguayan Guaraní (English pronunciation: /ɡwɑrəˈniː/; endonym avañe'ẽ [aʋaɲẽˈʔẽ]), is an indigenous language of South America that belongs to the Tupí-Guaraní subfamily of the Tupian languages. It is one of the official languages of Paraguay (along with Spanish), where it is spoken by 88% of the population, with half of the rural population monolingual.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_Guaran%C3%AD

Anyways, those figures apparently date from 2002. Since then, I think the TFR of Guarani Indians has fallen as well.


Petr

[Columnist]

It already is - apparently that figure was about monolingual Guarani-speakers, peasants that don't know Spanish:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_Guaran%C3%AD

Anyways, those figures apparently date from 2002. Since then, I think the TFR of Guarani Indians has fallen as well.


Petr
Sure, but the Spanish even further, I think.

[Petr]

Sure, but the Spanish even further, I think.
I would guess that they too are declining, but that Guarani TFR is falling faster.

But anyways, the fact that even Guarani Indians, country bumpkins who are so culturally isolated they don't speak Spanish, had the TFR of only 3,3 (back in 2002) shows how decisively South American birthrates are falling towards first-world levels.

(3,3 children per woman is less than what White American fertility was at the height of post-WW II baby boom. It is smaller than the Irish TFR back in the 1970s.)


Petr

[Petr]

3,3 children per woman is less than what White American fertility was at the height of post-WW II baby boom.
Here are some interesting related statistics:

As Colgate economist Michael Haines has shown, American fertility rates have been falling steadily for 200 years. In 1800, the fertility rate among white Americans was 7.04; by 1998, it was 2.07. This decline was interrupted by only a single period of increase: the Baby Boom. In 1940, the fertility rate was 2.22; in 1950, it rose to 2.98; in 1960, it rose further still to 3.53. But by 1970, it fell back to 2.39 and has been headed south ever since.

The fertility rate for black Americans is in steeper decline. In 1850, it was 7.90. Blacks, too, experienced a Baby Boom between 1940 and 1960, but by 1998, their fertility rate was 2.17 and falling fast. Hispanics are the only American ethnic group significantly above the replacement level, because Latin American immigrants bring with them higher fertility rates. After a few years in the States, they begin regressing to the mean: Between 1990 and 2001, America's Hispanic birthrate fell 10 percent.
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20061228_01/20061228_07.html


Petr

[Columnist]

Here are some interesting related statistics:


http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20061228_01/20061228_07.html


Petr
Hispanics replacing White AND Black?!

[Petr]

Here is a chart (already a bit dated) that describes the regional variations in Mexico's TFR - the birthrates are highest in the southern states where the pure-Indio populations dominate, and lowest in the states that are near the US border, presumably dominated by more culturally advanced Mestizos:


http://geocurrents.info/index.php?id=8030947228436939953


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_x7xNgfhbbWo/TDIa3qfpY3I/AAAAAAAAAhw/1BwAgAet940/s1600/Mexico44.jpg

[Columnist]

Here is a chart (already a bit dated) that describes the regional variations in Mexico's TFR - the birthrates are highest in the southern states where the pure-Indio populations dominate, and lowest in the states that are near the US border, presumably dominated by more culturally advanced Mestizos:


http://geocurrents.info/index.php?id=8030947228436939953


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_x7xNgfhbbWo/TDIa3qfpY3I/AAAAAAAAAhw/1BwAgAet940/s1600/Mexico44.jpg
Cholization. The race becoming pure again.

[banjo_billy]

Spare me from your anti-intellectual pap. I recall you are the same weirdo who doesn't trust Western medicine either. Petr

Aren't you pushing your aggressive stupidity a bit too far. Here is a fellow who actually lives in China giving you the actual observations on the ground; and here is someone who can actually comment knowledgably about Chinese subjects that you, yourself, can only get out of books, and you don't listen to what he has to say but merely take a posture of denial!!!

In fact, Western medicine is a fraud. And the Chinese are exactly as he claims that they are.

[banjo_billy]

Whatever the case, he is BS-spewing amateur all the same. And there are few things more annoying than a pretentious mediocrity.
Petr

What about an actual idiocity? Like you.

You cannot defeat the truth merely by denying it.

[Petr]

What about an actual idiocity? Like you.

You cannot defeat the truth merely by denying it.
Shut up now, fool.

Mentious and his pals almost managed to ruin this thread once already, you are not going to sidetrack it again.


Petr

[banjo_billy]

Shut up now, fool.

Mentious and his pals almost managed to ruin this thread once already, you are not going to sidetrack it again.

Petr

You aren't smart enough to understand your own thread.

Like so many who are confused by statistics, you think that mere numbers mean something mysterious when, in fact, without a causal relationship, numbers are useless. Why do you think that statisticians collect numbers, for the fun of it? No, so that they can use numbers as tools to estimate relationships in the real world. The numbers are not there for their own sake but as a gauge of measurement for a variety of real world factors. The numbers are tools. Whether they are used correctly or misused, depends upon the goals, the integrity, the morals and the purposes of the statisticians. Such numbers are used by people who may or may not have worthy reasons for using such numbers.

What you are not understanding about the numbers that you have presented is the reason WHY they are as they are. It is quite obvious that these lowering birth rates are caused by the power of Media and the methods of Brainwashing that the Media Moguls use to manipulate and prune populations. This should be of prime concern to everyone since the statistics that you have presented show quite clearly how very powerful such Media control is.

Your very first post shows why there is a lowing of birth rates in Third-World countries that use brainwashing and conditioning methods embedded in their media, but you don't seem to be interested in anything more than more and more numbers. The numbers are less important than the reasons why the numbers are as they are.

In this case, we should not be astounding ourselves with statistics but should be inspecting use and misuse of Media as a population control factor. Birth control contraceptives are only a secondary cause. The primary cause is the use of the Media for convincing people to use contraceptives in the first place. Thought preceeds action; those who control the thoughts of the People control the actions of the People. So, we should be very careful of who we allow to control the thoughts and ideas of the People.

Once again, the Jews own the Media and it is to them that we must look for the causes of our declining population in the entire world. Through the Media, the Jews are committing genocide upon white populations while hiding their crimes behind mere numbers and statistics not connected to cause.

[Petr]

Seeing that Latinos are mostly responsible for teenage births in California nowadays, I see this sort of development as a harbinger that in spite of being constantly refueled by immigration, the Hispanic population of America will sooner and later fall towards first-world, replacement-level fertility (which is where the American Blacks approximately are already).

(Right now American Hispanics have a fertility of a bit less than three children per woman - which is less than the American White TFR was at the height of post-WW II baby boom.)

It's surprising that teen births in California have gone down rapidly since 1991, even though Hispanic population of the state has simultaneously gone rapidly up:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2011%2F02%2F11%2Fstate%2Fn131235S13.DTL

Teen birth rates drop to all-time low in California

By SHAYA TAYEFE MOHAJER, Associated Press

Friday, February 11, 2011
...

Los Angeles County has the highest number of births to teenagers in the state, with 13,146 in 2009, the most recent year statistics were available. But the number has consistently fallen, from 14,733 in 2007. The drop reflects a broader drop in teen births across the state, down to 47,811 in 2009 from 53,393 in 2007.

The state's teen birth rate of 32.1 per 1,000 females in 2009, age 15 to 19, is half of what it was 1991 when the figure peaked at 70.9 and less than the national rate of 41.5.
...

Latinas make up the vast majority of teen moms, with 72.9 percent of such births. Most of those mothers, 71 percent, are born in the U.S.

[Columnist]

Seeing that Latinos are mostly responsible for teenage births in California nowadays, I see this sort of development as a harbinger that in spite of being constantly refueled by immigration, the Hispanic population of America will sooner and later fall towards first-world, replacement-level fertility (which is where the American Blacks approximately are already).

(Right now American Hispanics have a fertility of a bit less than three children per woman - which is less than the American White TFR was at the height of post-WW II baby boom.)

It's surprising that teen births in California have gone down rapidly since 1991, even though Hispanic population of the state has simultaneously gone rapidly up:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2011%2F02%2F11%2Fstate%2Fn131235S13.DTL
40% of Hispanics vote Republican, 60% Democrat. What to make from that.

[Petr]

40% of Hispanics vote Republican, 60% Democrat. What to make from that.
63 % of American Hispanics self-identify as "Whites," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Hispanic#Demographic_information) and about 40 % might indeed qualify as such in some sense - leaning culturally and genetically more towards European type than Injun or Negroid one. I think more purely Indio Latinos are as Democratic-leaning as the Blacks.

The current Republican Latina governor of New Mexico, Susana Martinez (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susana_Martinez), would be an example of more-Caucasoid-than-Mongoloid Mexican:


http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/on-politics/2010/11/08/susana-martinez118x-large.jpg

[Petr]

This is pretty amazing if confirmed - that Mexico's Total Fertility Rate would be already well below the replacement level:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41896070/ns/world_news-americas/


Mexico census: Fewer migrating, many returning

By MARK STEVENSON
The Associated Press

updated 3/3/2011 7:08:17 PM

MEXICO CITY — The number of migrants leaving Mexico dropped by more than two-thirds since peaking in the middle of the last decade, and more migrants are coming back than before, according to new census figures released Thursday.

The National Statistics and Geography Institute said the 2010 census shows a net outflow of about 145,000 Mexicans leaving the country per year from 2005 to 2010, the period covered by the count.

That is down from a peak of about 450,000 between 2000 and 2005, and about 240,000 per year between 1995 and 2000.

The census is held once every 10 years, but an intermediate count is held every five. The vast majority of Mexican migrants head to the United States.

Eduardo Sojo, the president of the institute's board, said the number of immigrants returning, while still a minority, had almost doubled over the decade.

"The migration phenomenon has undergone a drastic change in the last five years," Sojo said.

About 31 percent of migrants who left in the last five years had returned, compared to about 17 percent of migrants who left in 2000, Sojo said. He attributed the lower outflows to the economic downturn in the United States and the greater difficulty of crossing the border as a result of stepped-up U.S. border enforcement.

And he said there was a third factor that was perhaps rooted in Mexico's steadily slowing rate of population increase. Population growth cooled to about 1.4 percent in 2010, from a peak of about 3.4 percent per year in the 1960s. Mexico's population now stands at about 112 million and while still young, is increasingly graying.

Only 29.3 percent of the population was under 15 in 2010, compared to 34.1 percent in 2000. The average number of children for women of childbearing age has fallen to 1.7, from 2.4 in 1990. There are only 3.9 people living in the average home, as compared to 5 in 1990.

"In the end, the supply of migrants is not unlimited," Sojo said. "There is a finite number of people are willing to take that risk."

Sojo also noted that population had dropped in some cities and towns in the north of Mexico, a region that once saw explosively high growth rates but which has been particularly hard hit by drug cartel violence.

"In effect, we have seen a decline in the population in some municipalities in the north of the country," Sojo said. "We asked the census takers in the area what the reason was, and in many cases the reason was people migrating out of these townships ... we cannot venture a guess as to the reasons" why they left, or whether the violence played a role.

But in some cases, the effect is clear: the town of El Porvenir in the Rio Grande Valley, which has become a battle ground for cartels, lost more than half its population between 2005 and 2010. Ciudad Mier, in Tamaulipas state, has lost more than a quarter of its population in the same period.

In other data, the average Mexican had 8.6 years of schooling in 2010, compared to 6.5 years in 1990. About 84 percent of Mexicans listed themselves as Catholic in 2010, down from 89.7 percent in 1990.

Most Mexicans — 59.5 percent — received salaries of $15 per day or less, and 38.7 percent were paid $10 per day or less. While the vast majority of Mexicans have basic services and access to some form of health care, only 21.3 percent of households have internet and 29.4 percent have computers.

[Columnist]

This is pretty amazing if confirmed - that Mexico's Total Fertility Rate would be already well below the replacement level:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41896070/ns/world_news-americas/
So no Reconquista.

[Petr]

So no Reconquista.
There are many other Latinos besides the Mexicans moving to the United States...


Petr

[Columnist]

There are many other Latinos besides the Mexicans moving to the United States...


Petr
Yes, but the other countries have sagging birthrates, too. But if the threat is still powerfull, what should we do?

