Conversation on Population Growth
Celia:
I will offer up another perspective.
In 2006, Joel Garreau wrote a piece in the Smithsonian called “300 million and Counting.” This article is still readily available. The point of the article was the U.S. population which was an approximate 300 million. It was on the verge of creating only enough citizens to maintain present numbers.
“In 2006 the US States’ population was growing at the rate of ~1 percent per year, thanks in part to immigration and its secondary effects. The United States did accept more legal immigrants as permanent residents than the rest of the world combined. Recent arrivals did tend to have more children than established residents. That was until their descendants attained affluence and education. The birthrates of these Americans would also drop below replacement levels. Overall, (counting both immigrants and the native-born) the United States then had a replacement rate of 2.03.”
That was then, Now the replacement rate is at ~1.7 or 1.7 children per couple. As you can see on the Fed Graph, since 1960, the replacement rate has been decreasing. Americans are having smaller families. Is this good or bad?
It depends a lot on which way America is going. Greater automation would eliminate the need for labor. However, there will always be a need for such and probability not as much labor input. It is also not like we are being over-whelmed with people. This is also taking into consideration of Trump and others being of similar thoughts. I believe this to be an issue for them and not so much for a majority of Americans.
Recent article by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs has a piece on this also. As the Chicago Council on Global Affairs polling notes, American attitudes toward immigration differ notably among the various racial and ethnic subgroups of Americans. Also . . .
White Americans are more likely to favor decreasing legal immigration, and more likely to favor deporting undocumented immigrants rather than providing them a path to legal status or citizenship. By contrast, other racial groups in the United States generally prefer to maintain current levels of legal immigration and are more likely to favor a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
But then the reality of replacement places a role in determining the correct policy. Several inputs to determining a policy? The largest segment being baby boomers are aging out. Couples are having few children. Immigrants are more likely to have more children in the beginning. And finally, labor input will still be in demand going forward.
Determinants of immigration policy? Will the increasing number of people of many different races, nationalities, and ethnic groups in the United States make the country a better place to live in, a worse place to live in, or does it make no difference? A majority would keep it at the present level and increased.
Another issue is how soon should immigrants be allowed to become citizens. Should there be a longer waiting period? Presently, Permanent resident for at least 5 years; or at least 3 years if you are married to a US citizen.
It is safe to say a large minority are concerned about who comes to and stays in America And they are at the helm driving America’s direction today. A detailed American immigration policy continues to be how to resolve the status of millions of undocumented immigrants living and working in the United States.
On questions of immigration reform, Hispanic (51%) and Black Americans (50%) are the most likely to support a direct route to citizenship for illegal immigrants currently working in the US. Asian Americans support a path to citizenship but are more likely to favor requiring a penalty and waiting period (30% without and 34% with conditions). Both Asian (28%) and White Americans (27%) are the most likely to favor requiring these immigrants to leave the country.
It is safe to say, the United States will need replacements for baby boomers aging out. For the United States today, the decision to be determined will be “from what country will these new citizens be from in the future?”
Some sources.
“Demographic Divides on Immigration and Diversity,” Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Why replace the baby boomers? The US (and other countries) might do better with falling populations.
@Kaleberg,
I had the same question. If anything like the promises of AI and robotics come to pass in the next 20 years, there would be a severe decrease in the need for human labor. Now would be the time to start shrinking the population.
Joel:
The replacement rate is 1.7. So, the reduction is already occurring. There is a timing issue here with the babyboomer reductions. “The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that 6.7 million jobs will be added to the economy by 2033. However, the number of workers available to fill those jobs is expected to be constrained by an ongoing wave of retiring Baby Boomers, slowing population growth among working age adults, and immigration levels coming up short of what’s needed to maintain employment growth.” US Labor Shortage: Who Will Do the Work? July 2025.
The issue here is population. Us Citizens are not replacing themselves. Growth is occurring with immigrants and their families. Even that will age out. Trump is helping it along with his bigoted and racist manners and beliefs. It is a big country also with room for growth and new opportunities.
Kaleberg:
It would be replacement rate. Large numbers of Baby Boomers are aging out into retirement. Unless there is a severe decrease for the need of Labor, we will be shy of such input. Bridging the Gap: Meeting Workforce Needs Over the Next Decade
It is a good question to ask why!