Worldometers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agrarian cultures that have yet to be reproductively "detuned" due to industrialization. All in due time.

[ October 11, 2005, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]
 
If you divide the numbers of cigarettes produced this year by the number of deaths caused by smoking this year, you could draw the conclusion that one would need to smoke 1.7 million cigarettes this year to cause death.
 
"Find out who is causing those births numbers to increase so rapidly and make them stop it."

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/peo_tee_bir_rat

Map & Graph: People: Teenage birth rate

1. United States 52.1
2. United Kingdom 30.8
3. New Zealand 29.8
4. Slovakia 26.9
5. Hungary 26.5
6. Iceland 24.7
7. Portugal 21.2
8. Canada 20.2
9. Poland 18.7
10. Ireland 18.7
11. Australia 18.4
12. Czech Republic 16.4
13. Austria 14.0
14. Germany 13.1
15. Norway 12.4
16. Greece 11.8
17. Belgium 9.9
18. Luxembourg 9.7
19. France 9.3
20. Finland 9.2
21. Denmark 8.1
22. Spain 7.9
23. Italy 6.6
24. Sweden 6.5
25. Netherlands 6.2


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr50/nvsr50_09.pdf

Teenage Births in the United States: State Trends, 1991–2000, an Update
 
quote:

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
Agrarian cultures that have yet to be reproductively "detuned" due to industrialization. All in due time.

Right, when we have standing room only on the planet, the rate of reproduction will slow down.
 
1struck - that's only teen births.

And the US is still pretty much on top of the heap among 1st world countries for overall birth rate. But, the clock that you were initially looking at is based upon population, not birth rate, and the US was the #4 contributor to population increase between 1950 and 1995, see below, and we're still in the top ten for projected increases. The high teen birth rate in the US is similar to 3rd world countries, although it varies a lot by state and region, and combined with the large population we end up being big contributors.

http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/Papers/gkh1/tabc1_3.htm
 
quote:

Originally posted by 1sttruck:
and the US was the #4 contributor to population increase between 1950 and 1995, see below,

But I'm guessing a big chunk of it can be attributed to immigration, not purely births.
 
Maybe there is some confusion here. The counter mentioned at the start of the thread was counting people, not rates. A ranking of countries by birth rate does not provide information on contribution to population increase as one also needs the population of the country. The US is a big country, so even modest birth rates can produce large increases in poplation. See below.

http://www.prb.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PRB/Educators/Human_Population/Migration2/Migration1.htm

The volume of legal migration has fluctuated since the 1930s. Immigration has accounted for an increasing portion of population growth as American women began having fewer children. Today one-third of the U.S. population growth is from net migration. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that the U.S. population will reach 403,687,000 by 2050. Of this projected growth, 36 percent may result from immigration, with 46,691,756 new immigrants being added in the next 50 years.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3761/is_200212/ai_n9157094

The U.S. population is growing as fast as or faster than any other more developed country. Between 1990 and 2000, nearly 33 million people were added to the U.S. population-a group nearly as large as Argentina's population, and the greatest 10-year increase ever for the country. This growth is in stark contrast to the slow or negative population growth in other more developed countries, and reinforces the United States' demographic position in the developed world.

At 288 million in 2002, the United States is also the world's third-largest country. Although it is well behind numbers one and two-demographic billionaires China and India-the United States remains the largest more developed country. Russia, with 145 million in 2002, comes closest in size, but its numbers are dwindling because it has more deaths than births each year. Japan-at 127 million the third-largest more developed country-also faces population decline in the near future. Other more developed countries, a group that includes the rest of Europe, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, are far smaller and are not expected to grow much larger over the next half-century. The United States, in contrast, is projected to add nearly 140 million people by 2050, bringing the population total to 420 million.

While the U.S. population increased substantially throughout the 20th century, the percent increase each decade varied from 21 percent between 1900 and 1910 to 7 percent between 1930 and 1940. After holding steady at close to 10 percent per decade between 1970 and 1990, the pace quickened in the 1990s. The magnitude of growth during the 1990s surprised even the Census Bureau and population experts who track demographic trends. The 2000 Census count came in about 7 million higher than expected. Many demographers think that much of this discrepancy is explained by international migration: More immigrants settled in the United States and fewer residents moved abroad than the Census Bureau had anticipated.1

Fertility has been the driving force of population growth in the United States. In every decade of the 20th century, births far outnumbered deaths, generating natural increase. In 2001, 4.0 million babies were born in the United States, while 2.4 million people died. The annual number of births determines population growth, but this number, often measured as births per 1,000 population, reflects the share of women of childbearing age as well as the average number of children each woman bears. Demographers often look at the changes in the average number of children per woman to detect trends that can be used to forecast future growth. The total fertility rate (TFR) is often used to measure the average total number of children a woman would have given current birth rates.
 
"In 2001, 4.0 million babies were born in the United States, while 2.4 million people died."

The net increase in the US was 1.6 million, which is about 3 per minute. The US as a country is a big contributor to population increase, but North America as a region is a small contributor compared to regions like Asia or Africa.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Pablo:
1struck - is Mexico included in North America?

Please post the numbers for Mexico.


The Central American countries, Carribean islands and Greenland are part og North America too.
 
I would like to see something a little bit lighter in nature. For instance, a counter that counts the number of:
-beers consumed
-times guys have been rejected by gals
-computer mice are produced
-computers need to be reloaded with Windows everyday
-times refrigerator doors are opened and closed
-AA batteries sold
-hamburgers consumed
-times the name "Bob" is mentioned in any Newhart episode.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top