[Petr]

Here is an example of how low Latino birthrates can fall - Puerto Rico, famous back in the days of West Side Story for its fertility now has a first-world aging demography. The TFR of Puerto Ricans today is lower than that of White Americans.


http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=365003&CategoryId=14092

Marriage, Birth Rates Declining in Puerto Rico


SAN JUAN – Fewer Puerto Ricans are getting married and the number of children per couple has dropped, a trend brought on by the new role of the woman and other social changes on the Caribbean island.

The latest figures available from the Health Department show that in 1999 a total of 27,255 legal marriages took place in Puerto Rico, a figure that declined to 25,236 in 2003, an erosion in the rate of marriages per 1,000 inhabitants from 9.3 to 6.5.

Births in 2003 reached 50,800, a number that fell in 2009 to 44,080, which meant that the birth rate dropped from 13.1 for each 1,000 inhabitants to less than 10.

During that period, every region on the island showed fewer births, with the most dramatic decline occurring in Greater San Juan, which had a 16 percent decrease in newborn babies.

The Health Department said in a study of demographic changes on the Caribbean island that “there’s no doubt that couples are evaluating the costs a child brings with it when it is born.”

The report said that “postponement of marriage to a later age is delaying and diminishing reproduction and the number of births” in the U.S. commonwealth.

Demographer Raul Figueroa told Efe on Friday that the drop in the number of married couples and in the number of children per couple is explained by the changing role women play in Puerto Rican society.

“The woman works more and is much better educated, which encourages her to delay getting married until after 30,” he said.

Also to be considered is that nowadays, in many cases, there are “informal unions” that are not reflected in official statistics.

“Informal unions have increased in recent years, but they are never reflected officially,” the expert said.

With regard to births, he said that the trend is intimately related to the reduction in marriages, which, he said, is justified by the new role assumed by the woman as a worker outside the home.

Figueroa said that it is also evident that the deep recession the island is going through – for the fourth consecutive year – makes couples evaluate very carefully the number of children they want to have.

The slump is the reason that between 2000 and 2007 a total of 190,000 Puerto Ricans, mostly young professionals, left the island, a phenomenon that has obviously diminished the birth rate.

Eighty percent of university students in Puerto Rico are women, whose dedication to their studies means they remain single longer, up to ages that just a few years ago were unthinkable in Puerto Rican society.

These matrimonial and reproduction trends are the big reasons for the drop of 52,000 inhabitants that is expected to be seen in this year’s U.S. Census, which will leave the island with a population of approximately 3.75 million, according to the demographer’s estimates.

More on the subject here:

http://pennance.us/?page_id=206

The likely economic consequences of this population decline for Puerto Rico are well described by Alexander F. Díaz, in his article Demographic storm [2]. In fact, the decline in fertility is already being experienced in the closing of schools and the diminishing enrollment in post secondary education. The Puerto Rico Department of Education is planning for a reduction of 14,000 students in the public schools in 2010 and at least 40 schools are in danger of closing. The University of Puerto Rico has experienced an estimated 14% drop in enrollment at its main campus in Rio Piedras from 21,561 students in 2000 to 18,653 in 2010.

To date, this fall in enrollment has gone largely uncommented. There is a tendency among educators to hide the decline. The UPR Department of English website still proclaims a total enrollment in 2010 of 22,000 students. Many professors are wedded -apparently without the possibility of divorce- to the long discredited narrative of population explosion and continue to teach this in their courses. The decline in enrollment, and concurrent loss of revenues, has contributed to the UPR’s 300 million dollar deficit and is a contributing cause of the current five week student strike.

However, unlike in previous strikes, not all of the student’s demands are likely to be met. The government does not have the luxury of robbing the already weakened general economy to bale out an institution which has long been a black hole for money: where tenure is a sinecure; where students regularly take more than 8 years to graduate; where professors of postmodern stripe dedicate time to propagating the discredited ideologies of Freud, Marx, and Freire or the lunacy of gender theory; where many students, ignorant of communist atrocities, proudly wear Che t-shirts and, in violation of Federal laws, participate in brigades to visit Cuba; where student unrest receives the endorsement of dictators such as Castro and Chavez; where Literature professors devote class time to showing triple x movies; where Body Art has supplanted Western Civilization in the curriculum.

http://hispanicohio.northcoastnow.com/2010/12/23/25017/

On April 1, 2010 Puerto Rico’s population was 3,725,789, or 82,821 less than in April 2000. This is the first time since the Federal Census has been conducted in Puerto Rico that the Puerto Rican population decreased from one decade to another.

Just one another federal jurisdiction, the state of Michigan, which has one of the three highest unemployment rates in the U.S. (12.4%), had a decline in their population during the last decade. The unemployment rate in Puerto Rico was in more than 16% in 2010.

“There is no doubt that in the case of Puerto Rico there has been a major migration pattern,” said Raul Cisneros, spokesman for the Federal Census, after announcing yesterday the first results from Census 2010.

According to the Census, 489.509 people moved from Puerto Rico to the United States between 2000 and 2008. “This does not include the number of people who returned to Puerto Rico during the same period,” said Professor Jorge Duany, an expert at the University of Puerto Rico (UPR).

In terms of the birth rate, statistics from the Department of Health of Puerto Rico in 2000 indicate that 15.6 children were born per 1,000 people. But in 2009, Duany stressed, the rate was 11.6 per 1,000 persons.

“The mortality rate, however, remained stable, around 7.4 deaths per 1,000 people,” said Duany.
...

Foreign migration appears to have declined. Duany said Interior Department data indicate that between 2000 and 2009, 35.063 foreigners were admitted as immigrants in Puerto Rico, almost half of the total between 1990 and 1999.

Over Estimate

The first Federal Census estimates made between 2005 and 2009 overestimated the total number of residents of the Island.

Last week, preliminary calculations of the Puerto Rico Community Service placed the population of Puerto Rico at 3.94 million, about 200,000 more than the more accurate analysis presented yesterday from the 2010 Census.

The most recent estimate of the total of Puerto Ricans in the U.S. by the American Community Survey Federal Census was 4.16 million.

[Kodos]

Asia is generally getting its population explosion under control, Latin America even more so, and thus the "last frontier" of population control is in sub-Saharan Africa. But even there, the process has started to get rolling:


http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14302837


Petr

What about India?

[Columnist]

What about India?
Muslims outbreeding Hindus.

[Sheza]

Muslims outbreeding Hindus.

Really?

I think you seem to be confusing India for the Netherlands or something.

Anyway, I'd say one of the pressing concerns for India (along with China) is, obviously, the surplus of males and deficit of females.

[Columnist]

Really?

I think you seem to be confusing India for the Netherlands or something.
In the Netherlands, there are Quiverfull Christians with large families. I personally spoke one.


Anyway, I'd say one of the pressing concerns for India (along with China) is, obviously, the surplus of males and deficit of females.
I agree. That is one thing Islam did right, forbidding female infanticide. A case could be made for mandatory sex testing before a possible abortion. Abortion of females forbidden, or severely restricted.

[Petr]

According to CIA Factbook's new statistics (which, remember, are not necessarily infallible), some new Latin American countries are just about to enter the first-world level of fertility.


El Salvador: (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/es.html) 2.08 children born/woman (2011 est.)


Nicaragua: (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nu.html) 2.12 children born/woman (2011 est.)


Colombia: (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/co.html) 2.15 children born/woman (2011 est.)


Paraguay: (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pa.html) 2.11 children born/woman (2011 est.)

[Frank]

Asia is generally getting its population explosion under control, Latin America even more so, and thus the "last frontier" of population control is in sub-Saharan Africa. But even there, the process has started to get rolling:

This would be a credible statement if the United Nations did not predict a population explosion in Sub-Saharan Africa over the next 40 years.

The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations estimates that the population of Sub-Saharan Africa will reach 1.5 or 2 billion by 2050. In 2005, the population was 770 million.

"Sub-Saharan Africa’s population is predicted to grow from 770 million in 2005 to 1.5 to 2 billion in 2050. Despite rapid migration from the countryside to cities and the growth in urban population, the absolute number of rural people is also likely to continue to increase. " SOURCE: 2050 – Africa’s food challenge - FAO Media Centre - September 28, 2009.

[Petr]

This would be a credible statement if the United Nations did not predict a population explosion in Sub-Saharan Africa over the next 40 years.
That Africa's population will greatly grow in the few following decades in no way falsifies what I said. TFRs have started to gone down even in sub-Saharan Africa, and will in all likelihood continue to do so. As the saying goes, it is not the beginning of the end, but at least the end of the beginning.


Petr

[Frank]

That Africa's population will greatly grow in the few following decades in no way falsifies what I said

Ummm...yeah. :rolleyes:

[Petr]

Ummm...yeah. :rolleyes:
Yeah indeed. I'm sorry if you cannot understand the basics of demographic transition process from pre-modern agrarian societies to urbanized modern ones.


Petr

[Frank]

Yeah indeed. I'm sorry if you cannot understand the basics of demographic transition process from pre-modern agrarian societies to urbanized modern ones.

I enjoy getting lessons in science and statistics from simple-minded deranged religious fanatics who cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

Maybe you should pray to your cult leaders and false gods for wisdom and knowledge, namely that irresponsible "r" population explosions do not magically translate into the foundations of responsible "K" population control practices.

[Petr]

I enjoy getting lessons in science and statistics from simple-minded deranged religious fanatics who cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality.
Another little village-atheist who thinks that infidelity makes him automatically smarter than believers. I think most veteran posters here would consider me a quite profound thinker, at least compared to your yawn-inducing mediocrity.

Anyways, you're just the third dweeb after Kuniklo Nigra and banjo billy who tries to hijack this thread for their own pap. Say something relevant or quit flapping your gums.


Petr

[Frank]

Another tiresome village-atheist who thinks that infidelity makes him automatically smarter than believers. I think most veteran posters here would consider me a quite profound thinker, at least compared to your yawn-inducing mediocrity.

You are so ignorant that you believe in absurdities like the following:

Absurdity in the Bible (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm)

Science and History in the Bible (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html)

How does your appeal to popularity negate your proven simple-mindedness? I would not have brought this up Petr but I resent being spoken down to by a clown who believes in fairy tales.

[Petr]

You are so ignorant that you believe in absurdities like the following:

Absurdity in the Bible (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm)

Science and History in the Bible (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html)

How does your appeal to popularity negate your proven simple-mindedness? How can I respect the intellect of people who believe in the above type of supercilious non sense?
For some reason this thread has drawn in trolls of all sorts. Have you no shame, derailing my thread like this?


Petr

[Frank]

For some reason this thread has drawn in trolls all all sorts. Have you no shame, derailing my thread like this?

Petr, you should be ashamed that your brain has failed to evolve past the 14th century.

[Columnist]

Yeah indeed. I'm sorry if you cannot understand the basics of demographic transition process from pre-modern agrarian societies to urbanized modern ones.


Petr

Well, among urbanized, highly educated non-religious people, there is a revival of large, young families (have your baby in college, have four children, etc.). Also, religious people tend to have larger families than expected when controlled for income and education. I predict a demographic rebound. First in the West, then in the Third World.

[Columnist]

I enjoy getting lessons in science and statistics from simple-minded deranged religious fanatics who cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

Maybe you should pray to your cult leaders and false gods for wisdom and knowledge, namely that irresponsible "r" population explosions do not magically translate into the foundations of responsible "K" population control practices.
Evolution? Anyway, White Europeans did have large families quite recently, and irresponsible people can use birth control because they prefer fun over family. "r" vs. "K" is not totally determined by race, and races can change.

[Petr]

Anyway, White Europeans did have large families quite recently, and irresponsible people can use birth control because they prefer fun over family.
Indeed. And the contraceptives (not mentioning abortions) just continue to get more and more efficient, cheaper and widespread. Avoiding family-life while still fornicating has never been easier for irresponsibles.

(Child-support welfare money is often the factor that prevents low-class types in Western ghettoes from using contraceptives as often as they otherwise would. In the third world, this factor does not exist.)

I understand that "Black America" is currently aging quickly. Their TFR is only about 2,0 (just slightly higher than Whites), and their baby-boomer generation is reaching the retirement age as well.

