No, all you did was try to sneak in an attack on President Trump and immigration, nothing else. Your claim even then was based on immigration, and the birth rate declining and falling into the negatives. Which did not happen, it rose. When the very prediction you base your claim on is that completely wrong, you should do the logical thing and completely dismiss it. And to be honest, I could not give a rat's arse about immigration, that is a stupid red herring and the population is still growing, with or without immigration. It will continue to grow, more kids will be born, and in areas of low water continue to use more of it every single year. Once again, you spin in circles about things that do not matter worth a damn, and are simply unable to actually discuss the topic in a logical manner at all.
And here, let me show you how utterly stupid that very claim is. My wife and I have 2 kids. Are they also factors in these "immigration births"?
I know that doc. There isn't a change that can be considered statistically significant or likely to be sustained. It certainly is not to be considered a rebound, as it is a miniscule fraction of the slide that the cite shows traces back to the 1960's. And, it is still well below the number required for sustaining the population.
WOW you are fragile. I didn't say anything deprecatory about Trump's cut in immigration. It came as a response to COVID. And, I pointed out that the political will of America is AGAINST increasing immigration. When you've got nothing, you tell others that they are "spinning".
I don't know your immigration status. And, one data point is irrelevant in any study of US population growth.
Oh, I am an original American. But my wife is from South America. Which should show how completely wrong your claims are. Do you know what the term is for the child of an Immigrant to the US? American. Try to tell my son he is anything other than an American, and he will likely punch you in the nose.
Actually, it is in general but it is screamed about the most in a specific region. But notice, California and the states that border it that take water from the Colorado River are all screaming about a lack of water. But notice, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho are not screaming. Is the "drought" magically not affecting them? No, however they do not have populations that are excess to the supply of water in the area. However, if tomorrow all of the people of California suddenly relocated to Washington and Oregon, then they would be in the same boat, as the water there is not enough to support an additional 40 million people. In fact, the population of Southern California alone is greater than the population of both of those states combined. See how that works?
Watch yourself. A census happens only once every 10 years! As with other analyses, one really needs to look at multiple sources.
LOL - so, you're bringing up a hooligan! The normal consideration concerns women, not men. And, you're ignoring the issue of one data point in our total population!
*facepalm* It is still showing clear positive growth. Not as much as 60 years ago, but still clear positive growth. Not negative. And want to know something else? We are in an actual decline of the death rates now. The peak of annual deaths was actually in 2010, and the death rate has been decreasing every year. And the cause should actually be obvious. The "Baby Boomers" are dying off. The Baby Boomers now range in age from 58 to 80. Almost the entire "Greatest Generation" is gone, and the boomers are going now. After that you have a slower generational growth, but it is still clear growth. Want to see how? My grandparents themselves had 6 kids among 4 of them. Of them, they had 7 kids in my generation. My generation, we have 9 kids, and the number is going to increase as one of my uncles started late, which is why I have cousins younger than my own kids. But they are also finally getting married and that will only increase. And so far of the 9 kids in the generation after me, there are another 7 kids. I expect that to be over 10 by the time my cousins stop having kids. That is as of this time 22 kids originating from 2 couples. Now the trend is down, as at least on my fraternal side they were all large families. Down is not the same as negative, and it does not matter where the kids come from, born to 8th generation Americans or the children of immigrants. Unless you are some kind of racist that feels that the children of immigrants are not really Americans.
Right. Tell you what, go tell Arnold Schwarzenegger he is not an American. Or Goran Visnjic. Or Ryan Reynolds. John Leguizamo, Anthony Hopkins, Tommy Chong, Peter Jennings, Slash, Dr. Kissinger, and I can just go on and on. You seem to have a real issue with immigrants, and take offense if one of them was insulted if somebody said they were not Americans. Or their children for that matter. Maybe you should stick to StormFront. Sounds like you might fit in there perfectly.
The 2010 census showed a total of 308,745,538 people in the US. 2020 showed a total of 331,449,281 people in the US. That is a large increase, an increase of 22,703,743. And the total immigrant population both decades was actually stable at around 40 million. But they still make up only 13.7% of the population, up from around 11% in 2020. And even that is not an all-time high, only the highest in the last century. Peak immigration during the era of records was actually 14.8% in 1890. But the silly claims about their kids is only some kind of twisted ethnic hatred. As any children born to them are not immigrants, they are Americans. I think I am seeing now why at least one person was on my list, I have no use for racists.
Those who have projected what climate change means over time have projected that the western side of the divide in OR and WA will tend to be wetter. I don't know what that means for the east side of those states, but there is a lot of agriculture and not very many people on that side. Remember that I've repeatedly agreed with your concern about people, right? So, I really don't know where you are going here. Are you struggling to find a disagreement? You do need to remember that it isn't all about the people. It's also about agriculture. West coast states depend on agriculture in a big way. One central point about population is that we don't have a methodology for telling people where to live. So, when considering remediation, telling people to go to WA or OR or ?? doesn't work. Plus, remember that OR has a desert, too. So, the size of the state can be deceiving to some.
I'm not interested in using your family or mine as an example of anything. I cited Fred on procreation rate. Take a look.
I have NO IDEA what the heck you are talking about. All those here contribute to US procreation. I've repeatedly pointed out that we NEED immigration - for the very reason of those you mention.
And the eastern half always drier. They are a desert as much as most of Idaho, Nevada, and Utah is. Here however is a historical average for much of the US, dating back over a century. https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/us-precipitation-1901-2019-a-decade-by-decade-look In fact, if one examines it the annual rainfall across the US is actually increasing. However, for some reason people as I originally stated are confusing overconsumption with drought. They are not the same thing.
U.S. Sacramento Bee Before and after: Dramatic photos show how California lake filled in just 3 months’ time
Another California reservoir just spilled for the first time in decades Modesto Bee Another Central Coast reservoir just spilled for the first time in decades San Luis Obispo Tribune
Yep, a flood control reservoir. And I noticed the wording they used is misleading. In reality, this is the first time since 1998 that the spillway overflowed. That is really not the same thing as the last time it was "filled". To give an idea, here is a shot with the lake in the background in June 2018. From this video, and if one looks the lake is pretty damned full for June. Maybe 10 feet down from the highest water levels if one looks at the shoreline in the background. For those that are not aware dams almost never overflow, that is a very rare thing. Most are never allowed to be over around 75% capacity, as they want reserve for unexpected deluges as well as preventing excess stress on the structure. The Oroville Reservoir has been full a great many times, but it only overflowed once. And if one looks at the shots empty, there are no trees, and there is not much plant growth other than grasses. Another dam that has only overflowed once is Boulder Dam, and that was in 1983 when record rainfalls caused it to overflow.
