The US Census Bureau thread

[Chef]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Mexican Migration peaked in like 1998

Mexican migration was driven by its 20th century population growth more than anything else. For three decades it was producing new workers faster than it was producing new jobs. They had to go somewhere. Now that its fertility rate has fallen to about the same as in developed countries there is much less of a migration push factor driving people to leave the country. Even though the US is still a much richer country the hassle of emigration probably holds less allure if you can find a job in your home country.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Chef

Mexican migration was driven by its 20th century population growth more than anything else.

Not really. Mexican migration was driven by U.S. worker shortages initiated by the 1970's-era baby bust, and a less insane environment regarding nativism/immigration policy.

Mexican population growth was mostly absorbed by Mexican cities (rural Mexico has emptied out, despite historically high birthrates) and has little to do with emigration. Mexico City grew from 3 to 20 million in about 15 years.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Mexico City grew from 3 to 20 million in about 15 years.

That timeline seems wrong. Do you have a source supporting your claim?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ mexican-american growth rates might be falling on a relative basis, but according to that link, mexican-americans still make up 62% of all latinos in the US!!!

the next largest single group is puerto ricans with only 9% of all US latinos.

and once you get outside of the I-95 corridor (whose cities tend to have way more latino diversity with all of the various Caribbean groups well represented), mexican-american dominance tends to get even stronger in most places (in chicagoland for instance, mexican-americans make up almost 80% of all latinos in the MSA).

In the Southwest, I'm pretty sure Mexican dominance of Latinos is way beyond Chicago's 80% everywhere.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by craigs

That timeline seems wrong. Do you have a source supporting your claim?

It was 60 years. 1950 to 2010.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by lio45

In the Southwest, I'm pretty sure Mexican dominance of Latinos is way beyond Chicago's 80% everywhere.

Well, the Southwest is close and parts were once Mexico, so dominance there should not be unusual. Chicago is sort of an outlier since it is in the Midwest and I can't think of any other Midwest or even Northeast city that has such a relatively large Mexican-American population.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Well, the Southwest is close and parts were once Mexico, so dominance there should not be unusual. Chicago is sort of an outlier since it is in the Midwest and I can't think of any other Midwest or even Northeast city that has such a relatively large Mexican-American population.

I think it's the other way around. Chicago probably has a lower percentage of Mexican Latinos than other Midwest cities. The northeast and Florida likely have the lowest share of Mexicans in the U.S. Latino population, though.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by lio45

In the Southwest, I'm pretty sure Mexican dominance of Latinos is way beyond Chicago's 80% everywhere.

maybe in some spots in the SW, but in the link that started this tangent there was the following chart showing that mexican-americans make up 77% of LA MSA latinos and 73% of houston MSA latinos, so not radically different from chicago on that score.


source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/16/key-facts-about-u-s-hispanics/

chicago is FAR more similar to SW metros on this measure than it is to the I-95 corridor cities that are relatively light on mexican-americans compared to the rest of the nation.

[Steely Dan]

^ going back to that chart I posted above, I'm quite intrigued by the large PR/cuban inversion between Miami and Orlando.

I would've expected things to be a little bit more balanced than that in florida. Is it just a self-sorting thing or is there more to the story? Any Floridians wanna chime in?



The radically out-sized proportion of Salvadorans in DC is also very interesting.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ going back to that chart I posted above, I'm quite intrigued by the large PR/cuban inversion between Miami and Orlando.

I would've expected things to be a little bit more balanced than that but in florida. Is it just a self-sorting thing or is there more to the story? Any Floridians wanna chime in?



The radically out-sized proportion of Salvadorans in DC is also very interesting.

My impression is self-sorting.

I haven’t encountered many Cubans outside of the Miami area. Even in other parts of South Florida, the Mexican population at the time had a more visible presence (Southern Florida Agriculture).

Orlando is a sensible location for Puerto Ricans. It’s much more affordable with plenty of colleges for younger Puerto Ricans. The Theme Park and entertainment industry always has places, and Puerto Ricans are easier to hire than other immigrants.

Also, I think a lot of the Florida migration is recent with Hurricane Maria as a big factor.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by Yuri

US vital statistics for Q1/2022 are out:

------------ Births ----- Deaths ----- Surplus

2007 --- 4,316,234 --- 2,423,712 --- +1,892,522

2019 --- 3,747,540 --- 2,854,858 ----- +892,682

2020 --- 3,613,647 --- 3,383,729 ----- +229,918

2021 --- 3,659,289 --- 3,471,563 ----- +187,726

2022Q1 -- 875,000 ----- 922,000 ------- -47 000

:o

I always though Canada would reach negative natural growth before the US but guess not.