Here Puerto Rico is compared to Detroit:

http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news03.php?nt_id=52053&ct_id=1

Economist Elías Gutiérrez, director of the University of Puerto Rico’s Graduate School of Planning, told CARIBBEAN BUSINESS that the island is on a path to becoming a “ghetto of poor and old people.”

With 1,088.2 people per square mile, Puerto Rico held its position as the third most-densely populated U.S. jurisdiction behind the District of Columbia and New Jersey. Puerto Rico’s population density was 1,112.2 people per square mile in the 2000 Census.

“The economic implications are not good,” said economist Sergio Marxuach, policy director at the Center for the New Economy, a San Juan-based think tank. “Less population means less aggregate demand, less consumption, less savings, and less investment.”

The total U.S. national count was 308,745,538, representing the slowest growth over the last decade since the Great Depression.

Only one state, Michigan, registered a drop in population in the 2010 Census, dipping 0.6 percent.

“This demographic trend reinforces the economic malaise of the last five years. Puerto Rico, as a society, is dying slowly and well on its way to becoming the Detroit of the Caribbean; a post-industrial wasteland with high unemployment, little or no social mobility, and increasing poverty, with all its attendant social ills,” Marxuach said.

[Columnist]

Child-support welfare money is often the factor that prevents low-class types in Western ghettoes from using contraceptives as often as they otherwise would.
Kinderbijslag. Fiercely defended by "Christian" parties. A powerful party in the Dutch political center, the CDA, is in favor of BOTH legal abortion and government handouts for children.:confused::confused::confused:

I understand that "Black America" is currently aging quickly. Their TFR is only about 2,0 (just slightly higher than Whites), and their baby-boomer generation is reaching the retirement age as well.

Here Puerto Rico is compared to Detroit:

http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news03.php?nt_id=52053&ct_id=1
Margaret Sanger can be proud.

[Petr]

Margaret Sanger can be proud.
This might not be simply due to racist White abortionist conspiracies. We can observe that Black birthrates in some small Caribbean nations have already dwindled down to even less than in America.

Take Trinidad and Tobago, for example:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/td.html

1.72 children born/woman (2011 est.)
Or Barbados:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bb.html

1.68 children born/woman (2011 est.)

Even Haiti, without a doubt suffering from the most disastrous overpopulation problem of the whole Caribbean area, supposedly has the TFR of only 3,07 children per woman. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ha.html)


Petr

[Frank]

Evolution? Anyway, White Europeans did have large families quite recently, and irresponsible people can use birth control because they prefer fun over family. "r" vs. "K" is not totally determined by race, and races can change.

Environmental stimuli tends to the central predictor of such behaviour. While Whites have had large families at one point they illustrated the ability to care for them.

On the other hand Sub-Saharan Africans not only have large families to this day but they do so knowing that their children will likely starve to death as they are unable to care for them.

Even the African-American population is set to increase massively over the next 50 years even though poverty impacts their community to a great degree.

The African-American population is projected to increase from 41.1 million to 65.7 million by 2050, going from 14 percent of the U.S. population to 15 percent.

CNN: Minorities expected to be majority in 2050 (http://articles.cnn.com/2008-08-13/us/census.minorities_1_hispanic-population-census-bureau-white-population?_s=PM:US)

[Petr]

Even the African-American population is set to increase massively over the next 50 years even though poverty impacts their community to a great degree.

The African-American population is projected to increase from 41.1 million to 65.7 million by 2050, going from 14 percent of the U.S. population to 15 percent.

CNN: Minorities expected to be majority in 2050 (http://articles.cnn.com/2008-08-13/us/census.minorities_1_hispanic-population-census-bureau-white-population?_s=PM:US)
This model probably assumes continuing high Black immigration from the Caribbean and Africa.

Moreover, the conclusions of that report that you linked to (which says that Whites will become minority by 2042) can, and actually has already been challenged - for it assumes that the rapid population-growth of the last few decades will continue the same for the next 40 years.

That report predicted that the US population would be about 440 million by 2050. This source starkly disagrees:

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2011/01/the_changing_fa_4.php

The Changing Face of 2050

There is a “consensus” view of the United States in 2050, based partly on multi-culturalist wishful thinking and partly on extrapolation of the 13% population growth of the 1990s. The Census Bureau in 2009 estimated 2050 population at 439 million, but to the conventional thinkers that has always seemed too conservative—after all, if 1990-2000’s population growth rate had been repeated over the succeeding five decades, the population in 2050 would have been 523 million. {snip} The new census result blows such predictions out of the water.
...

We can then project forward from 2010’s actual number an “inherent” population growth, assuming a constant second derivative (minus the 1990-2005 blip) and tight immigration law enforcement, and get a U.S. population in 2050 of a mere 333 million, with a slight decline in the 2040-2050 period. That intuitively seems far too low, but with immigration law enforcement likely to tighten at least in the short term, a 2050 population of below 400 million certainly now looks plausible, with the demographic split only moderately changed from today’s.
This model was naturally disagree with the projection of high population growth for the American Blacks.

It is really quite unplausible to claim that America's population would grow by 130 million over the next 40 years, with birthrates going quickly down not only in the US but in Latin America as well. If White conservatives manage to rein in immigration, it will definitely not happen.


Petr

[Frank]

This model probably assumes continuing high Black immigration from the Caribbean and Africa.

In all fairness, I am not sure about the model being used; I am going by the projections of the government statistics:

The U.S. population is becoming more diverse by race and Hispanic origin.

The race and Hispanic-origin2 distribution of the U.S. population is projected to become more diverse. As the Black; Asian and Pacific Islander; American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut; and Hispanic-origin populations increase their proportions of the total population, the non-Hispanic White population proportion would decrease. By the turn of the century, the non-Hispanic White proportion of the population is projected to decrease to less than 72 percent with about 13 percent Black; 11 percent Hispanic origin; 4 percent Asian and Pacific Islander; and less than 1 percent American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut. By 2050, the proportional shares shift quite dramatically. Less than 53 percent would be non-Hispanic White; 16 percent would be Black; 23 percent would be Hispanic origin; 10 percent would be Asian and Pacific Islander; and about 1 percent would be American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut.

Non-Hispanic Whites, the slowest growing group, are likely to contribute less and less to the total population growth in this country. Although non-Hispanic Whites make up almost 75 percent of the total population, they would contribute only 35 percent of the total population growth between 1990 and 2000. This percentage of growth would decrease to 23 percent between 2000 and 2010, and 14 percent from 2010 to 2030. The non-Hispanic White population would contribute nothing to population growth after 2030 because it would be declining in size.

According to the middle-series projection, the Black population would increase almost 5 million by 2000, almost 10 million by 2010, and over 20 million by 2030. The Black population would double its present size to 62 million by 2050.

The fastest growing race groups will continue to be the Asian and Pacific Islander population with annual growth rates that may exceed 4 percent during the 1990's. By the turn of the century, the Asian and Pacific Islander population would expand to over 12 million, double its current size by 2010, triple by 2020, and increase to more than 5 times its current size, to 41 million by 2050.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division - Current Population Reports, Series P25-1104, Population Projections of the United States, by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1993 to 2050.

[Petr]

The UNFPA's "medium variant" model would predict a population of 404 million for the United States in 2050. "Low variant" model would predict the population of only 357 million, with a slight decrease in the 2045-2050 period:

http://esa.un.org/unpp/index.asp?panel=3

Clearly even UNFPA's medium option is far from the model that would predict 440 million by 2050.


Petr

[Frank]

The UNFPA's "medium variant" model would predict a population of 404 million for the United States in 2050. "Low variant" model would predict the population of only 357 million, with a slight decrease in the 2045-2050 period:

We know that the African-American TFR rate is 2.2...

Different cultural groups within a country can exhibit different total fertility rates. In the United States, for example, when the country's total fertility rate was 2.1, the total fertility rate was 3.0 for Hispanics, 2.2 for African Americans, and the below replacement of 1.9 for Asian and Pacific Islanders.*

http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/fertilityrate.htm

I am curious as to how this will impact their population numbers over a 40 year period.

[Petr]

We know that the African-American TFR rate is 2.2...
According to this source, it fell from 2,11 in 2008 to 2,03 in 2009:


U.S. Fertility in Decline

Lifetime Births per Woman, 2008 / Lifetime Births per Woman, 2009 / Percent Change

Total 2.08 2.01 -3.7

White 1.83 1.78 -2.8
Black 2.11 2.03 -3.9
Asian 2.05 1.96 -4.8
AIAN* 1.84 1.78 -3.5
Hispanic 2.91 2.73 -6.1
https://www.prb.org/Articles/2011/us-fertility-decline.aspx

It's surprising that AIANs (American Indian and Alaska Natives) would seem to have a TFR as low as Whites.

The number of babies born in the United States fell by 2.3 percent in 2009, and the number is continuing to slide. The total fertility rate, or average number of lifetime births per woman, for 2009 was 2.01, the lowest level since 1998.1
...

Birth rates declined among all the major racial and ethnic groups, but Hispanics saw the biggest declines. Hispanics have more children than non-Hispanic groups, on average, but the gap narrowed a bit in recent years. The TFR for Hispanic women fell from 2.9 in 2008 to 2.7 in 2009 (see table).

[Frank]

According to this source, it fell from 2,11 in 2008 to 2,03 in 2009.

My source is from 2010 but who knows what to believe.

[Petr]

My source is from 2010 but who knows what to believe.
Your source was written in 2010 but referred back to statistics several years older than that:

http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/fertilityrate.htm

In the United States, for example, when the country's total fertility rate was 2.1, the total fertility rate was 3.0 for Hispanics, 2.2 for African Americans, and the below replacement of 1.9 for Asian and Pacific Islanders.*

*Source: Getis, Getis, and Fellmann, Introduction to Geography. 2004, McGraw Hill.

[Frank]

Your source was written in 2010 but referred back to statistics several years older than that:

The 2006 statistics were interesting:

But according to 2006 data, African Americans had a total fertility rate of 2.155, more than whites’ rate of 2.096. Women of Hispanic ethnicity had a total fertility rate of 2.960. (Note: the Census records calculate total fertility rates according to births per 1,000 women.)

http://www.americanindependent.com/161590/austin-group-targets-african-americans-likens-abortion-to-genocide

I wonder if the decreasing rate is due to abortion levels? Some conspiracy types seem to think so...

[Petr]

https://www.prb.org/Articles/2011/us-fertility-decline.aspx

It's surprising that AIANs (American Indian and Alaska Natives) would seem to have a TFR as low as Whites.
I checked this one out, and it does seem that American Indian populations have surprisingly low birthrates (which could indicate how low the fertility of Latin American Indians may also some day fall).

The Native American total fertility rate is lower than the American average, which means that it's a lot lower than that of Hispanics (whose rate is above average), making it just about as high as that of Whites, like the source above claimed:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/nativetrends/ind_1_8.asp


Figure 1.8a. Fertility rates, by race/ethnicity and age group of mother: 2005

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/nativetrends/images/fig1_8a.gif

The overall fertility rate for American Indian/Alaska Native women (ages 15 to 44 years) is lower than that for women in general; however, birth rates for young women (ages 15 to 24 years) are higher among American Indians/Alaska Natives than among young women overall. Infant and child mortality rates for American Indians/Alaska Natives are higher than those for all infants and children under age 19.

[Columnist]

I checked this one out, and it does seem that American Indian populations have surprisingly low birthrates (which could indicate how low the fertility of Latin American Indians may also some day fall).

The Native American total fertility rate is lower than the American average, which means that it's a lot lower than that of Hispanics (whose rate is above average), making it just about as high as that of Whites, like the source above claimed:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/nativetrends/ind_1_8.asp


Figure 1.8a. Fertility rates, by race/ethnicity and age group of mother: 2005

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/nativetrends/images/fig1_8a.gif
Shorter generations means more population growth.

[Petr]

What about India?
Well, here's now some info for you - basically, the birthrates in southern India are almost on the first-world level, while northern India is lagging far behind.

