[HN Gopher] Over 90% of US Population Growth Since 2020 Came fro...
___________________________________________________________________
Over 90% of US Population Growth Since 2020 Came from Hispanics
Author : paulpauper
Score : 60 points
Date : 2024-08-08 20:11 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
| JohnMakin wrote:
| You do not even need a racial explanation for cities like LA
| losing population - The average rent cost of rent is less than
| the average pre-tax salary. This gnarly rent to income ratio is a
| trend across most major US cities. You simply cannot afford to
| live in them without a high paying salary. In LA, many of those
| people are fleeing inland, causing prices to increase there as
| well. It's a problem I'm not sure the solution for.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I blame a tech bubble. The salaries in these cities are
| massively inflated and it's messing up local economies in
| strange ways.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Tech is not present in every city in the US.
|
| Really the big issue is lack of housing production, which was
| significantly lower in the 2010s and we still have not made
| up for all that lost time:
| https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST
| blackhawkC17 wrote:
| I wonder why tech employees (labour) earning high salaries
| should represent a problem. That's a very good thing.
| Arnt wrote:
| The somewhat informed argument is that a few per cent of
| well-paying renters drive up the marginal price, and
| landlords try to stay close to the marginal rate.
| llamaimperative wrote:
| You'd intuitively think this is true, but empirically it
| has _not_ been true anywhere ever.
|
| Rising productivity yields rising inequality. The issue is
| that land rents rise to swallow all productivity gains (we
| end up calling this "cost of living," as if it emerges out
| of the ether).
|
| That's why in ultra-high productivity locales like Palo
| Alto, $200k/yr is a welfare wage. The land is ludicrously
| expensive because those prices rise in lockstep with
| productivity -- which they don't have to. Land costs
| nothing to exist. It is there ready to be used no matter
| what the price is.
|
| But everything _on_ the land, which is _everything_ , must
| then pay rent to the landowners, giving rise to "cost of
| living."
| nullc wrote:
| How does that cause a population decrease?
|
| "It's too expensive, no one lives there anymore"?
| JohnMakin wrote:
| People leaving the city for less expensive areas
| moneil971 wrote:
| This is about the U.S. as a whole tho. I don't think people
| are leaving the U.S. entirely
| JohnMakin wrote:
| There is a table that shows the cities with biggest
| population loss, which is what I am referencing.
| vlovich123 wrote:
| That explains migration within a country which doesn't
| change population counts. Unless you're claiming that
| white people are moving out of America because it's too
| expensive and simultaneously Hispanics are moving into a
| higher COL area (even if not high COL cities, America as
| a whole is going to be higher COL than Latin America).
|
| Based on the news I've been following, a more likely
| explanation is that Biden's immigration policy has been
| more welcoming on the southern border at the same time as
| Latin America destabilizing quite a bit politically and
| generating a lot of refugee migration.
|
| I just don't see how high COL or lack of housing being
| built explains the population growth being dominated by
| Hispanics.
| JohnMakin wrote:
| that is sort of my entire point, pointing to California's
| massive population loss is completely irrelevant data for
| the topic of this article. I don't have the data in front
| of me, but I would be willing to bet a large percentage
| of that is not due to birth rates and is due to
| emigration.
| everybodyknows wrote:
| Kids need bedrooms of their own. Young couples take this into
| account when managing contraception.
| j0hnyl wrote:
| Not really. That's a luxury.
| ericd wrote:
| Why is this being downvoted? Do you all not know people
| whose kids are in the same room? Ours are. Someone we
| know has 4 kids in a 2 BR apartment, those kids are
| great.
| jeffbee wrote:
| The number of people per household has been declining for
| fifty years, so if you don't build homes then you lose people
| instead.
| vlovich123 wrote:
| Where are those people going and why are Hispanics moving
| in?
| jeffbee wrote:
| I don't think housing costs explain the short-term
| changes described in this article. I am only answering
| the question of how housing costs lead to population
| decreases.
| georgeplusplus wrote:
| Has limiting the amount of asylum seekers or people coming over
| the border to claim asylum crossed your mind?
| llamaimperative wrote:
| Considering that we already don't have enough workers, no.
|
| Has building more housing crossed your mind?
