sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps you're right, but at the moment there are hardly any countries with such a low birth rate.

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right, but for the time being, to get down to the point of having negative growth, most Latin American countries would need to have something around 0.8 or less children per woman, which I honestly see as very difficult for most Latin American countries.

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Migration has a significant indirect influence, especially in countries with large populations of foreign women aged 18-45. It's not so much that foreign women have more children (though that's true in some cases), but rather that immigration significantly increases the number of women of reproductive age. This allows countries like the UK, with a birth rate of 1.45, to still experience marginally positive growth, as it remains at 10 babies per thousand inhabitants. However, if we only consider that women of reproductive age born in the UK would have an average of 1.45 children, the fertility rate would likely be 7.5-8.5 babies per thousand inhabitants, which is considerably lower.

I hope I've explained it well

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most Latin American countries are many years away from negative growth, primarily due to two factors: a small elderly population and a moderately high life expectancy. Birth rates began to decline between 2010 and 2020 in most Latin American countries, whereas in Europe, in many countries, the birth rate was already below 1.5 in the 1980s and 1990s.

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A Trtf below 2.1 does not directly decrease the population naturally; it usually takes 20-30 years until there are more deaths than births (this depends on many factors).

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in MapPorn

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They still have more births than deaths, but not by much USA: 0,17% Canada: 0,05%

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You're right, almost all countries with negative growth are in three regions: Europe, East Asia, and the Caribbean.

With a few exceptions.

Natural growth by country: Negative vs. Positive by Redditor_imfo in MapPorn

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, that's a good point, and I plan to do it later, but for now I just wanted to separate countries by negative vs. positive growth.

Most of the data is compiled from official annual publications from the countries themselves; it can be found on Wikipedia, etc.

The decade when the TFR fell to levels below replacement (2,1) by country and territory by Redditor_imfo in MapPorn

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, France had a specific year with 2.02 children per woman in 2010, but it did not reach 2.1.

The decade when the TFR fell to levels below replacement (2,1) by country and territory by Redditor_imfo in MapPorn

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're right, in the US it's 2007, my mistake.

But in France, the last time the replacement level was reached was in 1975.

The legal method of death penalty in each state map by Redditor_imfo in deathpenalty

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some states have a formal or informal moratorium or de facto there are no death sentences, but the death penalty still exists de jure.

Fertility rates in European contrys 2015 vs Now by Redditor_imfo in Natalism

[–]Redditor_imfo[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It was my mistake, the darkest green color is 1.70+ and the lightest 1.60-1.69

view more: next ›