I have also read that the city populations of India already have a TFR below the replacement level, and that it is the countryside that is keeping India above it.

http://karnatique.blogspot.com/2010/07/impending-south-indian-population.html

As this startling graphic (http://www.nfhsindia.org/NFHS-3%20Data/Press%20Briefing%20Kit/Fertility.pdf) from the fertility report of the National Family Health Survey - 3 (2005-6) shows, all of South India is accelerating towards a population implosion, not a population explosion. That is, South Indians are being made to voluntarily reduce their fertility so much, that they are already unable to maintain the population of South India, which is already very low compared to North India.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4lRc12hwnjc/TDvDCp9FkSI/AAAAAAAAB1w/kADNppNjKWM/s1600/nfhs3.png

Demographer of world renown, P N Mari Bhat, opines that the growing demographic imbalance due to the exploding north and the imploding south may trigger a serious regional conflict due to large migration from the north to the south. In India Vision 2020, a book published by the Planning Commission of India, he writes (italics mine):
[B]y the year 2020, population of north India would still be growing at a rate of 1.7 per cent per annum while the growth rate in South India would have fallen to 0.6 per cent. The advantages, the south would derive from its early demographic transition are thus obvious. But the regional demographic imbalances may induce large population movements from the north to the south. It remains to be seen whether this would develop into a serious regional conflict.

[Petr]

http://www.himvani.com/news/2010/12/12/himachal-high-on-grey-population/9266

India, which accounts for 2.4% of the world land area, is already supporting around 17% of the world population, a huge strain on the limited natural resources & a great challenge for sustainable and equitable development. However, according to the latest National Health Profile 2009 released by the Central Bureau of Health Intelligence, Government of India in February 2010, the demographic indicators have shown certain positive trends for India. The birth rate declined from 26.8 in 1998 to 22.8 in 2008, while the death rate declined from 9.0 to 7.4 per 1,000 population over the same period. Infant Mortality Rate has declined considerably (72 in 1998) during the last decade and reached 53 per 1000 live births in 2008.
...

The total fertility rate has declined through voluntary regulation and the latest figures released by the National Health Profile Survey show that Himachal Pradesh is now among the few in the country that are leading the path to population control. With a total fertility rate of 1.9, Himachal and Goa are only next to states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which have a total fertility rate of 1.7 and top the national list. Punjab (2.0) has also achieved the replacement level of fertility. Thus on an average a woman gives birth to two children in Himachal Pradesh and Punjab, which lives up to the national slogan of ‘Hum do hamare do’. However, for Haryana (2.6) and J & K (2.3) the fertility rates are still high.

[Columnist]

Well, here's now some info for you - basically, the birthrates in southern India are almost on the first-world level, while northern India is lagging far behind.

I have also read that the city populations of India already have a TFR below the replacement level, and that it is the countryside that is keeping India above it.

http://karnatique.blogspot.com/2010/07/impending-south-indian-population.html
South India is generally understood to be more progressive and cosmopolitan.

[Petr]

South India is generally understood to be more progressive and cosmopolitan.
The southern state of Kerala (which leads India with the TFR of only 1,7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Kerala#Birth_rate)) has traditionally had a strong Communist presence:

Kerala hosts two major political alliances: the United Democratic Front (UDF—led by the Indian National Congress)and the Left Democratic Front (LDF—led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)). At present, the LDF is the ruling coalition in government; V.S. Achuthanandan of the CPI(M) is the Chief Minister of Kerala and Oommen Chandy of the UDF is the Chief Opposition leader. Strikes, protests and marches are ubiquitous in Kerala due to the comparatively strong presence of labour unions.[76][77]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala#Government

Right now India's total TFR is something like 2,6 children per woman:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.html


Petr

[Bismarck]

How could brazils birth rates and it's relation to soap operas demand 11 pages of writing?

[Petr]

The first basic information about India's massive 2011 census (held in February) has been released - their population growth is beginning to plateau:

http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/01/stories/2011040157920100.htm

NEW DELHI: India's population has jumped to 1.21 billion, an increase of more than 181 million during 2001-11, according to provisional data of Census 2011 released on Thursday.

Though the population is almost equal to the combined population of the U.S., Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Japan (1,214.3 million), the silver lining is that after 1911-21 the past decade (2001-11) witnessed the addition of smaller population than the previous decade's growth.

Of the total provisional population of 1,210.2 million, the number of males stood at 623.7 million and females at 586.5 million. The percentage growth in 2001-11 was 17.64 — males 17.19 and females 18.12. India's population accounts for 17.5 per cent of the world's.
...

Among the States and the Union Territories, Uttar Pradesh is the most populous State with 199 million people, followed by Maharashtra with 112 million people. Lakshadweep is the least populated at 64,429 people.

The percentage decadal growth rates of the six most populous States have declined during 2001-11 compared with 1991-2001. The population growth in Uttar Pradesh has declined from 25.85 per cent to 20.09 per cent, in Maharashtra from 22.73 per cent to 15.99 per cent, Bihar from 28.62 per cent to 25.07 per cent, West Bengal from 17.77 per cent to 13.93 per cent, Andhra Pradesh from 14.59 per cent to 11.10 per cent and Madhya Pradesh from 24.26 per cent to 20.30 per cent. “This shows that we have added population, but the growth [rate] has been less,” Dr. Chandramouli said.
...

The total number of children in the age group of 0-6 is now 158.8 million, less by five million since 2001.

The literacy rate has gone up from 64.83 per cent in 2001 to 74.04 per cent, an increase of 9.21 percentage points.

According to UN estimates (2008 revision, using "medium variant" model), India's population growth should stabilize around 2050 with about 1,6 billion people:

http://esa.un.org/unpp/index.asp?panel=3


Petr

[Petr]

And so I would assume that the news actually mean that what is actually happening is that the fertility of the colored half of Brazil's population is falling towards the level of Whites. It might still be slightly higher, just like the Black TFR is slightly higher than that of Whites in the USA.
The results of Brazil's 2010 census have been released, and they would seem to support my interpretation above.

Here are Brazil's main regions - blue "South" is the Whitest of them all, and orange "Northeast" is the Blackest of them all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_Brazil#List_of_Brazilian_states

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Brazil_Labelled_Map.svg/400px-Brazil_Labelled_Map.svg.png

And according to latest stats, Negro Northeast still has somewhat more youthful demography than White South, but it has clearly been "catching up" with southern territories during the last two decades. Same process is also going on in the Indian-dominated, green Amazonian North region:

http://www.ibge.gov.br/english/presidencia/noticias/noticia_visualiza.php?id_noticia=1866&id_pagina=1

The North Region, despite the continuous aging observed in the last two decades, still presents a very young structure, due to the high fertility levels recorded in the past. In this Major Region, the population of children under 5 years of age, which was 14.3% in 1991, fell to 12.7% in 2000, and reached 9.8% in 2010. The proportion of elderly people aged 65 years and over surpassed from 3.0% in 1991 and 3.6% in 2000 to 4.6% in 2010. The Northeast Region also has, the same way, characteristics of a young population. Children under 5 years of age corresponded to 12.8% of the population in 1991; in 2000 this figure had decreased by 10.6%, and reached 8.0% in 2010. The proportion of elderly persons changed from 5.1% in 1991 to 5.8% in 2000 and 7.2% in 2010.

The Southeast and South presented similar evolution in the age structure, remaining as the two Regions with the highest levels of aging in the country. Both had, in 2010, 8.1% of their population formed by elderly persons aged 65 years and over, whereas the proportion of children under 5 years of age was, respectively, 6.5% and 6.4%.

The Central West Region presents an age structure and evolution similar to those of the overall population in Brazil. The percentage of children under 5 years of age in 2010 reached 7.6%, a figure that was 11.5% in 1991 and 9.8% in 2000. The elderly population recorded growth, having changed from 3.3% in 1991, to 4.3% in 2000 and 5.8% in 2010.

[Petr]

The country of Noriega is also approaching first-world fertility levels:

http://www.insidecostarica.com/dailynews/2010/june/08/centralamerica100060804.htm

Panama: Population Growth Rate Decreases


PANAMA - The preliminary data of the recent population and housing census in Panama revealed that the rate population growth rate has decreased regarding the study carried out in 2000, according to specialized sources.

Experts of the National Institute of Statistics asserted that this year's researches brought about a rate of 16 births per 1000 inhabitants while 10 years ago this number reached 20.

The census determined that the population is composed by 3,322,576 people, a number that is lower than 3.5 million that were registered in previous estimates by the Comptroller General of the Republic.

From that total, 1,672,568 are men and 1,650,008 are women. There are 1,056,208 houses in the country.

[Petr]

Nor is the land of Somoza and Sandinists untouched by this trend. We can again see that urbanization is one of the key factors in sinking TFRs.

http://www.populationaction.org/Publications/Reports/Reproductive_Health_Supplies_in_Six_Countries/Nicaragua.pdf

With its 2005 population estimated at 5.5 million, population growth in Nicaragua is estimated at 1.3 percent per year, which is consistent with a total fertility rate (TFR) of 2.7 children per woman of childbearing age in 2007.3 Nicaragua’s fertility rate declined 13 percent in the previous six years, confirming the trend that was observed in 2001 when the fertility rate of 3.1 represented a 21 percent decline with respect to 1998 (3.9).

Nevertheless, the overall TFR hides important differences by socioeconomic status. Indeed, whereas the wealthiest fifth of the Nicaraguan population had an average fertility rate of only 1.8 children per woman in 2006/2007—having dropped below replacement level—the figure for the poorest fifth was 4.5.4 Thus, it is to be expected that the eight percent overall unmet need for family planning among women married or in union chiefly affects lower income women. Together with the higher prevalence of poverty in the countryside, this would explain that fertility in rural areas is 3.5 children per woman, which is 59 percent higher than the urban level (2.2).5

[Petr]

More evidence that in spite of Blacks being a major nuisance, it is with Hispanics (and Asians) that Whites will have to struggle for the mastery of North America.

In spite of the immigration reinforcements from the Caribbean and Africa, the number of Black children declined in America during the 2000s, although not as heavily as that of White children.

(The decline of White children was pretty much inevitable, as it was during the 2000s that the 1945-1963 Baby Boomer generation finally exited the breeding age).

Even though they are still promiscuous, American Blacks have indeed apparently learned to use contraceptives better as their teen births have "plummeted."

http://smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?type=wnews&title=Census:%20Fewer%20black%20children%20in%20biggest%20U.S.%20cities&id=162078

Census: Fewer black children in biggest U.S. cities

July 01, 2011, 02:19 AM The Associated Press


NEW YORK — A catastrophic flood emptied New Orleans of much of its black youth. Powerful social forces may be doing a similar thing to places like Harlem and Chicago’s South Side.

Over the past decade, the inner-city neighborhoods that have served for generations as citadels of African-American life and culture have been steadily draining of black children.

Last year’s census found that the number of black, non-Hispanic children living in New York City had fallen by 22.4 percent in 10 years. In raw numbers, that meant 127,058 fewer black kids living in the city of Jay Z and Spike Lee, even as the number of black adults grew slightly.

The same pattern has repeated from coast to coast. Los Angeles saw a 31.8 percent decline in its population of black children, far surpassing the 6.9 percent drop in black adults. The number of black children in Atlanta fell by 27 percent. It was down 31 percent in Chicago and 37.6 percent in Detroit. Oakland, Calif. saw a drop of 42.3 percent, an exodus that fell only 6 percentage points below the decline in flood-ravaged New Orleans.

Overall, the census found nearly a half-million fewer black children living in the 25 largest U.S. cities than there were a decade earlier. By comparison, the number of black adults living in big cities has hardly budged.

Demographics experts said a combination of factors appeared to be at work. Americans in general are having fewer children than they once did, due mostly to increased use of birth control. That has been true, too, among black mothers. Teen pregnancy rates among blacks have also plummeted.

But the more significant trend, experts said, may be a migration by young black parents to the suburbs.
...

Oakland, a city fraught for years with violence and high poverty rates, has at last been experiencing a renaissance, but the number of white hipsters, Asians and Hispanics moving in has been outpaced by the number of black families that have disappeared.

That decline has been led by the 42.3 percent drop in the number of black children, from 38,765 a decade ago to 22,377 last year. By comparison, the number of black adults dropped by just under 17 percent.

