NationStates Jolt Archive

End of an era in our giant southern neighbor. I guess Canada will follow.


National Data, By Edwin S. Rubenstein
The Next Big Headline: Most Births Minority in 2011.

The number of non-white Americans exceeded 100 million for the first time in 2006, according to a just released Census Bureau report.

According to the latest figures, non-Hispanic whites accounted for 66.4 percent of U.S. population on July 1, 2006. Minorities were 33.6 percent of the total. As recently as 1990, 76 percent of Americans called themselves non-Hispanic white. In 1965, the American population was 88 percent white.

This shift is essentially all caused by public policy—specifically, the Immigration Act of 1965 and the simultaneous collapse of law enforcement against illegal immigration. As a result, the U.S. demographic balance has been completely destabilized.

Less reported, the recent data showed a growing generational racial divide between the young and older persons living in the U.S. [New Demographic Racial Gap Emerges By Sam Roberts, New York Times,May 17, 2007]

In 2006 white, non-Hispanics accounted for:
bullet 56 percent of persons 9 and younger

bullet 60 percent of persons 10 to 19

bullet 67 percent of persons 20 to 64

bullet 81 percent of persons 65 and older

From July 1, 2005 to July 1, 2006, the white population grew by a miniscule 0.26 percent. The minority population grew by 2.42 percent.
bullet If the white and minority populations continue growing at their respective 2005-06 growth rates, present day minorities will attain majority status by the year 2038. (Table 1.) (This is much earlier than the Census Bureau projects, primarily because they presume a reduction in legal immigration.)

And this extrapolation does not capture the dramatic situation into which Washington has led the white population.

A basic measure of fertility is the hypothetical number of births a woman would have over her childbearing years if she experienced the age-specific birthrates for her group. Based on 2004 fertility rates (the latest available), non-Hispanic white women will have 1.847 children; non-Hispanic Black women, 2.02 children; and Hispanic women, 2.82 children.[PDF]

The “replacement” rate—2.1 births per women—is considered the value at which a group can exactly replace itself over the course of a generation. Fertility rates of non-Hispanic whites were 12 percent below the replacement rate in 2004. They are expected to remain low in future decades. This will eventually shrink the white population.

Births to white, non-Hispanic women have already started to fall in absolute terms. (Table 2) White, non-Hispanic mothers gave birth to 2,244,288 children in 2006. That was about 28,000 fewer births than in 2005, a decline of 1.25 percent.

Over the same period births to minority mothers rose by 2.78 percent.

In 2006 45.9 percent of live births were to minority mothers. That was up from 45.0 percent in 2005.

Here’s the next big headline (you read it on VDARE.COM first):
bullet If white births continue shrinking and minority births growing at the present rate, minorities will account for more than half of all births by 2011.

By 2021 more than 60 percent of births will be to minorities (Table 2.)

Of course, if immigration were completely cut off now, the date at which minorities would become the U.S. majority would be greatly postponed—probably into the 22nd century.

And, if immigrant stock birthrates began to decline to the American norm, as they arguably will, it might never happen at all.

But right now, the U.S. federal government is literally doing what the poet Bertolt Brecht suggested only satirically that the East German communist government should do.

It is dissolving the people and electing new one.

Edwin S. Rubenstein (email him) is President of ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/070524_nd.htm

So?

But all dead in 2012.

FEAR TEH BR0WN PEPLEZ!!!!!!!!!1111oneoneleven

:rolleyes:

Meh. So? By third gen they are culturally identical to every other American. Teh scary Immigrants aren't going to hide under your bed and try to eat your children.

Cool. Then I'll be a minority and I'll be eligible for some of that sweet affirmative action.

But all dead in 2012.

More of that theory... *sigh* here's hoping it goes the way of the "millenium bug" *raises glass*

Cool. Then I'll be a minority and I'll be eligible for some of that sweet affirmative action.

It'll be majority-minority, so yeah...

Latina chicks do it better anyways. I will miss my fellow blondies, but oh, do I enjoy latin ass.

