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.
It has been pointed out that the UN promotes numbers which are unsupported by math. You introduce a good example. A country with a fertility rate of 1.8 will not grow its population. The population will shrink. The UN attempts to support its figures by extending the life expectancy and they end up with an average life expectancy of 85.6 - a figure not attained by any country on earth today.
Those numbers you quoted are for the United States, not for Brazil. And yes the population can keep growing by immigration.
I would state that this projection cannot be very reliable since projecting immigration rates for the next 4 decades is nearly impossible.
Quote:
(2021) Midyear Population 335.0 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate 0.7%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.84
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 80.4
(2051) Midyear Population 390.4 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate 0.4%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.84
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 84.6
(2060) Midyear Population 404.5 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate 0.4%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.83
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 85.6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307
A country with a fertility rate of 1.8 will not grow its population. The population will shrink.
Now these are the numbers for Brazil which has a TFR of 1.73 while the population is expected to still grow more than 20 million before it starts to decline. Unlike the US there is not a significant net immigration into Brazil.
In Brazil there is a more significant increase in Life Expectency (I think these projections were all done pre-COVID). Even though the TFR is 1.73 the TFR is by definition for all women of all ages. If the average of the women is still young, you still get population growth. This effect is often called "population inertia".
The average of Brazilians is 33.5, while the average age of people in the United States is 38.5 with the median age in Utah 31.2 while it is 45.1 in Maine.
Quote:
Brazil (2021) Midyear Population 213.4 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate 0.7%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.73
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 75.0
Brazil (2050) Midyear Population 236.0 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate 0.0%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.70
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 81.9
Brazil (2060) Midyear Population 234.8 Million
Average Annual Growth Rate -0.1%
Total Fertility Rate (Births per woman) 1.70
Life Expectancy at Birth, Both Sexes (Years) 83.8
Frankly, I would be surprised if US can hold it down, given the mass migration north from failed or nearly failed economies in the south.
USA will do fine. The rest of the world will not, and that indicates maybe a couple of things: I am thinking maybe trouble with supply chain since so many countries, Asian and European, are part of the US supply chain.
The other thing that occurs to me is a net positive in that our huge standing military may no longer be necessary. As large, trouble making governments fail they will be unable to fund their large military and over time the whole US military industrial bureaucracy may just go away.
Somehow, someway congress needs to make immigration law that makes sense and delivers young workers who can be used all over America. There is no hope for that happening with this current congress of clowns, but maybe some day in the future. Officially, congress has allowed for only 675,000 immigrants per year and that is inadequate to meet the needs of business as they try to replace aging workers.
I don't see that happening. Powerful countries don't tend to disarm and give up their dominance.
The U.S. will find many uses for a large and well equipped armed forces in future decades. If Venezuela totally collapses, for example, we may end up flying care packages in from carriers stationed off the coast, as we did in Indonesia after Typhoon Haiyan in 2012. It's always the United States that steps in.
I suspect as the world stumbles towards the 22nd Century, there's going to be plenty of need for armies. Of course, as AI and robotics advance, those armies may be totally non-human. Scary thought.
Those numbers you quoted are for the United States, not for Brazil. And yes the population can keep growing by immigration.
I would state that this projection cannot be very reliable since projecting immigration rates for the next 4 decades is nearly impossible.
Now these are the numbers for Brazil which has a TFR of 1.73 while the population is expected to still grow more than 20 million before it starts to decline. Unlike the US there is not a significant net immigration into Brazil.
In Brazil there is a more significant increase in Life Expectency (I think these projections were all done pre-COVID). Even though the TFR is 1.73 the TFR is by definition for all women of all ages. If the average of the women is still young, you still get population growth. This effect is often called "population inertia".
The average of Brazilians is 33.5, while the average age of people in the United States is 38.5 with the median age in Utah 31.2 while it is 45.1 in Maine.
Well, that was dang stupid of me.......... Why did I get the idea we were talking Brazil?
Right. US population will grow due to immigration.
I don't see that happening. Powerful countries don't tend to disarm and give up their dominance.................
Broke countries do, though. And I am projecting an aging and broke China and Russia, who will then fade off into history like so many others including The British Empire, The Ottomans, Japan, and going further back in history, Spain and Portugal.
Well, that was dang stupid of me.......... Why did I get the idea we were talking Brazil?
Brazil's population will still grow an additional 20 million even though TFR is already well below 1.8 and with no appreciable immigration.
It's called "population momentum". Even though the TFR is below replacement level there are enough young women getting pregnant while at the same time the expected life expectancy is increasing that the population is still growing.
