Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And here's the 2014 estimates for 2050 vs. the 1996 estimates for 2050. Notice that the number of minorities has actually trended upward with each new update: National Population Projections - People and Households - U.S. Census Bureau (1995 to 2050 Population Projections based on 1990 Census (released 1996)), page 88 (96).
The estimates are very stable considering the span of nearly 20 years between Census projections. So 4.2 million change is pretty small. But what's huge is the massive decline in the projected White population. In 1996, the Census estimated that the U.S. would have 208 million Whites in 2050. It now estimates just 188 million non-Hispanic Whites (a decline of 20 million!). The Hispanic population, meanwhile, has gone up by 10 million! Considering the White drug epidemic in many parts of the Heartland, the White population could post even bigger declines than projected, which be a horrible tragedy on many fronts (I want a U.S. of 500 million people), but would also mean that racial change will come even faster. Pretty interesting numbers overall, but few countries in the world are seeing the scale of demographic change taking place in the USA right now. There are also massive ideological and cultural differences between White elders and White youth, with the latter being a lot more tolerant and progressive than the former.
I am familiar with the area from New Mexico to California as well. Every place has its nuances but overall as I mentioned I was still surprised at the pervasiveness of English. Not that I should have been. It's the U.S. after all. But with all of the talk about so many places that have become Spanish dominant... one wonders sometimes.
None of these places is like Puerto Rico, for example. Or highly francophone places in the so-called "Anglo-Canada" like Hawkesbury, Ontario or Edmundston, New Brunswick.
I never said it was the same. In fact, I remember stating that I knew it wasn't. What I am disputing is the dismissive attitude that it's just like it was with previous linguistic groups which it clearly isn't.
Because I've been a student (officially and unofficially) of language policy and politics for about 30 years.
As such, I have a pretty good idea of how language policy and practice works in the Aaland Islands of Finland, or the Valle d'Aosta in Italy, let alone Canada and the U.S.
The Ã…land Islands are unilingual Swedish. I hoped you knew that. Mainland Finland is bilingual.
And here's the 2014 estimates for 2050 vs. the 1996 estimates for 2050. Notice that the number of minorities has actually trended upward with each new update: National Population Projections - People and Households - U.S. Census Bureau (1995 to 2050 Population Projections based on 1990 Census (released 1996)), page 88 (96).
The estimates are very stable considering the span of nearly 20 years between those projections. So 4.2 million change is pretty small. But what's huge is the massive decline in the projected White population. In 1996, the Census estimated that the U.S. would have 208 million Whites in 2050. It now estimates just 188 million non-Hispanic Whites (a decline of 20 million!). The Hispanic population, meanwhile, has gone up by 10 million! Considering the White drug epidemic in many parts of the Heartland, the White population could post even bigger declines than projected, which be a horrible tragedy on many fronts (I want a U.S. of 500 million people), but would also mean that racial change will come even faster. Pretty interesting numbers overall, but few countries in the world are seeing the scale of demographic change taking place in the USA right now. There are also massive ideological and cultural differences between White elders and White youth, with the latter being a lot more tolerant and progressive than the former.
It is interesting to compare projections with almost 2 decades of difference.
They had no mixed race numbers?
I will speak about %.
It is interesting Asian % is similar. So in 90s projection they correctly guessed Asian immigration will increase.
They underestimated Latinos/probably expected immigration to slow down.
They overestimated Blacks. Not sure if it is, because of category mixed/that many African Americans end up with other non black partners and their children are mixed or also there was strong immigration from Black Caribbean in 80s and 90s and this somehow skewed their prediction. But from other perspective immigration from subsaharan Africa was much smaller than it was in times of that 2nd projection in 2014.
In case of non hispanic whites not much to say, just typical exaggerated numbers. This is the case everywhere. I have seen older Canadian, Australian, German, French, British or Russian projections for next decades and they all exaggerated white or ethnical % of domestic population. In case of France it was just some estimation by NGO I think (they banned race, religion, ethnicity data).