EDIT: Though, I've had a thought. Hair color is a recessive gene, correct? And if my never-present fundie born again christian science teacher was correct, it would reappear now and then rather than just disappearing. See where I'm going?

That's right, blonde chicks with a latin ass.

I for one will welcome our new blonde hispanic overlords!

Ohnoes teh nonwhites are attackingz our racial purity11!!!

Ohnoes teh nonwhites are attackingz our racial purity11!!!

:confused: There is nothing in the article about interracial relationships.

More of that theory... *sigh* here's hoping it goes the way of the "millenium bug" *raises glass*

You mean when all the computers went insane and cyborgs attempted to assassinate my first born (who is destined to be savior of all humanity, by the way) and I had to travel back in time to correct every single damn PC in the entire world? Let's hope it doesn't. Oh... and you're welcome.

is it time yet to welcome our new brown overlords?

You'd imagine so with a country built on immigration, no?

:confused: There is nothing in the article about interracial relationships.

It's clear enough that you're a racist bigot. Who cares if the article says nothing about what you would call "miscegenation?" That's quite irrelevant and you'd know it, if years of inbreeding hadn't weakened your mind.

It's clear enough that you're a racist bigot. Who cares if the article says nothing about what you would call "miscegenation?" That's quite irrelevant and you'd know it, if years of inbreeding hadn't weakened your mind.

hey, racial purity is hard to maintain without inbreeding, man!

Report: Caucasians Will Soon Be A Minority In Their Own Goddamn Country

PIKEVILLE, TN—According to Hormel-plant breakroom sources, if the Puerto Ricans and the Mexicans and the Orientals and the blacks don't stop having all those babies, whites will be a minority in their own goddamn country as early as 2010. "Someone looked at the census figures, and on account of how much faster they're multiplying, it's only a couple years before there's more of them than of us real Americans," foreman Ron Nelson announced Tuesday. "They're already making the kids learn Spanish at the high school." According to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, 80.7 percent of the current U.S. population is white.

Once again proving that the Onion has an article for EVERY occasion.

You'd imagine so with a country built on immigration, no?

This is the second such demographic change in this region of the world in all history. The first was European colonization/occupation...

So it's not an everyday event...

Cool. Then I'll be a minority and I'll be eligible for some of that sweet affirmative action.

I doubt it. They'd probably abolish it as soon as it stopped benefiting them.

This is the second such demographic change in this region of the world in all history. The first was European colonization/occupation...

So it's not an everyday event...

Second? It's been ongoing since nigh on 1500.

Second? It's been ongoing since nigh on 1500.

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Good. Like I said, Immigrants=HOTT!

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Someone alert the Guiness Book of World Records!

But all dead in 2012.


We've got five years, what a surprise/We've got five years, stuck on my eyes/We've got five years, my brain hurts a lot/Five years, thats all we've got ...etc.

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Let me guess, you think there are two races: Whites, and Minorities?

:confused: There is nothing in the article about interracial relationships.

Are half white people minorities?

Are half white people minorities?

Yeah.

Let me guess, you think there are two races: Whites, and Minorities?

No, he clearly stated that the population could be cleanly divided among racial lines into the majority and minorities. He stated that the majority was initially Native American, not white. Of course, you never let simple facts get in the way of your trolling.

No, he clearly stated that the population could be cleanly divided among racial lines into the majority and minorities. He stated that the majority was initially Native American, not white. Of course, you never let simple facts get in the way of your trolling.

Hell just froze over guys.
You're right. I've read this entire thing, and haven't seen one bigoted thing said by Nova Magna Germania. Please people, read the posts before you ridicule them, will you?

Please?

No, he clearly stated that the population could be cleanly divided among racial lines into the majority and minorities .

The Majority = Singular. (White)

Minorities = Plural. (Everyone else grouped together in one label)

That quite enough asshatery thank you.

No, he clearly stated that the population could be cleanly divided among racial lines into the majority and minorities. He stated that the majority was initially Native American, not white. Of course, you never let simple facts get in the way of your trolling.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c88/EasyPrey/DontFeedTheTroll.jpg

No, he clearly stated that the population could be cleanly divided among racial lines into the majority and minorities. He stated that the majority was initially Native American, not white. Of course, you never let simple facts get in the way of your trolling.