Oakland Mayor Jean Quan blamed the departures on a lack of affordable housing. Quan, who became the city’s first Asian mayor (and only the city’s second non-black mayor since 1977) when she took office in January, said she runs into African Americans all the time who have given up the city for suburbs as far away as Antioch, Calif., a small city that has seen its share of black residents grow from 2.6 percent in 1990 to 17 percent last year.

“I ask them, ‘Do you live in Oakland?’ They say, ‘No, but I used to.”’

That drop has been a source of dismay among some in Oakland concerned about the city losing its cultural identity.

The Harlem of the past 10 years has been another place where drops in violent crime and a gradual erasing of decades of blight have brought an influx of new residents and concerns about the neighborhood’s heritage.

It would be easy to blame gentrification for pushing young families out, yet Census data shows that the sections of the neighborhood with the steepest drops in the number of black children are those where economic recovery has been more sluggish.
...

State Assemblyman Keith Wright, whose district covers Central Harlem, has noticed fewer children in the area as well, but he, too, thinks the phenomenon has less to do with flight from crime or decay, and more to do with the high price of city living.

“You don’t see those big families anymore,” Wright said. “A lot of our younger folks, I find, are moving to New Jersey. They think the city life is too expensive. It comes down to a matter of economics,” he said.

Some black city residents, he said, are also migrating “back down South, where they think the dollar will go farther.”

That migration has been evident in places like Henry County, Georgia, an area of suburban Atlanta that has seen its black population more than triple in the past decade. Blacks now make up 37 percent of the county of nearly 204,000 people.

The trend has also been showing up in a less visible way in countless mostly white suburbs like Livonia, Mich., outside of Detroit. Just a decade ago, there were 951 black people living in the entire city, out of a population of around 100,000. Now there are 3,309. The same trend has repeated in white suburbs across the country.
...

Even cities that saw a large rise in their overall black population saw their numbers of black children fall, or grow at a much slower rate. In Phoenix, the number of black adult residents grew by 44.8 percent over the past decade, but added fewer than 4,000 black children, for a growth rate of 18.6 percent. Houston added 21,324 black adults, but had 23,219 fewer black children.

On a national level, the number of black children has inched down by only 2.3 percent, compared to a much larger 9.8 percent drop for white children.

[Petr]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/census/2011-03-22-1Ablacks22_ST_N.htm

2010 Census data released so far this year show that 20 of the 25 cities that have at least 250,000 people and a 20% black population either lost more blacks or gained fewer in the past decade than during the 1990s. The declines happened in some traditional black strongholds: Chicago, Oakland, Atlanta, Cleveland and St. Louis.

The loss is fueled by three distinct trends:

• Blacks — many in the middle or upper-middle class — leaving cities for the suburbs.

• Blacks leaving Northern cities for thriving centers in the South.

• The aging of the African-American population, whose growth rate has dropped from more than 16% in the 1990s to about 10% since 2000.

"In the Northern cities, a lot of young blacks who might have grown up in cities are leaving maybe the entire region," says William Frey, demographer at the Brookings Institution who analyzed the data. "They're going to the Sun Belt and particularly the South. The ones who stay in the area want to move to the suburbs."

[Columnist]

More evidence that in spite of Blacks being a major nuisance, it is with Hispanics (and Asians) that Whites will have to struggle for the mastery of North America.

In spite of the immigration reinforcements from the Caribbean and Africa, the number of Black children declined in America during the 2000s, although not as heavily as that of White children.

(The decline of White children was pretty much inevitable, as it was during the 2000s that the 1945-1963 Baby Boomer generation finally exited the breeding age).

Even though they are still promiscuous, American Blacks have indeed apparently learned to use contraceptives better as their teen births have "plummeted."

http://smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?type=wnews&title=Census:%20Fewer%20black%20children%20in%20biggest%20U.S.%20cities&id=162078
Which Black people are using birth control? The underclass or the middle class?

[Petr]

Which Black people are using birth control? The underclass or the middle class?
Middle class definitely more. Here's a bit dated (May 1995) article from a Black Ebony magazine:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_n7_v50/ai_16878134/

A sexual time bomb: the declining fertility rate of the black middle class

by Monique Burns


WHEN it comes to making babies, nobody does it better than Black folks. In fact, 19 percent of all Black teenagers, aged 15-19, become pregnant each year, compared with only 8 percent of White teens. Because Black teens are giving up educational opportunities and careers to bear babies at an age when they are still "babies themselves," this "baby boom" has caused nationwide concern about the future of Black America. Less well known--but just as critical to the future of Black America--is the "baby bust" occurring among older Black couples, aged 25-44. At a time when they have the maturity and financial means to establish and nurture strong families, many Black couples are finding that they simply cannot have children. The truth is, when it comes to making babies, African-American couples in the 25-44 age group are discovering that the much-vaunted myth of Black fertility is just that--a myth.

The National Center for Health Statistics, a division of the National Centers for Disease Control, notes no difference in fertility rates for White or Black women, aged 25-44. However, according to RESOLVE, a national clearinghouse and support group, infertility is actually 1.5 times higher among African-Americans than Caucasians. Infertility--defined as the inability to conceive after one year or more of intercourse without contraception--usually can be treated and reversed. In fact, of the 5.3 million infertile couples in the U.S. who seek treatment two-thirds are able to have children.

[Columnist]

Middle class definitely more. Here's a bit dated (May 1995) article from a Black Ebony magazine:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_n7_v50/ai_16878134/
Aaah, interesting. Why are they infertile?

[President Barbicane]

Aaah, interesting. Why are they infertile?


Good question.

Of course, if infertility is successfully treated and the genes responsible for infertility persist in the population, long term infertility will go up. That doesn't seem to be a good thing to me.

[Columnist]

Good question.

Of course, if infertility is successfully treated and the genes responsible for infertility persist in the population, long term infertility will go up. That doesn't seem to be a good thing to me.
It would be ironical.

[Petr]

http://www.salon.com/news/race/index.html?story=/mwt/feature/2011/09/04/marriage_and_race_interview

It's been the case since the 1960s. Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote about poorer African-Americans in the '60s -- you may be familiar with the Moynihan report, where he talked about the so-called breakdown of the family in inner city areas and the increase in single parent families among poor African-Americans. Since that time, the same developments have spread to the middle class. If you look at statistics overall, about 2 out of every 3 black women are unmarried. A minority of black men are married, as well. These figures are most pronounced among the poor, but they actually extend throughout the socioeconomic spectrum. College educated black women are about twice as likely to be unmarried as college educated white women by age 40.
...

One consequence of this is that the highly educated black women have the lowest rate of fertility of any group in the country, which is to say that there are more childless women among black women with graduate degrees -- lawyers, doctors, engineers and so forth -- than among any other group.

[RuneX2]

Here's an article from National Geographic on the subject: How a mix of female empowerment and steamy soap operas helped bring down Brazil’s fertility rate and stoke its vibrant economy. (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/09/girl-power/gorney-text)

[Columnist]

Here's an article from National Geographic on the subject: How a mix of female empowerment and steamy soap operas helped bring down Brazil’s fertility rate and stoke its vibrant economy. (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/09/girl-power/gorney-text)
Will Brazil impose its low fertility on others?

[Petr]

http://tucsoncitizen.com/arizona-news/2011/09/01/hispanic-birthrate-dips-in-arizona/

Hispanic birthrate dips in Arizona

by Ronald J. Hansen on Sep. 01, 2011, under Arizona Republic News


Hispanic women in Arizona are having children at a significantly lower rate than in past decades, which could slow overall population growth if the trend continues, according to new state and federal data.

Hispanic birthrates and net migration into the state have contributed heavily to the state’s rapid population growth. The decline in the Hispanic birthrate from 2000 to 2010, coupled with an overall drop, already has demographers contemplating scaled-back projections for the state’s future population. Those projections are used for planning an array of services from schools to roads and housing.

From roughly 2000 to 2010, total fertility rates for Hispanic women declined from 3.0 births per woman to 2.4, according to the Arizona State Demographer’s Office. The drop was most pronounced for Hispanic women younger than 20 years old. Birthrates for Hispanic women 35 years and older increased slightly but are a relatively small portion of total births.

“We have been anticipating this, but the magnitude is surprising,” said Jim Chang, senior demographer for the demographer’s office. “It’s a big change.”

In the near term, the trend would likely mean “tens of thousands” of fewer residents, Chang said. “When you project for many years, it adds up. There’s a cumulative effect.”

Experts cite various reasons for the decline.

Carlos Vlez-Ibez, director of the School of Transborder Studies at Arizona State University, said the trend is an extension of a pattern that began in Mexico and is likely occurring in other U.S. states. As more Mexicans moved from the rural areas to cities and became more educated, they tended to have fewer children and the birth rate declined. Most Hispanics in Arizona are of Mexican descent.

“Mexico itself has changed from a very rural nation to a very urban one,” he said. “That shift started in the 1960s.”

Between 1960 and 1965, there were 6.75 births per Mexican woman, according to data from the United Nations. By the 1990-95 period, that had fallen to 3.19, the U.N. reports.

Assimilation also could be a factor as birthrates for Hispanics with multiple generations in the U.S. are beginning to mirror those of the country as a whole.

But Vlez-Ibez rejects the idea that assimilation alone explains the decline. He said that as in other countries like Mexico, as Hispanics become more educated and more affluent and as divorce rates creep up, their long-term birthrates will keep falling.

“In 20 to 25 years, you’ll have replacement rate (births), and that’s about it,” Vlez-Ibez said.

Arizona averaged more than 2 percent annual growth in the past decade. About 40 percent of it was driven by natural changes from births and deaths. The remaining 60 percent was affected by net migration from other states and nations. Demographers monitor birthrates by race and ethnicity because differences among those groups can be distinct.

The change in the Hispanic birthrate was largely driven by a slowdown in births by mothers younger than 20 years old.

In 2000, that group had about 6,600 births in the one-year period around the census. Ten years later, Hispanic women younger than 20 had about 5,700 births. The decline is especially significant because census data show the number of women in those age groups increased from 118,000 to 182,000 over the decade.

Births among non-Hispanic women under 20 also declined in 2010, contributing to the overall decline in birthrates. The birthrate for all Arizona women fell from about 2.4 per woman in 2000 to 2.1 in 2010.

The declining birthrates in Arizona are similar to changes playing out nationwide. The 2010 census showed that population gains over the decade were the smallest since the Great Depression. Many demographers suspect the economic downturn was a key factor, with families postponing or limiting having children for financial reasons.

Census reports show the national birthrate for Hispanic women had been lower than in Arizona but was drifting higher near the end of the past decade even as Arizona’s birthrate was likely flat or falling.

Since the 1940s, Arizona has been one of the fastest-growing states in the nation. Census data have shown that Hispanics account for the greatest share of the growth in recent years.

[Columnist]

http://tucsoncitizen.com/arizona-news/2011/09/01/hispanic-birthrate-dips-in-arizona/
So this becomes a race to the bottom. Do you think the exceptions will demographically take over within a few years, and birthrates will rise again?

[RuneX2]

End of history and the last woman - How long do countries have until their populations disappear? (http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/populations)

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/20110827_WOC449.gif

In Hong Kong, for example, a cohort of 1,000 women would be expected to give birth to just 547 daughters, at today’s fertility rates. (That gives Hong Kong a “net reproduction rate” of just 0.547, in the language of demographers.) If nothing changed, those 547 daughters would be succeeded by just 299 daughters of their own, and so on.

- do these numbers account for the higher death rate of some countries compared to others.

[Petr]

The official results of Brazil's latest census:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-15766840

Between 2000 and 2010:

# Adult illiteracy fell from 13.6% to 9.6%. Among children aged 10-14, illiteracy fell from 7.3% to 3.9%

# The proportion of children not attending school fell from 5.1% to 3.1%

# The fertility rate fell from 2.38 children for each woman to 1.86

# Access to mains drinking water, electricity and sanitation increased nationwide

However, in almost all fields of human development the census revealed enduring inequalities between north and south Brazil, between urban and rural areas, and between rich and poor.

The IBGE highlighted "acute income disparity" in Brazil, with the richest 10% of the population gaining 44.5% of total income compared to just 1.1% for the poorest 10%.