There is very limited european immigration, while in the 90s there at least were Russians, Ukrainians, Poles coming in. Obviously birthrates are another factor. America at least has higher birthrates than most of other western countries, but if we would break it down than i asume only Asians have similarly low birthrates as non hispanic whites/which can change with Asians from poorer and less developdd countries will immigrate in larger numbers/from countries with higher TFR numbers.
Look at old Canadian or Australian statistics, how much their population increased and changed in last few decades, so logically every year new prediction for the future must calculate with higher % for visible minorities (canadian term).
The same France, they had Maghrebis for long time, but 20 year old prediction wasn t calculating with such influx from subsaharan Africa, Germans had Turks, Yugos but also older predictions didn t expect so called refugee wave and Schengen area economic migrants.
In case of Russia prediction from 90s had many Caucasians (Caucasus) and many ethnic Russians immigrating. Now immigration of ethnic Russians is minimal and there are millions of Central Asians.
It is interesting to compare projections with almost 2 decades of difference.
They had no mixed race numbers?
I will speak about %.
It is interesting Asian % is similar. So in 90s projection they correctly guessed Asian immigration will increase.
They underestimated Latinos/probably expected immigration to slow down.
They overestimated Blacks. Not sure if it is, because of category mixed/that many African Americans end up with other non black partners and their children are mixed or also there was strong immigration from Black Caribbean in 80s and 90s and this somehow skewed their prediction. But from other perspective immigration from subsaharan Africa was much smaller than it was in times of that 2nd projection in 2014.
In case of non hispanic whites not much to say, just typical exaggerated numbers. This is the case everywhere. I have seen older Canadian, Australian, German, French, British or Russian projections for next decades and they all exaggerated white or ethnical % of domestic population. In case of France it was just some estimation by NGO I think (they banned race, religion, ethnicity data).
There is very limited european immigration, while in the 90s there at least were Russians, Ukrainians, Poles coming in. Obviously birthrates are another factor. America at least has higher birthrates than most of other western countries, but if we would break it down than i asume only Asians have similarly low birthrates as non hispanic whites/which can change with Asians from poorer and less developdd countries will immigrate in larger numbers/from countries with higher TFR numbers.
Look at old Canadian or Australian statistics, how much their population increased and changed in last few decades, so logically every year new prediction for the future must calculate with higher % for visible minorities (canadian term).
The same France, they had Maghrebis for long time, but 20 year old prediction wasn t calculating with such influx from subsaharan Africa, Germans had Turks, Yugos but also older predictions didn t expect so called refugee wave and Schengen area economic migrants.
In case of Russia prediction from 90s had many Caucasians (Caucasus) and many ethnic Russians immigrating. Now immigration of ethnic Russians is minimal and there are millions of Central Asians.
Note, these are projections, not estimates. The difference is that estimates use historical data, projections don't. See footnote 5 at bottom.
The Census Bureau comes out with new projection every couple of years.
On Asians specifically, I read a couple of years ago that they were now the fastest growing segment, in part because after the 2007 recession the increasing number of Hispanics, particularly Mexicans leaving the US offset those newly arriving. That could obviously swing back the other way in a few years.
Also notable that by 2060, natural deaths will be much closer to natural births, and the county will be relying much more on immigration for population and economic growth than it does today.
Since 1963, when the current rules were adopted, between 6 and 8 million people apply for permanent legal residence (Green Card Status) every year, and about 1 million are granted. They consist of about 500,000 already here on temporary status, and 500,000 new immigrants.
If all the 300 million or so, who've been denied permanent residence since 1963 had been admitted, and had created 200 million offspring, not unreasonable, the US population today would be north of 800 M and likely pushing 1B by 2060.
I never said it was the same. In fact, I remember stating that I knew it wasn't. What I am disputing is the dismissive attitude that it's just like it was with previous linguistic groups which it clearly isn't.
I don't disagree what that last point, though I think it will likely only delay the inevitable.
Again, when it comes to "surprise", I am surprised at how quickly Spanish is being lots integenerationally by so many hispanics in the US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