While I'm charmed and sentimental that you rush to the defense of your like-minded fascist forum friends, this is what he clearly stated:

<I>Native American majority to White majority</i>

ergo, Whites are a race, Native Americans are a race.

<i>White majority to Minority-Majority</i>

Ergo Whites are a race, "Minority" or "Minority-Majority" is a race.

But that was a nice try, MeansToAnEnd.

While I'm charmed and sentimental that you rush to the defense of your like-minded fascist forum friends, this is what he clearly stated:

<I>Native American majority to White majority</i>

ergo, Whites are a race, Native Americans are a race.

<i>White majority to Minority-Majority</i>

Ergo Whites are a race, "Minority" or "Minority-Majority" is a race.

But that was a nice try, MeansToAnEnd.

You can't expect him to say
White majority to black, hispanic, indian, asian, native, moonite, martian, space worm, furry, neo con, liberal, disney creature, can you?

Ah, our secret conspiracy to destroy America is proceeding apace.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c88/EasyPrey/DontFeedTheTroll.jpg

Hey you're right, no one should post in this thread.

I've read this entire thing, and haven't seen one bigoted thing said by Nova Magna Germania.

No... just the palpable, unstated implication of this entire thread, when posted by a poster with a long history of thinly-veiled bigotry.

You can't expect him to say
White majority to black, hispanic, indian asian native, can you?

Why not?

Too difficult?

Too much energy output by finger muscles?

Not enough energy input through metabolization? Perhaps the ubermensch here has too high a metabolism.

Of course not, that would fuck up his entire point.

Why would it?

You can't expect him to say
White majority to black, hispanic, indian asian native, can you?

Of course not, that would fuck up his entire point.

<i>White majority to Minority-Majority</i>
Ergo Whites are a race, "Minority" or "Minority-Majority" is a race.

No, it was clear that the term "minority" was used as an umbrella term for a cornucopia of races. Listing out each non-white race would be both cumbersome and utterly unnecessary. Nonetheless, you failed to see this either because of your blind partisan hatred or senseless trolling.

No... just the palpable, unstated implication of this entire thread, when posted by a poster with a long history of thinly-veiled bigotry.

Oh, oops. I don't know the poster's history at all. Sorry guys.

Oh, oops. I don't know the poster's history at all. Sorry guys.

I guess I'm a bigot because I disagree with reparations for slavery?

I guess I'm a bigot because I disagree with reparations for slavery?

Kind of a leap but if that is your conclusion...

I guess I'm a bigot because I disagree with reparations for slavery?

Don't pay any heed to such trolls. They deem you a "bigot" if you don't subscribe to the theory of "reverse" racism. Saying that blacks and whites should be treated equally in all aspects of life is sufficient to earn you their contempt.

Kind of a leap but if that is your conclusion...

I dont end my conclusions with question marks. Didnt you understand the question implied in that sentence?

No, it was clear that the term "minority" was used as an umbrella term for a cornucopia of races.

And so why couldn't he have used a perfectly acceptable term like "mud-people?"

Oh, that would give up the game too early.

Nonetheless, you failed to see this either because of your blind partisan hatred or senseless trolling.

Partisan hatred, that's the one. I'm a world-famous Democrat and I just slam anyone who isn't!

Don't pay any heed to such trolls. They deem you a "bigot" if you don't ascribe to the theory of "reverse" racism. Saying that blacks and whites should be treated equally in all aspects of life is sufficient to earn you their contempt.

Blacks and whites should be treated equally in all aspects of life.

But, no, incidentally, my assessment of Nova Magna Germania's bigotry has nothing to do with his specific political positions on reparations, affirmative action, and the like... it has to do with the nature of the arguments he uses against them.

This is the second such demographic change in this region of the world in all history. The first was European colonization/occupation...

So it's not an everyday event...Yes, but this one is occurring without genocide.

I dont end my conclusions with question marks. Didnt you understand the question implied in that sentence?

I end my conclusions with question marks?

I end my conclusions with question marks?