It said more than half of the population earned less than the minimum wage and, on average, white and Asian Brazilians earned twice as much as black or mixed-race Brazilians.

[Monty]

Considering how mulatto Brazil is, is there a prospect for a decline in third world populations elsewhere?

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Environmental stimuli tends to the central predictor of such behaviour. While Whites have had large families at one point they illustrated the ability to care for them.

On the other hand Sub-Saharan Africans not only have large families to this day but they do so knowing that their children will likely starve to death as they are unable to care for them.

Even the African-American population is set to increase massively over the next 50 years even though poverty impacts their community to a great degree.

The African-American population is projected to increase from 41.1 million to 65.7 million by 2050, going from 14 percent of the U.S. population to 15 percent.

CNN: Minorities expected to be majority in 2050 (http://articles.cnn.com/2008-08-13/us/census.minorities_1_hispanic-population-census-bureau-white-population?_s=PM:US)
Joke:

What's the difference between a black man and a large pizza?

[Petr]

Joke:

What's the difference between a black man and a large pizza?
Please delete this useless post. This is supposedly-serious Academy, and you have disturbed this particular thread already enough.

[Petr]

Considering how mulatto Brazil is, is there a prospect for a decline in third world populations elsewhere?
Why, certainly (especially if you count China as third world). Take South Africa for example:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=70220&highlight=2100

Between 2001 and 2010, South Africa’s fertility rate decreased from 2.86 to 2.38 births per woman.
SA is thus now, TFR-wise, where Brazil was a decade ago.

[Petr]

And this just in - if I read this correctly, the Hispanic TFR has now fallen to 2,4 not just in Arizona, but in the whole of United States:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-report-birth-rates-plummet-for-young-women-as-economy-worries-likely-keep-the-stork-away/2011/11/17/gIQA9qwiUN_story.html

ATLANTA (AP) — The economy may well be the best form of birth control.

U.S. births dropped for the third straight year — especially for young mothers — and experts think money worries are the reason.

A federal report released Thursday showed declines in the birth rate for all races and most age groups. Teens and women in their early 20s had the most dramatic dip, to the lowest rates since record-keeping began in the 1940s. Also, the rate of cesarean sections stopped going up for the first time since 1996.

Experts suspected the economy drove down birth rates in 2008 and 2009 as women put off having children. With the 2010 figures, suspicion has turned into certainty.
...

U.S. births hit an all-time high in 2007, at more than 4.3 million. Over the next two years, the number dropped to about 4.2 million and then about 4.1 million.

Last year, it was down to just over 4 million, according to the new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For teens, birth rates dropped 9 percent from 2009. For women in their early 20s, they fell 6 percent. For unmarried mothers, the drop was 4 percent.
...

One involved a statistic called the total fertility rate. In essence, it tells how many children a woman can be expected to have if current birth rates continue. That figure was 1.9 children last year. In most years, it's more like 2.1.

More striking was the change in the fertility rate for Hispanic women. The rate plummeted to 2.4 from nearly 3 children just a few years ago.

"Whoa!" said Haub, in reaction to the statistic.

The economy is no doubt affecting Hispanic mothers, too, but some young women who immigrated to the United States for jobs or other opportunities may have left, Haub said.

[Petr]

Besides cultural factors, Marxist economic-environmental determinism could also largely explain this fall in fertility: once rural people move into cities, their children are no longer needed as farmworkers and big families become rather a financial burden. Having lots of offspring no longer "pays off" so well in the urban environment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/fertility-rate-plummets-in-brazil/2011/12/23/gIQAsOXWPP_story.html

Birth rate plummets in Brazil

By Juan Forero, Published: December 30

...

From sprawling Mexico to tiny Ecuador to economically buoyant Chile, fertility rates plummeted, even though abortion is illegal, the Catholic Church opposes birth control and government-run family planning is rare.

A frenzied migration to the cities, the expansion of the female workforce, better health care and the example of the small, affluent families portrayed on the region’s wildly popular soap operas have contributed to a demographic shift that happened so fast it caught social scientists by surprise.

In 1960, women in Latin America had almost six children on average. By 2010, the rate had fallen to 2.3 children.

“When I started out, the cutting-edge thing to do was to explain why people had lots of children,” said Joseph Potter, a demographer at the Population Research Center at the University of Texas, who began working in Latin America in the 1970s. “In fact, people were more disposed toward low fertility than we oh-so-sophisticated social scientists thought. . . . The idea that lots of children was the way to go went down the drain a lot earlier than we were prepared to realize.”

Brazil’s declining fertility rate has been particularly fascinating for demographers. This is a country of continental proportions whose population is an ethnic stew of almost 200 million. There is also a great gap between rich and poor, although millions have joined the middle class during Brazil’s recent economic expansion.

The country’s fertility rate has fallen from 6.15 children per woman in 1960 to less than 1.9 today. That is a lower rate than in any other Latin American country except Cuba, which has state-sponsored family planning and legalized abortion. It is also lower than the rate for the United States, which at 2 per woman is just enough for the population to replace itself.

Demographers were astonished that Brazil’s fertility rate fell almost uniformly from cosmopolitan Sao Paulo, with its tiny apartments and go-go economy, to Amazonian villages and the vast central farming belt.

“Brazil started coming down and had this big drop that amazed everybody, everywhere,” said Suzana Cavenaghi, a Brazilian census bureau demographer. “We wouldn’t expect that in a country that’s so diverse, with a lot of poverty in so many places and so unequal, economically speaking.”
...

Women were empowered by a pro-democracy movement that rose up against a 1970s-era military dictatorship. That dictatorship, which wanted to populate Brazil’s remote areas, inadvertently contributed to fewer births by promoting industrialization. That led rural families to crowd into cities, where a brood of children could be a financial drain.

Cavenaghi said women began to look for means of birth control, easily obtained without a prescription. Doctors in the public health service provided sterilizations, which became common, and women sought out pills that induced abortions long before those pills became the subject of controversy in the United States.
...

Marques, who is 31 and married and who doesn’t have any children, said that for many Brazilian women, the top role model is the country’s first female president, Dilma Rousseff. She went from being a daring 1960s-era Marxist guerrilla to a brainy, no-nonsense technocrat. Now Rousseff, whose only child, a daughter, is a lawyer, leads the world’s sixth-largest economy.

And it is not hard to find young women, college-educated and climbing the ladder of success, who say they may do without children.

For instance, Elisangela Batista, 37, was a banker for 10 years and now does public relations work. “I have no intention of having children,” Batista said, adding that most of her friends have one child or none. “My priority has been other things: to study, to work.”

The aspirations of Brazilian women are underscored by a report issued this month by the Center for Work-Life Policy, a think tank in New York. The report, “The Battle for Female Talent in Brazil,” says that 59 percent of Brazilian women consider themselves “very ambitious” and that 80 percent of college-educated women aspire to upper-echelon positions. U.S. women were far less likely to give those responses.

The telenovela effect

The lives of Brazil’s career women are often reflected in the country’s elaborate soaps, or telenovelas, which numerous U.S. and Brazilian researchers say have been an important factor in the drop in Brazilian fertility. The protagonists may be perpetually anguished about lost love, but they inhabit an appealing, affluent, highflying world, whose distinguishing features include the small family.

“They are all young. They live well. They are comfortable. They are beautiful,” said Maria Immacolata Vassallo de Lopes, coordinator of the Center for the Study of the Telenovela in Sao Paulo. “Why do they need children?”

[Niccolo and Donkey]

Petr, this is good stuff. Much like how Europeans went through a population boom thanks to advances in medicine in the 19th century, the 3rd world is experiencing the same boom and doing what we did: move to less populated places with greater economic opportunity because the homeland became too crowded.

As their homelands see a rise in living standards and the economy balances out with the remaining population, the need to depressurize through emigration becomes less and less.

[Macrobius]

U.S. births hit an all-time high in 2007, at more than 4.3 million. Over the next two years, the number dropped to about 4.2 million and then about 4.1 million.

This is a side note on the thread, but the reason US births peaked in 2007 would be grandchildren of the baby boom. There are a noticeable number of crying White children in stores, this Christmas season. There may be a 'rising tide of colour' here, but the echo-echo boomlet cresting still dominated the demographics -- we are a White country still.

No word at all that there is a White baby boomlet going on, and moving rapidly towards school age, in the MSM I suppose. Are we expanding school space to accommodate them?

As the saying goes, there are no anti-Darwinists. Only Darwinian theoreticians who know all about Evolution and die childless, their Race neglected, and Darwinian practitioners. The gap between theory and practice is growing every year.

[Alex_De_Large]

Bill Gates should give Africa free soap operas instead of free killer mercury laden vaccines.

[Clarence Potter]

And this just in - if I read this correctly, the Hispanic TFR has now fallen to 2,4 not just in Arizona, but in the whole of United States:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-report-birth-rates-plummet-for-young-women-as-economy-worries-likely-keep-the-stork-away/2011/11/17/gIQA9qwiUN_story.html

What does this mean long term?

The number of babies born to Hispanics dropped below 1 million in 2010, a nearly 11% drop since 2007 that reflects the tough times.Fewer people of all backgrounds are having babies because of economic concerns but the sharpest drop is among Hispanics, a booming population that contributes almost a quarter of all U.S. births and half of its population growth.
"Hispanic fertility is dropping like a stone," says Kenneth Johnson, demographer for the University of New Hampshire's Carsey Institute.

Hispanic birthrates tumbled 17.6% in three years — from 97.4 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 to 80.3 last year, according to preliminary 2010 data released this month by the National Center for Health Statistics.

Non-Hispanic whites still deliver most U.S. births. Their birthrates fell too, but at a much slower pace — down 3.7% to 58.7 per 1,000 women in 2010


The dramatic decline in births to Hispanics, who still have the highest fertility rates, raises the specter of a long-term drop in the nation's overall fertility — now higher than that of most other developed nations. It also crystallizes the impact of the economic downturn on Hispanics.

Births to Hispanics in Texas fell 7.5% since 2007 — a drop so significant that Hispanic births went from being the majority (50.2%) to less than half (48.9%), Johnson's analysis shows.

In Florida, Hispanic births dropped 15.9% and in California, they were down 7.3%.

Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies which favors controlled immigration, says lower birthrates could benefit some poor families. "Given the very high rates of poverty among Hispanic children, small families might make it easier for parents to provide for their children," he says


http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-11-27/economy-causes-drop-in-hispanic-births/51425394/1

[Columnist]

What does this mean long term?



http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-11-27/economy-causes-drop-in-hispanic-births/51425394/1
The Catholic Church imports Mexicans thinking they will stay Catholic. This is wrong.

[Clarence Potter]

The Catholic Church imports Mexicans thinking they will stay Catholic. This is wrong.

True,but what does this mean demographic wise? Will whites still end up screwed?

[Petr]

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cultural-marxism-new-threat-to-society-says-brazilian-commentator

SAO PAULO, Brazil, December 21, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Although Marxism appears to have died with the fall of the Soviet Union, it has only metamorphosed, and is now threatening culture in many nations at every level, according to one of Brazil’s best known priests.

In an exclusive video interview with LifeSiteNews, Fr. Azevedo tells LifeSiteNews that Marxists have moved into the cultural sphere following the discrediting of their economic views, and are now seeking to subvert all of the institutions of society from within.
...

In Brazil, the country with the largest Catholic population in the world, Marxists have targeted the Church, and large numbers of priests and bishops have embraced an ideology that replaces the spiritual teachings of Christ with a Marxist imitation known as “liberation theology.”

“Now what they are trying to do is to get to Christianity and change it from the inside,” said Azevedo. “So they keep the religious words, but they change the concept inside of the word.”

“When they talk about the kingdom of God, we as Christians, when we talk about the kingdom of God, we believe that you are talking about the kingdom of heaven, so you are talking about something that is not here in this world.”

“Well, they start saying that we are working here for the kingdom of God, and we want to bring about the kingdom here in this world. So in reality what they are talking about is the socialist society that they dream, the utopia that they think is going tho happen, is the kingdom of God.”

“They use the same words. It sounds like something Catholic, like something Christian, but at the same time you realize there is something strange about it, because there is something missing, and what is missing is everything that relates to the transcendental, to heaven, to life after death. Everything they do is they apply here on Earth.”
...