A shrinking US will have a profound effect on a lot of suburbs who are only feasibility with constant population growth. once that population growth stop they end up in a sustainability death spiral where the cost of maintenance keeps increasing and the only way is to pay for it is to increase taxes but that drive the population down faster. That's why the current ghettos/slum were the earliest low density suburbs.
Those that have densifying will remain sustainable however.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ going back to that chart I posted above, I'm quite intrigued by the large PR/cuban inversion between Miami and Orlando.

I would've expected things to be a little bit more balanced than that in florida. Is it just a self-sorting thing or is there more to the story? Any Floridians wanna chime in?



The radically out-sized proportion of Salvadorans in DC is also very interesting.

From what I can gather (and I have only lived in FL for about 18 months), the inversion seems to be due to recent waves of PRs (like since 2000) who have left and relocated to Orlando. Of course, Miami has always had a large Cuban population since the 1960s, and there was a sizable population in Tampa, and other Latino immigrants from Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela have settled in Miami, along with PRs. But it seems that many PRs relocated to Orlando. Maybe due to the abundant jobs in hospitality, cheaper living, less job competition? Any longer term Floridians with their take?

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by Nite

I always though Canada would reach negative natural growth before the US but guess not.

A shrinking US will have a profound effect on a lot of suburbs who are only feasibility with constant population growth. once that population growth stop they end up in a sustainability death spiral where the cost of maintenance keeps increasing and the only way is to pay for it is to increase taxes but that drive the population down faster. That's why the current ghettos/slum were the earliest low density suburbs.
Those that have densifying will remain sustainable however.

Time to institute 'Fertility Day'?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/14/world/europe/italy-births-fertility-europe.html

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by DCReid

From what I can gather (and I have only lived in FL for about 18 months), the inversion seems to be due to recent waves of PRs (like since 2000) who have left and relocated to Orlando. Of course, Miami has always had a large Cuban population since the 1960s, and there was a sizable population in Tampa, and other Latino immigrants from Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela have settled in Miami, along with PRs. But it seems that many PRs relocated to Orlando. Maybe due to the abundant jobs in hospitality, cheaper living, less job competition? Any longer term Floridians with their take?

It's pretty much what you guys already mentioned. Orlando's PR population grew rapidly after Hurricane Maria and Cubans have always had a strong presence in Miami. Central Florida has also been growing more rapidly than South Florida, which is now reaching the same limitations as LA and the Bay Area.


As for the Eastern cities having a more diverse Latino population, I can attest to that. The only Hispanics I come across on a daily basis in SoCal are Mexicans. It's a huge community, with tons of businesses, restaurants, etc. Makes sense due to history, but I like the diversity back East. I have more in common with Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and central and South Americans than I do with other Mexicans since there isn't as much African influence in Mexican culture.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by DCReid

From what I can gather (and I have only lived in FL for about 18 months), the inversion seems to be due to recent waves of PRs (like since 2000) who have left and relocated to Orlando. Of course, Miami has always had a large Cuban population since the 1960s, and there was a sizable population in Tampa, and other Latino immigrants from Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela have settled in Miami, along with PRs. But it seems that many PRs relocated to Orlando. Maybe due to the abundant jobs in hospitality, cheaper living, less job competition? Any longer term Floridians with their take?

I've been semi-present in the Orlando-ish area (due east, actually) for 11 years and counting, and now that this thread made me think about it, it's true that the Latinos I've met were often from PR rather than from "more logical" places like Cuba or the DR (where I'd have guessed they would be from). Even before Hurricane Maria.

Self-sorting is obviously the explanation. The initial impetus is likely just random.

For an obvious (Canadian) example, why exactly is Markham = China, Brampton = India, Surrey = India, Richmond = China...? Originally, I'm sure there's little reason. Either pure chance or else some tiny factor that is nowadays totally dwarfed by self-selection.

Immigrant groups like to congregate. There are plenty of good reasons for that. If you come to the U.S. mainland from Puerto Rico nowadays, there's a good chance you'll prefer to go somewhere where there's already a critical mass.

I know that if I were from El Salvador and relocating to the U.S., regardless of what I think of the various American cities, I'd be heading to DC. (Thanks to the thread for the info! )

[Yuri]

I guess it's somewhat related: Brazil will hold elections this year and Brazilians living abroad can and do vote (although vote not mandatory as it's for Brazilians living here).

697,078 Brazilians are licensed to vote abroad, a massive 39% increase over 2018. That would suggest a population of 1.5 million or so, giving many might choose not to vote.

Anyway, the biggest concentrations for the 2022 elections:

Lisbon: 45,273
Miami: 40,189
Boston: 37,159
Nagoya: 35,651
London: 34,498
Porto: 30,098
Tokyo: 28,730
New York: 27,937
Paris: 22,629
Milan: 20,054
Madrid: 19,866
Toronto: 17,755
Washington: 14,073
Houston: 13,804
Zurich: 13,605
Rome: 12,983
Berlin: 12,665
Atlanta: 12,591
Hamamatsu: 12,189
Dublin: 11,946
Munich: 11,857
San Francisco: 11,698
Buenos Aires: 11,570
Frankfurt: 11,563
Los Angeles: 11,205
Barcelona: 10,914
Sydney: 10,775
Geneve: 10,539
Chicago: 10,302
Amsterdam: 10,068
Vancouver: 10,004

Till 2018, Boston was the 1st. And obviously, the registers are linked to a Brazilian consulate. Those people don't necessarily live in those cities.

