United States of America: 5th country with the largest projected population growth

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by Euroconservativ, Jul 6, 2012.

  1. Euroconservativ
    Offline

    Euroconservativ Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +32
    Howard Steven Friedman: 10 Countries With the Largest Projected Population Growth: American Exceptionalism

    The top countries in order of the expected increase in population between 2010 and 2050 are:

    (1) India 467 million projected population increase
    (2) Nigeria 231 million
    (3) Pakistan 101 million
    (4) Tanzania 93 million
    (5) United States 93 million
    (6) DR Congo 83 million
    (7) Ethiopia 62 million
    (8) Philippines 62 million
    (9) Uganda 61 million
    (10) Kenya 56 million

    The U.S. stands out in this top 10 list for many reasons including its wealth, age distribution, immigration rates and fertility rates. As you probably noticed, the U.S. is the only wealthy country on this top 10 list and, in fact, is the only wealthy country in the top 25. Regarding the fertility rate, the U.S. is the only country in the top 10 with a total fertility rate (defined the expected number of children born per woman in her child-bearing years) near the replacement rate. The other top 10 countries have much higher total fertility rates, vastly exceeding the global average. The U.S., with a median age of 37 years, is the only country in the top 10 list with a median age of over 30 years. In fact, no other country in the top 25 has a median age over 30. Another key difference between the countries in this top 10 list is immigration. Nearly 40 million Americans were foreign born or about 13% of the American population. No other country in the top 25 has more than 6% of its population foreign born. So the US population is wealthier, older, less fertile and more influenced by immigration than the other countries projected to experience major population growth.

    While we've seen that U.S. is an outlier compared to other countries projected to have major population growths, it makes us wonder why the U.S. population is expected to grow much more than other wealthy countries? We can start by recalling that the current American population of around 310 million is the third largest in the world, exceeding only by India and China. That means that a 1% increase in the U.S. population contributes far more to the world population than a 1% increase by Mexico, Turkey or any another OECD country.

    Besides having a much larger base, what other factors are important in distinguishing the U.S. population projection from that of other wealthy countries?

    The population growth difference isn't due to the life expectancy differences. After all, the U.S. has a life expectancy of around 78 years, near the bottom of the OECD countries. Age distribution plays some role. The U.S. has the 7th youngest population of the OECD countries, averaging about 7 to 8 years younger than Japan, Germany and Italy. This younger population means that America has a higher percent of its population in the child bearing years than most OECD countries. Two other key factors driving the expected growth in the U.S. population are America's comparatively high fertility and immigration rates. The U.S. is one of only five OECD countries with a fertility rate near or above the replacement rate with countries like Japan, Korea, Poland and Italy far below the replacement rate. Additionally, the U.S. immigration rate is above the OECD average.

    America is often identified as being different from other countries, sometimes in positive ways and sometimes in negative ways. The population projections point to unique aspects of American demographics. Some readers may see the positive opportunities of a vast new generation, the influx of immigrant passion and a manageable support ratio while others will see the negatives from the viewpoint of Malthusian concerns. I suggest we embrace the positives of America's growing population while spending time to understand and address the issues and challenges that this growth creates.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Artevelde
    Offline

    Artevelde Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,431
    Thanks Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brussels, Belgium
    Ratings:
    +262
    Interesting OP.
    Obviously there is the qualification that these are absolute numbers, rather than percentages. Otherwise I'm pretty sure some Arab countries would have made it into the top ten, including some relatively rich ones but with small populations.
    Still your point about the exceptional position of the US stands.
     
  3. Euroconservativ
    Offline

    Euroconservativ Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +32
    The projected growth in the next 40 years is slower than the growth seen in 1970-2010: +106 million people. And slower than the current annual growth: +3 million.

    Question: is this level of population growth compatible with a hypothetical european-style Welfare State?
     
  4. Artevelde
    Offline

    Artevelde Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,431
    Thanks Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brussels, Belgium
    Ratings:
    +262
    I would argue that even irrespective of population growth the current European crisis demonstrates the limits of an excessive welfare state.
     
  5. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    You would be wrong.

    Greeks don't pay their taxes.
     
  6. Euroconservativ
    Offline

    Euroconservativ Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +32

    A developed welfare state demands a balance between two extremes: low birth rates and fertily rates below replacement level, and too much poor and low-skilled immigration. I think that only certain northern european states get it.
     
  7. Artevelde
    Offline

    Artevelde Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,431
    Thanks Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brussels, Belgium
    Ratings:
    +262
    No, I am right. Greece has to go through major structural reforms. Germany had to scale back its welfare state too. The problems in Europe are much more serious and fundamental than you - in your simplistic thinking - realize.
     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    America's growing population is entirely due to immigration.

    The USA native population achieved ZERO POP GROWTH back in the late 60s.
     
  9. Euroconservativ
    Offline

    Euroconservativ Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +32

    Not entirely due to immigration but...

    Texas: 11.2 million people in 1970; 25.5 million in 2011
    California: 20 million in 1970; 37.5 million in 2011
    Florida: 6.8 million in 1970; 19 million in 2011

    New York: 18.2 million in 1970; 19.5 million in 2011
    Ohio: 10.6 million in 1970; 11.5 million in 2011
    Iowa: 2.8 million in 1970; 3 million in 2011
    Etc.
     
  10. Unkotare
    Online

    Unkotare Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    61,514
    Thanks Received:
    4,885
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Ratings:
    +11,885
    Regardless, after 2050 the global population will begin to contract.
     

Share This Page