Citizens of Brazil and the United States are disarmed in the face of cultural Marxism, said Azevedo, because they naively believe that Marxism died with the fall of the Soviet Union.

[Warka]

Fr. Azevedo is correct.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Bill Gates should give Africa free soap operas instead of free killer mercury laden vaccines.
Bill Gates is honoring Africans with sacred Jewish rituals.

[Kodos]

I can't believe anyone takes this kookery about vaccines seriously, flu vaccines don't work but they pretty much wiped out polio smallpox and a lot of other diseases in the civilized world. They might have side effects but they have worked spectaculary well.

[Petr]

Brazil may be turning from an immigrant-sending country to a immigrant-receiving one. Already now, many migrants from Peru, Bolivia and Paraguay are heading to Brazil instead of North America (http://www.wibw.com/home/headlines/Booming_Brazil_Lures_Immigrant_Workers_136109558.html):

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/02/world/la-fg-brazil-return-20110902

"It's hard to get specific numbers," said Eduardo Gradilone Neto, undersecretary-general for Brazilian Communities Abroad at the Foreign Ministry. "But we're seeing that a significant part of what we call the Brazilian diaspora is coming home, because there are comparatively so much more opportunities here than there were five or 10 years ago."

He said Brazilians began emigrating in large numbers in the 1990s, when opportunities in Europe and the United States looked attractive compared with the economic problems in their homeland. At one point, he said, 3 million Brazilians were living abroad, many of them the young people who are the country's future. "That was the trend until 2008, when we saw the crisis in the developed countries."

About a third of the Brazilians living in Japan, for which there are official numbers because of a special visa agreement, have returned since 2008, Gradilone said.

"We wouldn't be surprised to see that a similar ratio of the community living in the U.S. had returned," he said. "And in the communities that we historically expected to see emigration, now instead of going to the U.S. or Europe, they tend to go to other Brazilian cities."

Over the last decade, Brazil has increased its trade ties with China, which has overtaken the U.S. as the country's main trading partner. High prices for commodities such as iron ore and soy have powered Brazil's economic boom, as have stable macroeconomic conditions and soaring consumer demand.

Strict banking regulations meant that Brazil was relatively unscathed by the 2008 crisis. In the years since the global meltdown, the growth has been most remarkable in the country's traditionally poorer regions, such as the northeastern state of Bahia, whose largest city, Salvador, was the capital of Brazil in early colonial times.

http://www.brazzil.com/component/content/article/238-october-2011/10526-americans-and-brazilian-immigrants-flock-south-in-search-of-brazilian-dream.html

Due to a historically low unemployment rate of 6 percent and earnings back home that have risen 170 percent since 1999, Brazilian immigrants are returning to their native construction, manufacturing, and service industries, which in the United States have been crippled by the ongoing effects of the recession.

Despite the global economic downturn, in 2008, the Brazilian economy rebounded quickly and has maintained steady growth. Brazil now leads Latin America with the world's seventh largest economy, rising to prominence on the global stage.

During the economic turmoil of the 1980s that swept Latin America, many Brazilians emigrated to the United States in hopes of achieving their own versions of the "American Dream:" an idealistic goal no longer possible in today's stagnant U.S. economy.

Subsequently, the Brazilian Diaspora is now beginning to return home for better economic opportunities. Recently, airlines have noted that a higher number of Brazilian migrants are now purchasing one-way tickets during the winter months when the need for U.S. manual labor slows down.

As the number of Brazilians flocking home increases, the population of Brazilians in the U.S. decreases. According to the Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, the amount of legal permanent residents who emigrated from Brazil to the U.S. has decreased from 14,701 residents in 2009 to 12,057 in 2010.

As Brazilians return home for better employment opportunities, U.S. citizens have followed suit, seeking the benefits of a potential "Brazilian Dream".

Americans are arriving in Brazil with a gold-rush mentality, determined to make profit. In the first six months of 2010, more than 4,300 U.S. citizens received working visas from Brazil's labor ministry, an increase of twenty percent over the previous year alone.

U.S. bankers, hedge fund managers, oil executives, and engineers have fled to large metropolitan cities such as Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo in search of jobs. U.S. and foreign investors have been particularly attracted to Brazil's oil discoveries. Meanwhile, the demand for jobs in information technology industries is also high.

Brazil still needs about 60,000 new engineers and as a result the government has been soliciting U.S. and other foreigner workers to fill these needed skilled positions. Jobs in mining, infrastructure, retail, and finance have also attracted trained workers from all around the world.

According to the New York Times, salaries in Brazil "are at least 50 percent more than salaries in the U.S. for strategic positions." Last year, Brazil's economy increased 7.5 percent and is expected to grow by four percent this year.

Despite the more favorable opportunities found in Brazil, US citizens heading south will face issues not encountered in the States. These include an overheating of the Brazilian economy and the high appreciation of the Brazilian real. Americans also have to compete for jobs with homeward-bound Brazilians as labor legislation favors hiring a Brazilian worker over a foreigner.

[Columnist]

Low birthrates, gay marriage, and now immigration, Brazil becomes the new Europe.

[RuneX2]

Brazil's Falling Birth Rate: A 'New Way Of Thinking'

Brazil has undergone a demographic shift so dramatic that it has astonished social scientists. Over the past 50 years, the fertility rate has tumbled from six children per woman on average to fewer than two — and is now lower than in the United States.

Demographers say the fertility rate is declining because the country is richer and more urban, but they also point to Brazil's hugely popular soap operas and their portrayal of small, glamorous families.Brazil's Falling Birth Rate: A 'New Way Of Thinking' (http://www.npr.org/2012/01/15/145133220/brazils-falling-birth-rate-a-new-way-of-thinking)

- now if only India and southern African got the message, then it would be swell.

[Columnist]

Brazil's Falling Birth Rate: A 'New Way Of Thinking' (http://www.npr.org/2012/01/15/145133220/brazils-falling-birth-rate-a-new-way-of-thinking)

- now if only India and southern African got the message, then it would be swell.
Kerala wants a two-child policy. As long as southern Africa doesn't get the message, all other regions could gang up against them.

[Petr]

According to latest census, the population growth of Nepal is rapidly slowing:

http://www.census.gov.np/

Central Bureau of Statistics has released the preliminary result of the National Population Census 2011 on September 27, 2011 in a program held in Lalitpur. According to preliminary result of the National Population Census 2011 released by CBS among the higher government official s, development partners and media, the population of Nepal reached 26,620,809 in the year 2011 which shows an increase of population at the rate of 1.4 percent per annum. According to the National Population Census 2001, the population growth rate of Nepal was 2.25 percent per annum.
...

Furthermore, the result also revealed that the size of the household in Nepal has decreased from 5.44 in 2001 to 4.7 in 2011.
And this in spite of Nepal still being a very poor and rural country:

The urban population of Nepal constitutes about 17 percent of the total population in 2011 compared to 14 percent urban population in 2001. Likewise the rural population of Nepal decreased from 86 percent in 2001 to 83 percent in 2011.
Nepal's per capita GDP is at the same level as Mali, and lower than that of Uganda:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html?countryName=Nepal&countryCode=np&regionCode=sas&rank=206#np

203 Uganda $ 1,300 2010 est.

206 Nepal $ 1,200 2010 est.
So an average Ugandan presently earns more than an average Nepalese, and yet Ugandan women have about 6,7 children each, and Nepalese women only about 2,5. This shows that economics are not everything.

Btw, not even all African countries are like Uganda. Take Ghana, for example:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gh.html

Total fertility rate:
3.48 children born/woman (2011 est.)

GDP - per capita (PPP):
$2,500 (2010 est.)

[Petr]

Another update - PR's TFR is now apparently about 1,6 children per woman:

http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news03.php?nt_id=64955&ct_id=1&ct_name=1

Puerto Rico’s population was pegged at 3,725,789 in the 2010 count, down from the 3,808,610 residents registered in the 2000 Census. It marks the first time the island population has declined between census counts. The 2010 Census also showed that there are 4.7 million Puerto Ricans living in the States.
...

Puerto Rico’s birth rate fell to 11.3 births per 1,000 total population in 2010, according to preliminary estimates released by the federal Centers for Disease Control this month.

The birth rate was 12.4 at the start of the island island’s economic recession in 2006. Only seven states have lower birth rates.

Meanwhile, the fertility rate in Puerto Rico was 54.3 in 2010, down from 57.2 in 2006. The fertility rate is the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years. Only four states had lower fertility rates in 2010.

There were 41,159 births in Puerto Rico in 2010, down from 48,597 births in 2006.

[Petr]

According to the CIA Factbook, Hugo Chavez's realm is also beginning to approach the replacement level:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ve.html

Total fertility rate:
2.4 children born/woman (2012 est.)
The just-in results from Venezuela's 2011 census (http://www.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/120223/ine-census-shows-over-27-million-people-in-venezuela) clearly confirm this trend: the average age of population has rapidly risen during the last two decades, while the percentage of children has fallen:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/6698

He said that among the most interesting information found by the census was the decrease in the number of inhabitants per household, which dropped from 5.29 to 3.08 people. Meanwhile, the average age of the population has increased from 18 years of age to 26 years of age.
...

Additionally, Eljuri said that the INE has registered a decrease in the number of people under 14 years old between 1991 and 2011, from 39 percent to 27.6 percent. The proportion of citizens over the age of 65 has increased from 3.5 to 5.9 percent.

[Columnist]

According to the CIA Factbook, Hugo Chavez's realm is also beginning to approach the replacement level:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ve.html


The just-in results from Venezuela's 2011 census (http://www.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/120223/ine-census-shows-over-27-million-people-in-venezuela) clearly confirm this trend: the average age of population has rapidly risen during the last two decades, while the percentage of children has fallen:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/6698
As I said, South America becomes the new Europe.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

Joke:

What's the difference between a black man and a large pizza?
A large pizza can feed a family of four.

[Clarence Potter]

Once-burgeoning Latino population growth rate dips in many U.S. cities

eporting from Washington and Los Angeles -- For years, America's growing and mobile Latino population helped transform cities such as Atlanta and Las Vegas as well as many smaller communities. But the deep recession slowed this great dispersion, a new analysis shows, raising economic and political implications.

Between 2000 and 2010, the nation's Latino population jumped 43% to 50.5 million, growing especially fast throughout the South and in smaller metropolitan areas in the Midwest and Northeast. The Latino populations more than tripled in such places as Palm Coast, Fla., Knoxville, Tenn., and Wausau, Wis. Job opportunities and an influx of new immigrants from Mexico and Latin America helped drive the boom.

But with the economic downturn that began in 2007, the meltdown of the housing market and a slowdown of new foreign arrivals, many of these same communities have seen the Latino growth rates flatten out.

Of 107 metro areas where the number of Latinos doubled between 2000 and 2010, almost all showed a slowdown in population growth by the end of the decade, according to William Frey, a Brookings Institution demographer who analyzed recently updated figures from the Census Bureau.

"It's kind of stopped on a dime," said Frey, author of the new report released Tuesday. "The big turndown in growth is pervasive."

He pointed to such cities as Florida's Palm Coast, a community of about 100,000 whose Latino population surged 19% annually for three years in the middle of the last decade. It rose by just 1.9% in 2010. The Latino growth rate in St. George, Utah, a community of about 73,000, fell from more than 15% in both 2005 and 2006 to 3.3% in 2010. And similar declines occurred in other cities, including Anderson, S.C., and Bend, Ore.

Los Angeles, New York and other major metropolitan areas that have long served as gateways and hubs for immigrants still notched small upticks in Latino growth rates at the end of the decade. In fact, the Latino population in the Los Angeles area, which was flat in 2006 at the peak of the housing market nationally, expanded by 1.5% in 2010. New York showed a similar pattern; its Latino growth slowed in the middle of the decade but was up by 2.4% in 2010.

The reason is that many Latinos who had left the big metropolitan areas to find jobs and cheaper housing in smaller cities earlier in the decade returned to those big cities during the tough economic times, Frey said.

Those gateway cities are "the anchors for new minorities, places where friends and relatives are ready to take in kids, provide social and financial support when times are bad," he said.