Here the full list: https://sig.tse.jus.br/ords/dwapr/f?p=10...P0_MUNICIPIO:Munic%C3%ADpio,,EXTERIOR,ZZ,

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Yuri

I guess it's somewhat related: Brazil will hold elections this year and Brazilians living abroad can and do vote (although vote not mandatory as it's for Brazilians living here).

697,078 Brazilians are licensed to vote abroad, a massive 39% increase over 2018. That would suggest a population of 1.5 million or so, giving many might choose not to vote.

Anyway, the biggest concentrations for the 2022 elections:

Lisbon: 45,273
Miami: 40,189
Boston: 37,159
Nagoya: 35,651
London: 34,498
Porto: 30,098
Tokyo: 28,730
New York: 27,937
Paris: 22,629
Milan: 20,054
Madrid: 19,866
Toronto: 17,755
Washington: 14,073
Houston: 13,804
Zurich: 13,605
Rome: 12,983
Berlin: 12,665
Atlanta: 12,591
Hamamatsu: 12,189
Dublin: 11,946
Munich: 11,857
San Francisco: 11,698
Buenos Aires: 11,570
Frankfurt: 11,563
Los Angeles: 11,205
Barcelona: 10,914
Sydney: 10,775
Geneve: 10,539
Chicago: 10,302
Amsterdam: 10,068
Vancouver: 10,004

Till 2018, Boston was the 1st. And obviously, the registers are linked to a Brazilian consulate. Those people don't necessarily live in those cities.

Here the full list: https://sig.tse.jus.br/ords/dwapr/f?p=10...P0_MUNICIPIO:Munic%C3%ADpio,,EXTERIOR,ZZ,

Does the New York number combine Newark with NYC?

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Does the New York number combine Newark with NYC?

Definitely. Probably everybody in the states of NY, NJ, PA, CT. People must register on the consulates or embassies to vote and people in Newark will use the New York Consulate.

Those numbers seem to be squeezed to well-educated people: 42% of those who vote abroad have superior degree.

Another thing is the number grew a lot: in 2010, there were only 200k as opposed to 697k in 2022. I guess it became simpler for Brazilians to register to vote abroad. And as Brazilian immigrants usually have strong ties with Brazil (they could be called "expats" if they were British... ), they have a good connection with consulates, making convenient to register.

But then again, those abroad can only vote for president and vote is not mandatory for them.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Definitely. Probably everybody in the states of NY, NJ, PA, CT. People must register on the consulates or embassies to vote and people in Newark will use the New York Consulate.

Those numbers seem to be squeezed to well-educated people: 42% of those who vote abroad have superior degree.

Another thing is the number grew a lot: in 2010, there were only 200k as opposed to 697k in 2022. I guess it became simpler for Brazilians to register to vote abroad. And as Brazilian immigrants usually have strong ties with Brazil (they could be called "expats" if they were British... ), they have a good connection with consulates, making convenient to register.

But then again, those abroad can only vote for president and vote is not mandatory for them.

Ah ok. Yeah, that's not representative of where people actually live then, if it's just counting where they registered at a consulate. It looks like there is a Brazilian consulate in Hartford that covers Connecticut and Rhode Island: https://www.usccb.org/about/world-youth-...es-in-the-US-and-their-Jurisdictions.pdf

Interestingly, the Brazilian consulate in NYC also covers Bermuda.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Ah ok. Yeah, that's not representative of where people actually live then, if it's just counting where they registered at a consulate. It looks like there is a Brazilian consulate in Hartford that covers Connecticut and Rhode Island: https://www.usccb.org/about/world-youth-...es-in-the-US-and-their-Jurisdictions.pdf

Interestingly, the Brazilian consulate in NYC also covers Bermuda.

Iheartthed, it's probably a honorary one. Looking again on Brazilian Superior Electoral Court, those are the only US cities with registered voters. Those people in Hartford are either registered in Boston or New York for voting purposes. I heard Brazil opened a full consulate in Orlando, so it probably will empty out Atlanta.

Regarding the US, I believe Boston is the oldest focus and where most of the long-term immigrants live. That might suggest the average Brazilian immigrant there is less likely to register than those from say, Miami.

EDIT: I stand corrected. Looking once again, and Hartford is indeed a full consulate. 4,028 voters registered there. Quite a big number. I didn't know about this. I'm aware Portuguese are big in Rhode Island though.