Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / June 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

U.S. population about to hit 300 million!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
exploding population - 25 Jun 2006 22:29 GMT
America set to hit 300 million and counting ...

Milestone baby likely to be Hispanic

Sunday, June 25, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. population is on target to hit 300 million
this fall and it's a good bet the milestone baby -- or immigrant --
will be Hispanic.

No one will know for sure because the date and time will be just an
estimate.

But Latinos -- immigrants and those born in this country -- are
driving the population growth, accounting for almost half the increase
last year, more than any other ethnic or racial group.

White non-Hispanics, who make up about two-thirds of the population,
accounted for less than one-fifth of the increase.

When the population reached 200 million in 1967, there was no accurate
tally of U.S. Hispanics. The first effort to count Hispanics came in
the 1970 census, and the results were dubious.

The Census Bureau counted about 9.6 million Latinos, a little less
than 5 percent of the population, but the bureau acknowledged that
figure was inflated.

In 1967, there were fewer than 10 million people in the U.S. who were
born in other countries; that was not even one in 20.

Today, there are 36 million immigrants, about one in eight.

"We were much more of an insular society back then," said William
Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think
tank.

As of early Sunday, there were 299,058,932 people in the United
States, according to the Census Bureau's population clock. The
estimate is based on annual numbers for births, deaths and
immigration, averaged throughout the year.

The 300-millionth person in the U.S. will likely be born -- or cross
the border -- in October, though bureau officials are wary of
committing to a particular month because of the subjective nature of
the clock.
Justin Pate - 25 Jun 2006 22:48 GMT
> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> committing to a particular month because of the subjective nature of
> the clock.

Horray!  USA! USA! USA!

Though I think it would have been cooler to live in 1967 when there
were far fewer immigrants around.
Gerry - 25 Jun 2006 23:11 GMT
> > America set to hit 300 million and counting ...

> > the clock.
>
> Horray!  USA! USA! USA!
>
> Though I think it would have been cooler to live in 1967 when there
> were far fewer immigrants around.

But, a Hell of a lot more Hippies.
shawn - 25 Jun 2006 23:25 GMT
>> The 300-millionth person in the U.S. will likely be born -- or cross
>> the border -- in October, though bureau officials are wary of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>Though I think it would have been cooler to live in 1967 when there
>were far fewer immigrants around.

In some ways it was cooler just because there were much fewer people
around. Most cities that are known for traffic now didn't have that
big a problem with traffic back then. Land was cheap even on the
ocean. Though the food choices were much more limited.
videonovels@yahoo.com - 26 Jun 2006 13:27 GMT
> >> The 300-millionth person in the U.S. will likely be born -- or cross
> >> the border -- in October, though bureau officials are wary of
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> big a problem with traffic back then. Land was cheap even on the
> ocean. Though the food choices were much more limited.

.

Radical.  How DARE you say the planet would be better off with fewer
Human animals running around?

(just joking)

I agree.  This planet would be better off with fewer people.  "Damaging
the environment" wouldn't even be an issue if there were only 50
million instead of 300 million Americans.  There'd be plenty of cheap
land to live upon, plenty of room on the highway for your drive to work
(goodbye Washington D.C. gridlock), and plenty of food & other
resources to share.

.

I thought it was amusing when Japan started telling women to get
pregant.  That's the WRONG thing to do.  Japan should be happy that
it's population is shrinking, and someday will have fewer people trying
to squeeze on to that little island & thereby living a more
sustainable/less damaging lifestyle on this planet.

.
Ubiquitous - 26 Jun 2006 00:27 GMT
>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...

yay! More TV viewers!

Signature

It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.

Morton Davis - 26 Jun 2006 01:28 GMT
> >America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
> yay! More TV viewers!

More gun owners.
Ubiquitous - 26 Jun 2006 01:49 GMT
>> >America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>
>> yay! More TV viewers!
>>
>More gun owners.

It's called the "second amendment". Try not to cry.

Signature

It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.

shawn - 26 Jun 2006 02:06 GMT
>>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
>yay! More TV viewers!

I wonder if that's why the number of entries each goes up dramatically
in the IMDB as the decades go by. Or maybe more people put in the
current stuff and the older stuff has just been lost.

1950  2365 entries
1960  3350 entries
1970  4748 entries
1980  5394 entries
1990  7357 entries
2000 14348 entries
2005 20368 entries
2006  9366 entries so far

That includes everything such as TV shows, movies and other projects.
Deaf Power - 26 Jun 2006 11:46 GMT
>>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
>yay! More TV viewers!

More trash, more cars jamming up the freeways....

--
Bush = Nixon

https://political.moveon.org/donate/notillegal-QT.html

http://www.bushflash.com/14.html
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
http://www.new-enlightenment.com/nazification_step4.htm

RichA - 26 Jun 2006 00:43 GMT
> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> driving the population growth, accounting for almost half the increase
> last year, more than any other ethnic or racial group.