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| Come on. We've got plenty of workers in this country.
| They're just not willing to work for pennies (and why
| should they?)
|
| Importing masses of unskilled labor puts downward pressure
| on wages. This is basic supply and demand.
| llamaimperative wrote:
| > We've got plenty of workers in this country.
|
| Citation needed
|
| > They're just not willing to work for pennies
|
| What jobs pay pennies?
|
| > This is basic supply and demand
|
| In a universe where more people in the country doesn't
| _also_ increase demand, sure. That 's not the universe we
| live in though.
| stormbeard wrote:
| Wouldn't it be easier and less controversial to just build
| more housing?
| llamaimperative wrote:
| And more legal under the US Constitution and international
| law!
| JohnMakin wrote:
| Landowners get extremely hostile to the type of housing
| required to alleviate this problem and usually dies on the
| vine in any city council
| feedforward wrote:
| That would mean lifting the Venezuela sanctions, Cuban
| embargo, and so on. I'm for it.
|
| The US has a dry foot policy specifically for Cuba,
| encouraging people to seek asylum in the US.
|
| The US involvement in Central America - from Honduras in 2009
| and before that encouraged migration and asylum servers, but
| that bell is hard to unring.
| xenadu02 wrote:
| > Has limiting the amount of asylum seekers or people coming
| over the border to claim asylum crossed your mind
|
| The number of asylum seekers is a tiny proportion of overall
| immigration of all types so we can basically ignore it.
|
| Population vs housing imbalance in California is not driven
| by immigrants anyway. The bulk of those people are citizens
| born to citizens or green card holders. Even if you could
| stop illegal immigration and simultaneously remove all non-
| citizens and non-visa holders right now today... that only
| punts the problem down the road by less than a decade.
| llamaimperative wrote:
| Land Value Tax
| JohnMakin wrote:
| > The average rent cost of rent is less than the average pre-
| tax salary
|
| too late to edit now but other than the butchered sentence I
| meant the cost of rent is _higher_ than the pre tax salary.
| darth_avocado wrote:
| https://archive.md/flX95
| paulpauper wrote:
| It's not that surprising. Fertility rates are falling hardest in
| Asian and European populations
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| No, fertility rates are falling hardest in the Hispanic
| population. It almost halved in the last 30 years.
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/260383/hispanic-fertilit...
|
| Yes, it's still substantially higher than other ethnic groups,
| but not by as much as it used to be.
| darth_avocado wrote:
| Linked in the article, but it looks like Black, Asian and other
| races will stay relatively stable in terms of % of population all
| the way to 2050. And the main changes will be that the % of
| Hispanic population will go up (immigration + higher fertile age
| population) and % of White population will go down (mostly
| aging). It's not as much as % of "people of color" going up as it
| is framed.
|
| https://www.brookings.edu/articles/census-shows-americas-pos...
| pessimizer wrote:
| Both liberals and conservatives have determined that the two
| races are "white" and "whatever." More Hispanics means that the
| "whatever" group is rising.
|
| What I wonder is if they've accounted for the lobbying of
| various subgroups to _leave_ the "white" category, such as
| Hispanics themselves did in the late 60s - early 70s (speaking
| Spanish is neither a race nor a single culture.)
|
| Every time a former white person declares themselves Latino (or
| MENA for that matter), the ratio changes.
| katzinsky wrote:
| Because the US was overwelmingly White (as in non-hispanic,
| just Irish/British/German which are practically the same two
| ethnic groups) and as more very different people have
| immigrated everything we like gets pushed away and trampled
| on.
|
| In the same paragraphs people here will say "no shut up
| racist, immigration is good" and "Not everyone likes pub
| food, Christianity, and 'classical liberalism.'"
|
| We actually liked things the way we were and worse since our
| own homeland has been overrun by the same people and we have
| no freedom of association in either place we can't just
| leave.
|
| So yeah, the categories are "us" and "people who aren't us
| and don't like us."
| segasaturn wrote:
| > just Irish/British/German which are practically the same
| two ethnic groups
|
| Despite wanting to go "back to the way things were", you
| are viewing that past through a distorted modern lens.