Sub replacement fertility simply tells you in the long term there is no "natural growth". It may take decades, but eventually deaths will outnumber births in a closed system with no immigration.
Brazil's population will still grow an additional 20 million even though TFR is already well below 1.8 and with no appreciable immigration.
It's called "population momentum". Even though the TFR is below replacement level there are enough young women getting pregnant while at the same time the expected life expectancy is increasing that the population is still growing.
Sub replacement fertility simply tells you in the long term there is no "natural growth". It may take decades, but eventually deaths will outnumber births in a closed system with no immigration.
I can understand that, readily enough.
I have not seen any source that claims the population has already peaked, but I am certain we will see reports in a few years as Baby Boomers die. Baby Boomers are a world wide phenomenon, just as WW2 was. They are now reaching their 75th birthday, so the great die-off will begin soon.
3.4M births were recorded in US during 1946. Today, there are only slightly more than that even though the population now is 330M and then was 140M.
The Baby Boom population bulge reminds me of the "pig through a python" analogy.
It is certainly quite different than the movies predicted when I was a kid.
The Population Reference Bureau made these projections in 2006.
Ukraine: 0.8% natural decrease annually; 28% total population decrease by 2050
Russia: -0.6%; -22%
Belarus: -0.6%; -12%
Bulgaria: -0.5%; -34%
Latvia: -0.5%; -23%
Lithuania: -0.4%; -15%
Hungary: -0.3%; -11%
Romania: -0.2%; -29%
Estonia: -0.2%; -23%
Moldova: -0.2%; -21%
Croatia: -0.2%; -14%
Germany: -0.2%; -9%
Czech Republic: -0.1%; -8% Japan: 0%; -21%
Poland: 0%; -17%
Slovakia: 0%; -12%
Austria: 0%; 8% increase
Italy: 0%; -5%
Slovenia: 0%; -5%
Greece: 0%; -4%
Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is not measured directly like birth rate or death rate. If death rate = net immigration rate + birth rate then you are presently at Zero Population Growth. TFR is an indirect calculation that predicts the long term natural growth. However how long it will take to get to ZPG depends age related fertility rates
Last edited by PacoMartin; 08-04-2021 at 09:37 AM..
Prediction: depopulated Tokyo metro will be a cheap city with lots of space for starving artists and other creatives, much like Berlin is today, or was a decade ago.
Interestingly enough, in sci-fi settings, Tokyo is often depicted as a cyberpunk utopia/dystopia (depending on how you look at it). It’s presented as an even bigger metropolis, yet the reality might be different.
Quote:
I think the more radical changes will occur in the countryside worldwide as the vast majority of the world's population moves to cities. We will see huge swathes of the planet become uninhabited and revert to nature.
Most population trends suggest that the world will become even more urbanized. It’s hard to argue against that, as it’s been the case for a long time. Then there’s the issue of desertification, which could very well render big chunks of the planet hostile to productive life.
Interestingly enough, in sci-fi settings, Tokyo is often depicted as a cyberpunk utopia/dystopia (depending on how you look at it). It’s presented as an even bigger metropolis, yet the reality might be different.
Most population trends suggest that the world will become even more urbanized. It’s hard to argue against that, as it’s been the case for a long time. Then there’s the issue of desertification, which could very well render big chunks of the planet hostile to productive life.
That may have been the trend 20-30 years ago, technology has made it possible to do a lot of work remotely, as about 50 million workers discovered this past year here in the U.S.
I'm willing to bet that technology will make it even better over time: faster connections, more immersive experiences (virtual reality goggles, 3-D displays, gaming tech).
The cities are less livable lately, with rising crime rates and high cost of living. Plus, there's been a feeling of vulnerability ever since the pandemic. Rural land is being snapped up, and for good reason.
That may have been the trend 20-30 years ago, technology has made it possible to do a lot of work remotely, as about 50 million workers discovered this past year here in the U.S.
I'm willing to bet that technology will make it even better over time: faster connections, more immersive experiences (virtual reality goggles, 3-D displays, gaming tech).
The cities are less livable lately, with rising crime rates and high cost of living. Plus, there's been a feeling of vulnerability ever since the pandemic. Rural land is being snapped up, and for good reason.
For every New Yorker moving to Scranton, there are a thousand Nigerian villagers moving to Lagos.
The world population is slightly over half urbanized. In developed countries it's closer to 80%. That's a lot of urbanization that's going to happen in the developing world.
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.
Why did I get the idea we were talking Brazil?