See any similarity?

http://www.hat.net/album/asia/india/10_temples_and_gods/13_bikaner/041209224218_
temple_of_rats.jpg

zaryzary2003@yahoo.com - 26 Jun 2006 01:46 GMT
> See any similarity?
>
> http://www.hat.net/album/asia/india/10_temples_and_gods/13_bikaner/041209224218_
temple_of_rats.jpg

Similary to what, Rich? Is that your family portrait?
trotsky - 26 Jun 2006 13:22 GMT
>>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> http://www.hat.net/album/asia/india/10_temples_and_gods/13_bikaner/041209224218_
temple_of_rats.jpg

That's not a very good family portrait, Rich.
M. Hale - 26 Jun 2006 00:49 GMT
> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
> Milestone baby likely to be Hispanic

And probably born to parents who are in the county illegally....
saroman@racsa.co.cr - 26 Jun 2006 02:09 GMT
> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...

[snip]

Wow! Three hundred million of the most ignorant, most obnoxious people
in the world, and all in one place.  Not to mention the greatest
argument there is for population control.
ameijers - 26 Jun 2006 03:11 GMT
> > America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> in the world, and all in one place.  Not to mention the greatest
> argument there is for population control.

Don't get snotty now. Without all us rich ignorant a.sholes to buy the
unneeded goods the dollar-a-day laborers in the third world make, they would
have even less than they do now.

aem sends...
ANIM8Rfsk - 26 Jun 2006 03:44 GMT
>> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> in the world, and all in one place.  Not to mention the greatest
> argument there is for population control.

This coming from Costa Rica???  We've read about you in Jurassic Park.
shawn - 26 Jun 2006 04:04 GMT
>>> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>This coming from Costa Rica???  We've read about you in Jurassic Park.

Is CR Costa Rica? I was thinking it might be Croatia. Either way there
isn't much to be said in comparison. Heck, it seems that about half
the people Central and South America want to come live and work in the
USA so it can't be that bad in comparison to their home countries.
Matthew Russotto - 26 Jun 2006 23:10 GMT
>>>> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>the people Central and South America want to come live and work in the
>USA so it can't be that bad in comparison to their home countries.

Costa Rica is CR, Croatia is HR.  I wonder how the Nicaraguans slaving
away on the Costa Rican coffee plantations feel about the wealthy (by
comparison) Costa Ricans...
Signature

 There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
 result in a fully-depreciated one.

lab~rat  >:-) - 27 Jun 2006 13:47 GMT
>>>>> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>away on the Costa Rican coffee plantations feel about the wealthy (by
>comparison) Costa Ricans...

Better question is how do young teenage prostitutes feel about being
exploited while their government allows it?  Costa Ricans should be
ashamed of themselves...
--
lab~rat  >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
saroman@racsa.co.cr - 27 Jun 2006 17:02 GMT
[snip]

> Better question is how do young teenage prostitutes feel about being
> exploited while their government allows it?  Costa Ricans should be
> ashamed of themselves...
> --
[snip]

I see that brain dead lab~rat keeps ignoring the documentation
confirming that the rate of underage prostitution in the US is twice
that of Costa Rica.  You really need to get laid.
lab~rat  >:-) - 28 Jun 2006 12:46 GMT
>[snip]
>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>confirming that the rate of underage prostitution in the US is twice
>that of Costa Rica.  

Difference is that it's against the law and enforced in the US while
the Costa Rican   condones it.

>You really need to get laid.

If I ever get an urge for 14 year old nookie, I'll go to Costa Rica
where I can get away with paying for it...
--
lab~rat  >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Bob Ward - 28 Jun 2006 23:50 GMT
>>[snip]
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>If I ever get an urge for 14 year old nookie, I'll go to Costa Rica
>where I can get away with paying for it...

Be sure and notify the Costa Rican consuklate so they can line you up
with the appropriate people.
http://www.1-costaricalink.com/costa_rica_entertainment/singles_bars_costa_rica.htm
Attention!
Prostitutes and prostitution are tolerated in Costa Rica. Promoting
prostitution, or pimping, is illegal and carries stiff prison terms if
convicted. The Costa Rican Government also takes a strong stance
against sexual activities, of any kind, with minors.

If you are a pedophile, or entertain thoughts of having sexual
relations with anyone under the age of 18, male or female, Costa Rica
is the wrong country for you. You will be severely punished if caught.
First time offenses can put you in a Costa Rican prison for the rest
of your life.
Matthew Russotto - 28 Jun 2006 15:48 GMT
>>>>>> America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>exploited while their government allows it?  Costa Ricans should be
>ashamed of themselves...

They just blame that on American tourists.

Signature

 There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
 result in a fully-depreciated one.

Culture of Corruption - 26 Jun 2006 02:23 GMT
>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
>Milestone baby likely to be Hispanic

Good, the Repubs are sh.tting all over our little brown vot, err,
brothers.

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Justin Pate - 26 Jun 2006 14:24 GMT
> >America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
> >
> >Milestone baby likely to be Hispanic
>
> Good, the Repubs are sh.tting all over our little brown vot, err,
> brothers.