| Prior to the 20th century someone who was English would see
| themselves as being from a completely different
| civilization as a German. Eastern immigrants such as from
| Poland or Ukraine were treated as non-white invaders. Even
| the way you just lump the English and Irish together is a
| very big no-no to this day.
| searealist wrote:
| Maybe this will help you understand better. The following
| groups are cultural and genetic clusters.
| Europeans contain ( Northwest Europeans contain (
| Germans, Irish, English,
| ..., ), Eastern Europeans contain (
| Russian, Polish, Ukrainian,
| ..., ), Southern Europeans contain (
| Italians, Spanish, ..., )
| )
|
| Now, imagine you are walking a graph. English to German
| is a short trip, English to Ukrainian is farther, and
| English to Latino is even farther (as it's not European).
| YawningAngel wrote:
| These are constructed categories that a given person
| might agree or disagree with. You are free to identify
| cultural similarities between an Andalusian and a
| Neapolitan, but that does not make the change the fact
| that those two people may view themselves as coming from
| entirely disparate cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
|
| For example, your decision to categorise "Latino" as non-
| European is very arbitrary. There are lots of Latinos who
| speak European languages and participate in European
| cultural traditions.
| searealist wrote:
| Do you think the average Andalusian and Neopolitan would
| disagree that all Southern Europeans share more culture
| and genetics than themselves and a German or Russian?
| hnpolicestate wrote:
| What aggravates me in particular is everything being made
| spicy as default. I like mild pub food too lol.
| anthk wrote:
| >practically the same
|
| Wait until you find mid-Northern Spaniards from the
| Cantabric mountain ranges where pretty much Celtic/Germanic
| descendants similar to Irishmen and Mid-North Frenchmen.
|
| When you hit Asturias, Leon, Cantabria, Burgos...
| everything you pretended to know about Spaniards/Hispanics
| goes out of the window.
| WheatMillington wrote:
| Tell me more about how America is a "homeland" to white
| people.
| katzinsky wrote:
| No. Britain was our homeland but the same thing has been
| done there, so as I said we can't just leave.
| hnpolicestate wrote:
| The United States was 80%+ White from 1776-1980.
|
| It was a White "homeland" mathematically speaking until a
| political/economic decision was made to make it
| otherwise. Why is that controversial to point out?
| Motives abound?
| RajT88 wrote:
| I've tried to understand what the heck you're talking about
| here in relation to the US, but it doesn't scan.
|
| Perhaps you could explain more in detail. I mean, Hispanics
| aren't pushing out Christianity and pub food... And they
| like Americans plenty.
|
| Side note: If your economy would otherwise be shrinking
| because of a shrinking population/labor pool, immigration
| _is_ good.
| katzinsky wrote:
| 1) They're not _us_ and it 's not wrong to not want to be
| replaced in your own country otherwise there's nothing
| wrong with colonization and wars of aggression.
|
| 2) The economy and birth rates are shrinking because of a
| break down in social cohesion not a lack of labor.
| Depending on which statistic you look at 30-40% of young
| men in the US are unemployed. There's no shortage of
| labor, there's a shortage of communication. Not only does
| immigration not help this it _exacerbates_ it.
|
| 3) Yes Hispanics absolutely have their own culture, their
| own religion, and their own politics. All of which we
| might be ok with sometimes but when we're not allowed to
| have our own thing that _really_ sucks and it 's
| reasonable to be upset about it.
| slibhb wrote:
| I'm "white" but neither side of my family was considered
| white when they came to the US.
|
| Hispanics will become "white," as will Asians (East Asians
| and Desis). The story of America will continue to be blacks
| getting left behind, and we'll continue to argue about what
| to do about it.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| East Asians and Indians won't become "white". They'll just
| continue to grow more prosperous. By white do you mean
| "doing well"?
| orwin wrote:
| By that he means that Irish were considered by racists
| from 100 years ago a subrace of white, as were eastern
| European until the late 90s (that sentiment still exist
| in some places), and Italian were considered 'colored'
| until the 70s.