He said it was unclear whether the broad distribution of Latinos across the country that occurred through much of the last decade would resume in coming years.

For many places, the question isn't just academic. As Latino populations boomed in many communities in past years, they often brought an influx of labor and a potential new base of customers for retailers and other industries.

"Since both low- and high-skilled Hispanic workers will be important for future economic growth, it will be essential to find ways to restart their migration once the economy revives," Frey said.

There may be political repercussions as well.

The new analysis suggests that political leaders counting on an increasingly large bloc of Latino voters to support their candidates and causes — particularly in the Midwest and the Southeast — may be disappointed.

"They may make less of a difference than people thought," Frey said.

Beyond its focus on Latinos, the report also examined overall population growth for the nation's 100 largest metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2010, showing that the recession slowed or stopped two decades worth of growth for some cities.


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-latino-cities-20120320,0,2935311.story

[Petr]

So an average Ugandan presently earns more than an average Nepalese, and yet Ugandan women have about 6,7 children each, and Nepalese women only about 2,5. This shows that economics are not everything.
Places like Uganda are in many ways "the last frontier" of population control. But we can see that demographic transformation is beginning there as well - and the general rule also holds in Uganda that city-dwellers have a much lower birthrate than peasants:

http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17489:-baby-deaths-down-as-uganda-makes-healthy-progress&catid=34:news&Itemid=114

After more than 15 years of stagnation in Uganda's key health indicators, there's some light. Preliminary results of the 2011 Uganda Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS) released by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) last week reveal that Uganda has made a significant achievement, especially in the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) - the number of children who die before their first birthday - from 76 to 54 deaths per 1,000 between 2006 and 2011.
...

The average number of birth per woman only decreased from 6.7 to 6.2, and this was mainly driven by trends in urban areas where fertility decreased from 4.4 to 3.8 children per woman in the past five years. This compares unfavourably to neighbours like Rwanda which reduced fertility levels from 6.1 to 4.8 births per woman during 2005-2010.
To put things in perspective, Uganda's TFR is now roughly where Mexico's TFR was back in the mid-1970s. If the country's fertility continues to decline at this rate, it would be at two children per woman by 2053.

[Clarence Potter]

And this just in - if I read this correctly, the Hispanic TFR has now fallen to 2,4 not just in Arizona, but in the whole of United States:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_02.pdf

As of 2010 the fertility rates of the United States by race:

Whole United States: 1,932.0

Non-Hispanic white: 1,791.0

Non-Hispanic black: 1,971.5

American Indian or Alaska Native: 1,404.0

Asian or Pacific Islander: 1,689.5

Hispanic: 2,352.5

[Columnist]

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_02.pdf

As of 2010 the fertility rates of the United States by race:

Whole United States: 1,932.0

Non-Hispanic white: 1,791.0

Non-Hispanic black: 1,971.5

American Indian or Alaska Native: 1,404.0

Asian or Pacific Islander: 1,689.5

Hispanic: 2,352.5
So, despite a higher rate of abortion, the percentage of the Afro-American population grows. This means the Whites use more birth control, severing the link between abortion and birth control many Catholics consider almost axiomatic.

[Columnist]

Places like Uganda are in many ways "the last frontier" of population control. But we can see that demographic transformation is beginning there as well - and the general rule also holds in Uganda that city-dwellers have a much lower birthrate than peasants:

http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17489:-baby-deaths-down-as-uganda-makes-healthy-progress&catid=34:news&Itemid=114


To put things in perspective, Uganda's TFR is now roughly where Mexico's TFR was back in the mid-1970s. If the country's fertility continues to decline at this rate, it would be at two children per woman by 2053.
I think that in many places the demographic transformation is beginning to reverse. Israel for example.

[Petr]

This means the Whites use more birth control, severing the link between abortion and birth control many Catholics consider almost axiomatic.
It does indeed seem that even though American Blacks (and Hispanics also, to a lesser extent) use abortion much more often than Whites, Whites instead employ contraception so much more that they have lower TFR in spite of their much smaller abortion-rate.

Blacks are hugely and Hispanics slightly over-represented in abortion statistics, while Whites are under-represented roughly by half considering their 2004 portion of America's population:

http://www.guttmacher.org/graphics/gpr1103/Who-has-abortions.gif

Overall, however, black women are three times as likely as white women to experience an unintended pregnancy; Hispanic women are twice as likely.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/11/3/gpr110302.html

I believe that if welfare-money would no longer be generously distributed to colored low-class ghetto types, they too would quickly learn to use contraceptives more often, as children then would no longer represent an economic benefit but a burden for them (as things now generally are among Whites).

[Columnist]

I believe that if welfare-money would no longer be generously distributed to colored low-class ghetto types, they too would quickly learn to use contraceptives more often, as children then would no longer represent an economic benefit but a burden for them (as things now generally are among Whites).
Truism, but Third Rail in the Two-Party System. But the main reason children are a burden to the Middle-Class, is because Middle-Class parents think it is mandatory to give their children all sorts of stuff. If you raised your children as a ghetto-dweller, everybody would crash down on you.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

I think that in many places the demographic transformation is beginning to reverse. Israel for example.
People are saying that Israel is in fact turning into an Arab country. At least from what I've seen all the jooz there speak Arabic, eat Arabic food and most of the politicians there have adopted Arabic-sounding last names in order to cover up their pasts and mix into the middle-eastern ethos.

[Clarence Potter]

So, despite a higher rate of abortion, the percentage of the Afro-American population grows.

They Black population is growing because of immigration and a younger population if i'm not mistaken. Non-hispanic whites are growing as well....just at a much slower pace than the other races.

If these trends continue Hispanics birth rates could be below replacement level in just 3-5 years.

The Hispanic TFR is declining extremely fast. Last year their TFR was 2.5 and in just one years time it dropped by 0.2 to 2.3!

I'm predicting that within 3-4 years hispanics will be around 1.8-2.0 in birth rates. Whites will continue to decline in % but at a much slower pace if these trends continue. The decline in % will come mostly from immigration and young non-white populations.

I don't know how this will effect 'whites will be minority by 2050' predictions,but this is damn good news.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

They Black population is growing because of immigration and a younger population if i'm not mistaken. Non-hispanic whites are growing as well....just at a much slower pace than the other races.

If these trends continue Hispanics birth rates could be below replacement level in just 3-5 years.

The Hispanic TFR is declining extremely fast. Last year their TFR was 2.5 and in just one years time it dropped by 0.2 to 2.3!

I'm predicting that within 3-4 years hispanics will be around 1.8-2.0 in birth rates. Whites will continue to decline in % but at a much slower pace if these trends continue. The decline in % will come mostly from immigration and young non-white populations.

I don't know how this will effect 'whites will be minority by 2050' predictions,but this is damn good news.
If you're the type of racist that says White men should make lots of White babies and increase the physical presence of the White race on earth, then yes this is good news.

[catfish]

People are saying that Israel is in fact turning into an Arab country. At least from what I've seen all the jooz there speak Arabic, eat Arabic food and most of the politicians there have adopted Arabic-sounding last names in order to cover up their pasts and mix into the middle-eastern ethos.

A lot of Israeli Jews are imitating arabic customs because they believe the false propaganda that they are of Semitic heritage, basically they are trying to get in touch with their Semitic roots by adopting the customs of the real Semites(the local arabs). But in reality the majority of Israeli Jews are not of Semitic heritage. In reality they are of Khazar heritage and the Khazars were a Aryan tribe that practiced a somewhat mongol culture.

The true Aryan culture is in India and is found in hinduism. If Jews really want to explore their roots they need to examine Aryan culture because the majority of Jews are of Aryan heritage. Basically Jews should study hinduism.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

If Jews really want to explore their roots they need to examine Aryan culture because the majority of Jews are of Aryan heritage.
Northern Europe is a long way from Mongolia. Do you have any evidence for your claim?

[catfish]

I am convinced the Khazars were an Aryan tribe who practiced a mongol culture. Khazars in old manuscripts were described as having red hair and blue eyes.

Al Maghribi said: “As to the Khazars, they are to the north of the inhabited earth towards the 7th clime, having over their heads the constellation of the plough. Their land is cold and wet, their eyes blue, their hair flowing and predominantly reddish, their bodies large and their natures cold. Their general aspect is wild”.

[catfish]

The Khazars fought, made alliances and interbred with peoples like the Viking Rus (who became the Russians) and the Magyars with whom they had extremely close relations. The Khazars were instrumental in the creation of the Magyar homeland of Hungary. Names like the Russian Cossack and the Hungarian Hussar came from 'Khazar', as did the German for heretic, Ketzer.8

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/tales_timeloop/tales_timeloop04.htm

The quote in my previous post is from the above link too.

[Kuniklo Nigra]

I am convinced the Khazars were an Aryan tribe who practiced a mongol culture. Khazars in old manuscripts were described as having red hair and blue eyes.
Genghis Khan had red hair and blue eyes, and he's the very definition of Mongolian (he fathered 6% of the entire Chinese population).

[Stoic_Cynic]

The true Aryan culture is in India and is found in hinduism. If Jews really want to explore their roots they need to examine Aryan culture because the majority of Jews are of Aryan heritage. Basically Jews should study hinduism.I am convinced that the true Aryan culture originated in the Black Sea region and that the remnants of it in India are merely the debased remnants of southward migration.

[Columnist]

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/tales_timeloop/tales_timeloop04.htm

The quote in my previous post is from the above link too.
The Khazars were instrumental in the creation of the Magyar homeland of Hungary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabar

The Khavars (Greek: Κάβαροι) or erroneously[1] Kabars were Khazarians, therefore Turkic people who joined to the Magyars (Hungarians) in the 8th century.
They consisted of three Khazar tribes who rebelled against the Khazar Khaganate some time in the ninth century; the rebellion was notable enough to be described in Constantine Porphyrogenitus's work De Administrando Imperio. Subsequently the Khavars were expelled from the Khazar Khaganate and sought refuge by joining the Magyar tribal confederacy called Hét-Magyar (meaning "seven" Hungarians). The three Khavar tribes accompanied the Magyar invasion of Pannonia and the subsequent formation of the Principality of Hungary in the late 9th century.[2]

Around 833 the Hungarian tribal confederacy was living in Levedia, between the Don and the Dnieper rivers, within the clientele of the Khazar empire. Toward 850 or 860, driven from Levedia by the Pechenegs, they entered Atelkuzu (Etelköz). The Magyars reached the Danube river basin around 880. Shortly afterward, the Byzantine emperor Leo VI, being then at war with Simeon, the Bulgarian czar, called the Hungarians to his aid. The Magyars, led by Árpád, crossed the Danube and put Bulgaria to fire and the sword. But the Bulgarians then appealed to the Pechenegs, now masters of the steppe, who attacked the Hungarians in the rear and forced them to take refuge in the mountains of Transylvania. At that moment, Arnulf, king of Germania, at war with the Slav ruler Svatopluk, king of Great Moravia, decided like the Byzantine to appeal to the Hungarians. The Hungarians came in haste and overcame Svatopluk, who disappeared in the conflict (895). Great Moravia collapsed, and the Hungarians took up permanent abode in Hungary (907).
The origin of the name Hungary is believed to originate from the Utigur Bulgar tribal confederacy named On-Ogur, (meaning "ten" Ogurs) (comparable to Tokuz-Oguz (meaning "nine" Oguz)), who ruled the territory of Hungary prior to the arrival of the Magyars.

Many Khavars settled in the Bihar region of the later Kingdom of Hungary and Transylvania. Some historian believe that the character recorded by Gesta Hungarorum as lord Marot and his grandson Menumorut, dux of Biharia, were of Khavar descent[citation needed]. One of the names on the Kievian Letter is "Kiabar", which may suggest that Khavars settled in Kiev as well. At least some Khavars were Jewish; others may have been Christians, Muslims or shamanists.[3]

The presence of a Turkic aristocracy among the Hungarians could explain the Byzantine protocol by which, in the exchange of ambassadors under Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Hungarian rulers were always referred to as "Princes of the Turks".[4]

The Khavars eventually assimilated into the general Hungarian population, leaving scattered remains and some cultural and linguistic imprints. Some scholars[citation needed] believe that the Székely are their descendants