Do you?/Good for you...

And so why couldn't he have used a perfectly acceptable term like "mud-people?"

Oh, that would give up the game too early.

For a couple reasons, the first of which is that "mud-people" is generally agreed to be a derogatory term, and the author had no wish to employ pejorative language. The second is that Asians and Eskimos are "minorities," yet the term "mud-people" does not apply to their white complexion. There is no "game" here; you simply see bigotry where there is none and proceed to flame the unwitting OP for his imaginary offense.

for me the real question is: How is the ethnicity of a newborn "The Next Big Headline"? Just because there are more kids with more melanin than what we are used to seeing in US hospitals; What difference will that make with anything?

Yes, but this one is occurring without genocide.

But with threats to white privilege and (the illusion of) white purity.

Next thing you know, commie mongrel perverts like me will be running things... and what will happen to traditional American values then? :eek:

Blacks and whites should be treated equally in all aspects of life.

But, no, incidentally, my assessment of Nova Magna Germania's bigotry has nothing to do with his specific political positions on reparations, affirmative action, and the like... it has to do with the nature of the arguments he uses against them.

In that case, I apologize for my overly hasty characterization of you; however, being prejudiced against this particular author for alleged past offenses is wrong. His present argument must be taken at face value, regardless of supposed past racism; in this case, his thesis is not bigoted in the least. Claiming that his posts are racist because one has formed a preconceived opinion of him, when, in reality, they are not, is trolling.

For a couple reasons, the first of which is that "mud-people" is generally agreed to be a derogatory term, and the author had no wish to employ pejorative language.

Indeed. That might make it a little too obvious.

The second is that Asians and Eskimos are "minorities," yet the term "mud-people" does not apply to their white complexion.

Oh? According to whom, and why? I thought "mud people" applies to anyone not of "pure" race enough to whoever is using the term.

But perhaps you are more familiar with it than I.

There is no "game" here; you simply see bigotry where there is none and proceed to flame the unwitting OP for his imaginary offense.

I thought I was trolling, not flaming?

Could you make up your mind? Better yet, let someone else handle such a judgement.

Yes, he's a bigot because he posted a study that states some facts! :rolleyes:

Damn, people...grow up! Not every single person talking about ethnicity or race is some kind of racist!

however, being prejudiced against this particular author for alleged past offenses is wrong.

Why?

I always take what people say in context of their broader views... it is crucial to understanding their full meaning.

Especially when dealing with racists in a society where most racists will deny being anything of the sort.

His present argument must be taken at face value, regardless of supposed past racism;

His arguments, yes... because then the question is not whether Nova Magna Germania is right, but whether the arguments are.

Of course, if I suspect that he is stubbornly persisting in a position for racist reasons, there is no reason to continue with futility.

This entire question is irrelevant to this thread, however, because no real argument has been made.

Claiming that his posts are racist because one has formed a preconceived opinion of him, when, in reality, they are not, is trolling.

I made no statement that the explicit content of his posts was racist.

I simply said that the implication of this thread was racist.

I thought I was trolling, not flaming?

Hint: excessive flaming is a form of trolling; both are serious offenses.

Why?

I always take what people say in context of their broader views... it is crucial to understanding their full meaning.

That does not mean all the views of a particular individual must be painted with the same brush. This would result in a logical fallacy: given that someone is a racist and is posting a topic about race, the topic must be racist. You miss the fact that a racist person may air non-racist opinions and hastily brand all that person's pertinent statements as "racist." Of course, how much this applies to the given situation is unknown to me, as I do not find the OP to be bigoted in the least.

I simply said that the implication of this thread was racist.

What, in particular, led you to that conclusion, other than the OP's past behavior? Do you find the (true) statement that "whites outperform blacks on the SAT" to be implicitly racist? I am of the opinion that cold, hard facts are just that: facts. They cannot be racist, either implicitly or explicitly.

That does not mean all the views of a particular individual must be painted with the same brush. This would result in a logical fallacy: given that someone is a racist and is posting a topic about race, the topic must be racist.

Obviously the conclusion that "This topic is racist" does not follow with logical certainty, but this is in the nature of implication.