|
| Racism do not have any internal consistency, that's why I
| heavily judge the intelligence of those subscribing to
| it. Indians were 'black' until weren't in my country.
| mise_en_place wrote:
| I think you're on to something here. There is definitely a
| much looser standard for whiteness in the United States.
| The one drop rule was used only w.r.t. former slaves. But
| the definition of whiteness in the United States seems to
| be much broader these days.
|
| Contrast that with Europe, where whiteness is a very strict
| category. This could partially explain the unrest that's
| going on in the UK. I saw a group of X users arguing with a
| British citizen with an Italian surname. They claimed that
| he was not really English (really what they were implying
| was, he wasn't white), even though his passport said so. I
| found it strange, because in the States we often consider
| Italian Americans to be white.
| pram wrote:
| JFYI hispanic is actually listed as an "ethnicity" so you
| still have to pick white or whatever.
| Izkata wrote:
| > And the main changes will be that the % of Hispanic
| population will go up (immigration + higher fertile age
| population) and % of White population will go down (mostly
| aging).
|
| This is misleading, because it's not tracked like this on the
| US census. Hispanic is a separate question from race - people
| are "White Hispanic" or "Black Hispanic" or "(something)
| Hispanic", not just "Hispanic".
| red012 wrote:
| My understanding is domestic births are practically irrelevant
| compared to border crossings, the growth isn't people being
| born here.
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| I hit the paywall. Is this due to illegal immigration (including
| the spikes in asylum applicants / refugees) or cultural
| differences leading to higher birth rates or something else (like
| location)?
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| New immigrant/less wealthy women lose less money by deciding to
| have children than wealthier women (historically white due to
| distance from equator effects).
|
| The wealthier you are, the more financial sense it makes to
| have zero children. Until the government decides that
| subsidizing families is worth doing until the population
| pyramid is stabilized, every wealthy subgroup will experience
| decline (except the practicing religious subgroups of those).
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Go to Tinder and you will find out why very quickly why that
| happens.
|
| Most women regardless of age are "still figuring it out". Not
| interested in kids, commitment of any kind, only traveling.
|
| And now everyone is obsessed with pets, which is their
| replacement for a family.
| okdood64 wrote:
| The problem here is that you're on Tinder to determine this.
| That doesn't prove that most women aren't interested in kids in
| America.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/07/25/the-
| exp...
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/03/millennia.
| ..
|
| https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/15/among-
| you...
|
| https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/women-children-
| study-1.711984...
|
| https://www.visionmonday.com/business/research-and-
| stats/art...
|
| https://theharrispoll.com/briefs/birth-rates/
|
| TLDR Freedom > kids. Educated, empowered women delay having
| kids and have less kids overall.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Freedom to learn the language and customs of those who have
| more kids, who will then have more political representation
| and ultimately rule over you.
|
| But well, no need to care about your kids' future if you
| have no kids.
| llamaimperative wrote:
| I'm really surprised that you're having a bad time on
| Tinder and women don't seem to want to settle down with
| you. It's probably because they're awful people or
| whatever.
| nick_ wrote:
| Are you implying that educated white women should be
| having more kids so that they'll stop or slow the end of
| a white majority America?
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| I suggest therapy if the future scares you, change is
| inevitable. All races converge to US fertility rate
| eventually, immigrants after a single generation. We're
| all racing to 0. Try to not stress about things you can't
| control.
|
| Framing this as some sort of breeding competition
| is...unproductive.
|
| https://ifstudies.org/blog/baby-bust-fertility-is-
| declining-...
| BaculumMeumEst wrote:
| If you want kids, there are places to find people who are very
| interested. It's not Tinder.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| One that is not owned by Match group?
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| If 91% of population growth comes from one group, how is that
| "increasing diversity" like the article claims?
| javawizard wrote:
| Because the group in question isn't the majority group, and
| still isn't after this increase.
|
| It's definitely eliding a lot of the nuance of the article, but
| technically it's not wrong.
| naveen99 wrote:
| English proficiency is probably improving even faster, especially
| with help of ai translation.
| swfadyi wrote:
| The Hispanics are a hard working, honest and family oriented
| people, so this is not a bad outcome
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-08 23:02 UTC)