Nice parody of a Democrat.  Very funny.
queenie - 26 Jun 2006 14:23 GMT
>America set to hit 300 million and counting ...
>
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>committing to a particular month because of the subjective nature of
>the clock.

Just speaking from my POV, I think that's the real reason behind the
anti-abortion movement.  More whites would get abortions than
minorities.

"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
Lord Acton
Justin Pate - 26 Jun 2006 14:25 GMT
> Just speaking from my POV, I think that's the real reason behind the
> anti-abortion movement.  More whites would get abortions than
> minorities.

Damn right!  Who wants to see a world become majority Muslim?
Roedy Green - 27 Jun 2006 20:48 GMT
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 21:29:15 +0000, exploding population
<theus@goes.boom> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said

>The U.S. population is on target to hit 300 million
>this fall and it's a good bet the milestone baby -- or immigrant --
>will be Hispanic.

see http://mindprod.com/environment/population.html
for why this is nothing to celebrate.

Every extra person is going to make the energy crunch that much harder
to deal with.

Before the age of oil the USA was able to support only about 76
million with most people doing manual agricultural labour.

The green revolution which allowed the population to balloon to 300
million, requires enormous quantities of oil and natural gas.

We can't keep doing that as the oil flow dwindles.  We either have to
find ever more energy efficient ways of growing and distributing food,
or we have to cut back on the number of people, or some of both.

Signature

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com 
"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory."
~ W. Edwards Deming

videonovels@yahoo.com - 28 Jun 2006 14:49 GMT
> Before the age of oil the USA was able to support only about 76
> million with most people doing manual agricultural labour.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> find ever more energy efficient ways of growing and distributing food,
> or we have to cut back on the number of people, or some of both.

.

I agree we will need to cut-back, but things are not quite as desperate
as you make them seem.  The largest supply of oil is directly north of
us in Canada's oil shale reserves.  And we've got literally mountains
filled with coal which we could probably liquefy & convert to diesel
fuel to keep the cars running.

Obviously we'd be better off with 100 million people (not just energy,
but also living space), but we're not going to face a disaster in the
future.  We'll just need to make some sacrifices.

.
shawn - 28 Jun 2006 15:42 GMT
>> Before the age of oil the USA was able to support only about 76
>> million with most people doing manual agricultural labour.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>but also living space), but we're not going to face a disaster in the
>future.  We'll just need to make some sacrifices.

The interesting thing is without all of the immigration of people into
the USA (legal and illegal) we would have a shrinking population. It
seems that all of the first world countries are experiencing shrinking
populations as people choose to have smaller families. So if we could
raise the standard of living overnight in China, India, Africa and the
South and Central American countries the worlds population might
actually begin to shrink.
morticide - 28 Jun 2006 15:50 GMT
> >> Before the age of oil the USA was able to support only about 76
> >> million with most people doing manual agricultural labour.
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> South and Central American countries the worlds population might
> actually begin to shrink.

Russia is already experiencing a population decline.  I figure the US
population will level off at 350 million in about 10-15 years as the
Mexicans start heading back home to find jobs.  If I could remember the
source, I ran across an estimate from "experts" that expect the world
population to level off at the 10.5 billion level in around 50 years.
shawn - 28 Jun 2006 16:38 GMT
>> >> Before the age of oil the USA was able to support only about 76
>> >> million with most people doing manual agricultural labour.
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>source, I ran across an estimate from "experts" that expect the world
>population to level off at the 10.5 billion level in around 50 years.

That's a good thing. If the population of the US stabilizes at about
350 million then that's a workable number. With the rise  in broadband
technologies and the rise in information based industries there could
be man more people choosing to live in smaller, more remote
communities so the large cities don't have to grow to population
densities of places like Tokyo.

I see from looking at this site:
http://gsociology.icaap.org/report/demsum.html that even the
population in the less developed countries is declining. That seems
surprising to me, but it does point to a stabilizing of the world's
population.
videonovels@yahoo.com - 29 Jun 2006 16:19 GMT
> >> On 28 Jun 2006 06:49:00 -0700, "videonovels@yahoo.com"
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> That's a good thing. If the population of the US stabilizes at about
> 350 million then that's a workable number. ....

The U.S. population according to the last Census has experienced 0.2%
natural growth (not counting immigrants), so we are not yet in negative
growth, but probably will be soon (like Europe/Japan).

I was annoyed with the Japanese government: "Here's some money; take
some time off from your jobs & have babies."  Jeez.  They should be
HAPPY their population is starting to shrink, not encouraging more
growth.  Short-sighted politicians.

.
Geoff Miller - 29 Jun 2006 13:48 GMT
> We either have to find ever more energy efficient ways of growing
> and distributing food, or we have to cut back on the number of
> people, or some of both.

I say we generate electricity by burning liberals.

Geoff

Signature

"Why do we need to mark our territory by spitting lung
tapioca on the wall for all to see?" -- Mike Golobay

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.