If someone asks me "What's up?", it is possible, even keeping to the bounds of coherent speech, that he or she is asking me to describe what is above us. But that is not the answer you give, unless you are obnoxious.

Similarly, when a racist refers to the SAT scores of black students, or to the imminent possibility of a "minority-majority" in babies, I have good reason to take it as a statement with racist implications... even though the literal meaning of the statement is not racist, and the implication I drew from it was not logically necesary.

I am of the opinion that cold, hard facts are just that: facts. They cannot be racist, either implicitly or explicitly.

Implicit meaning is a matter of context as much, if not more, as it is a matter of content.

You are abstracting away from the context and pointing out that the content of the statement in and of itself does not necessarily have racist implications, but I never said it did.

Hmm. So the US will no longer have a racial majority of any kind.

I'm all for it.

Again I must ask those who think this is actually the next big headline: What difference does this really make? How is this big news?

Hmm. So the US will no longer have a racial majority of any kind.

I'm all for it.

Hmmm interesting. So with us all being minorities the word no longer has any valid meaning it would seem. In the US that is.

Again I must ask those who think this is actually the next big headline: What difference does this really make? How is this big news?
QFT

Has anyone noticed that almost every person on NSG with a non-English spelling of Germany in their nation's name is obsessed with race?

I, for one, welcome our new melanin-rich, taco-eating overlords.

Yeah.

Sweet!

*goes all minority-izing on ya'lls asses*

Or something.

We need teh browns to fix our housing problems!1!1!1!

Ya see, we build our houses out of them. So more browns = more houses.

Greater Trostia, there's a line between atttacking the argument and attacking the arguer, and you crossed it. More than one player told you to stop, and you kept on.

So now you've got 24 hours to think about why I called it trolling.

EDIT: BTW, folks, humour is good to defuse intense topics, but remember that not all players have working sarcasm-detectors.

This is the second such demographic change in this region of the world in all history. The first was European colonization/occupation...

So it's not an everyday event...

"Second such demographic change" "in this region of the world" "in all history"

What was the first "such demographic change"? When did it start/finish?

What do you mean by "in this region of the world"? Merely the U.S.?

Why is the relative shrinking of the non-Hispanic white population a notable "demographic change"?

What does it mean? Why should we care?

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Meh. You are so used to thinking of racial groups as us versus them that your brain can't process simple facts. Once there are more minorities than whites, there will be no majority race.

This is a great step forward for our society.

Why is the relative shrinking of the non-Hispanic white population a notable "demographic change"?

What does it mean? Why should we care?

The answers to any of these questions, if given honestly by the OP, will prove what I and others like Soheran have said. But he won't give them specifically for that reason; that's why the OP itself had nothing more than "I guess Canada is next" with the bigoted conclusions left implied and unspoken.

Meh. You are so used to thinking of racial groups as us versus them that your brain can't process simple facts. Once there are more minorities than whites, there will be no majority race.

This is a great step forward for our society.

I guess it would in theory help...

But I for one just can't wait for the following headline:

"The debate over affirmative action has recently resurfaced... only this time, it's white people that want it." :D

So, will any of the minorities actually become a majority?

So, will any of the minorities actually become a majority?

Hispanics, if any.

Hispanics, if any.

Define "Hispanic". I'll wait.

In fact, while you're at it, define "white" or "Asian-American" or any other ridiculous racial group identifier in use.

Also, please cite US law that defines the legal meaning of any of these racial identifiers.

Define "Hispanic". I'll wait.

In fact, while you're at it, define "white" or "Asian-American" or any other ridiculous racial group identifier in use.

Also, please cite US law that defines the legal meaning of any of these racial identifiers.

Just chill, m'kay? By Hispanic, I meant people whose lineage stems from Latin America. I'm not gonna bother with the rest. You can be arsed to look it up yourself if you want to know.

Again I must ask those who think this is actually the next big headline: What difference does this really make? How is this big news?

It matters only to people who are overly concerned with racial purity, yet try to disguise the fact in pathetic, and obvious ways.

Again I must ask those who think this is actually the next big headline: What difference does this really make? How is this big news?

It might be the language thing, given the origin of the replacements.

Define "Hispanic". I'll wait.

Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin hispanicus, from Hispania Iberian Peninsula, Spain
: of, relating to, or being a person of Latin American descent living in the United States; especially : one of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin.

In fact, while you're at it, define "white"

a : being a member of a group or race characterized by light pigmentation of the skin b : of, relating to, characteristic of, or consisting of white people or their culture

or "Asian-American"

an American of Asian descent

Also, please cite US law that defines the legal meaning of any of these racial identifiers.

What's law got to do, got to do with it?

This is surprising, and slightly depressing. I'm white, and I love white women (I've never really been attracted to women of other ethnicities), and now there won't be as many. :(

I've read through the OP three times now, and I still can't figure out why I'm supposed to care.

Um, oh noez teh brown peoplez?

As a result, the U.S. demographic balance has been completely destabilized

Like it was ever stable :rolleyes:

Yeah, first was from Native American majority to White majority and now from White majority to Minority-Majority or non-Majority. Also, I guess USA will be the first country with minority-majority.

Well to be honest, I dont see why Hispanics are so different from whites. They're mostly descended from immigrants too aren't they?

Plus that's not true, there have been countries like that in the past and you'd probably find one in the present day.

The answers to any of these questions, if given honestly by the OP, will prove what I and others like Soheran have said. But he won't give them specifically for that reason; that's why the OP itself had nothing more than "I guess Canada is next" with the bigoted conclusions left implied and unspoken.

Yay, you're back!!!!!

Oh no! Canada might not be snow white forever? Well, then I suppose things are going back to 'normal'.

This is surprising, and slightly depressing. I'm white, and I love white women (I've never really been attracted to women of other ethnicities), and now there won't be as many. :(

Hmm, thats an interesting consequence. But can you say no to this (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/305702617_75a7846922.jpg)?

This is surprising, and slightly depressing. I'm white, and I love white women (I've never really been attracted to women of other ethnicities), and now there won't be as many. :(

Awwww poor you. In the sense of being so narrow in your attractions. How sad.

Hmm, thats an interesting consequence. But can you say no to this (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/305702617_75a7846922.jpg)?

I can. She is pretty though.

I can. She is pretty though.

So why teh no?

Yay, you're back!!!!!


*slobber slobber lick lick*

Hmm, thats an interesting consequence. But can you say no to this? (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/305702617_75a7846922.jpg)

...

*slobber slobber lick lick*


Well to be honest, I dont see why Hispanics are so different from whites. They're mostly descended from immigrants too aren't they?

Hispanics tend to have a lot more Native American heritage than kentucky-bred white folk. Otherwise yes, descended from Spanish and Portuguese as well. But really the differences are unimportant in my opinion, everyone is of equal value.

So why teh no?

Dunno. I'm not really attracted to her, but I can still see that she is pretty.

Hmm, thats an interesting consequence. But can you say no to this (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/305702617_75a7846922.jpg)?

Yeah, he'll say he will, because only pure white features are attractive. My husband (a latino) works with some folks like this...'black women are ugly, asian women are ugly'...they are so blinded by their biases that they don't see human women, they just see colour.

Dunno. I'm not really attracted to her, but I can still see that she is pretty.

Alright, fair enough. I won't heckle you further.

Again I must ask those who think this is actually the next big headline: What difference does this really make? How is this big news?
Well I can see how some white people would worry about the changing demographic balance. Basically, no matter how good society is there will always be a despised and discriminated against minority. If I were in the minority then I'd be the one that's hated and discriminated against. Dunno about you, but I'd rather not be that minority.

Non-Hispanic whites will remain the most numerous minority for the forseeable future, as well as being overrepresented in positions of power, and being richer.

If anyone should be steamed about that, it isn't whites.

EDIT: Five days is a gravedig. I won't participate, thanks NMG

Non-Hispanic whites will remain the most numerous minority for the forseeable future, as well as being overrepresented in positions of power, and being richer.

If anyone should be steamed about that, it isn't whites.

Asians have already higher median imcomes.