U.S. Population Rises, Slowly, to 316 Million

The rate of population growth is the slowest in more than 70 years

  • Share
  • Read Later

The U.S. population grew at the lowest rate in more than 70 years, according to Census Bureau data released Monday, with most of the growth fueled by states in the south and west.

The total population reached 316,128,839 in July, an increase of .72 percent from the 313,873,685 total a year earlier. It’s the lowest rate of population growth in more than seven decades, according to the New York Times.

California, the nation’s most populous state, became the first in the union to top 38 million people this year after adding 332,643 people. Texas grew by 387,397 people, and Florida by 232,111. Despite a much smaller rate of growth, adding only 75,002, New York still edged out Florida as the third largest state.

North Dakota, in the midst of an ongoing oil boom, saw the highest percentage increase, growing by 3.14 percent in the year ending in July. Maine and West Virginia both decreased in size, and Puerto Rico lost more than 1 percent of its population.

The Census Bureau said separately that the population will hit  317,297,938 on Jan. 1, 2014, with one birth expected every 8 seconds and death every 12 seconds.

[New York Times]

24 comments
soulmansaul
soulmansaul

It makes sense; less U.S. production, less food,  lower birth rate, and higher death rate.


PigsCanFly
PigsCanFly

Some of us don't even want to bring children into this type of world we're in right now.

ejb4502
ejb4502

We still need to get the Latino/Catholic community on board with the cooperation of the Catholic Church. In L.A., there are places you can go where nearly every woman is pushing a baby carriage, often carrying more than one baby, and/or with other kids in tow. Whether it's Catholic doctrine against birth control or anchor-babies or both, areas like L.A. have and will be overwhelmed when it comes to social services, crime, infrastructure, etc. The good news is that many Catholics, especially in the Philippines, are starting to openly question the morality of Church doctrine, i.e., is it moral to deny birth control and end up with a population you can't properly feed & house?

MBAPhotography1
MBAPhotography1

This is excellent news. I always wondered though, why are Republicants so pro-life when they hate those same mothers once their child is born for being moochers and receiving government benefits? Seems to me, if comprehensive sex ed and greater access to contraception were to become compulsory, there would be less "welfare" babies, and therefore less "Democrats". Don't forget, rich people's kids are more likely to become good future republicans.


In all seriousness though, I truly believe that a child should only be brought into the world when their parents are in a position to BE parents. That means willing to take the time to raise them right, educate them, and ensure that they are at least materially comfortable. Less children per family is ultimately a very good thing for society. 

TonyCox
TonyCox

Border enforcement is working

guz
guz

Best news ever.

We need free birth control for men now. Men don't want babies, they want sex. And above all, people who can't afford to have children shouldn't have them...

QueBravo
QueBravo

This is consistent around the world. Look at Japan, with their herbivore movement. Many news outlet treated it like a strange phenomena, but other countries including the US are facing similar issues because of the fear of the unknown with the economy, and I saying long-term prospects, not the current recessions we are working our way out of. People are making less and less over the decades, coupled with high divorce rates, and antiquated family courts that push families through like cattle, the costs of having children are pushing many away from having kids, not to mention we are still seeing the "Me" generation types more worried about what they will get in life, rather than the larger picture of starting new life. But then again, there are probably too many people around to begin with, so it might be natures way to handle our virus like spread, to balance populations from our love of excess to all the trends to homosexuality. We think we control everything, but it's just not so. 

byrondelaney
byrondelaney

So why do we still have such a big unemployment/underemployment problem? What's going on? Greed? Corruption? 

jcrouse222
jcrouse222

"most of the growth fueled by states in the south and west."  Gee, I can't imagine what nationality is fueling

this growth. That giant sucking sound is Mexicans living on the gov't dole..............



A1125
A1125

@MBAPhotography1  


"In all seriousness though, I truly believe that a child should only be brought into the world when their parents are in a position to BE parents. That means willing to take the time to raise them right, educate them, and ensure that they are at least materially comfortable. Less children per family is ultimately a very good thing for society. "


You should also, then, wonder why Democrats are so pro-abortion when the entirety of their platform is based on the expansion of social programs that depend on an ever increasing population financing those expansions.

ThePragmaticRepublican
ThePragmaticRepublican

@MBAPhotography1 Your 2nd paragraph answers the question in the first.  Being anti-abortion and anti-mooching are not mutually exclusive mentalities.  It simply means that if you decide to sleep with another and, intentionally or not, conceive a child that it is your responsibility to take care of that child... not everyone else's.

Heavy19
Heavy19

@TonyCox People having less children is a much bigger factor than less immigrants.

A1125
A1125

@guz Absolutely -- free birth control for men would also give men far more reproductive rights than they've had, and allow them the same sort of sexual freedom without childbearing consequences that we agitate for women.

QueBravo
QueBravo

@guzIn a way it sounds good, but long-term you want to either maintain or stay around the same as any potential enemy. Right now there is no conceivable war Americans would have to fight that would include the entire country. It has been decades since a draft, and no one remembers the World Wars, much older times that having smaller populations could be dangerous to your way or life in that country, should another attack. We have never had to deal with that, and it's a forgotten fear. When you have the best Army in the world, based off less boots and more technology, there could be a day we could be defeated if our technology was hacked in such a way where boots mattered. To do that, you have to have people to put in them in the future.

soulmansaul
soulmansaul

@byrondelaney The reason is that we have become a country of gaming people, and only a tiny fraction of the population is actually creating and producing something of value.  We have become consumers, and other countries like China are taking advantage of our ignorance.

eagle11772
eagle11772

@byrondelaney  Because The Obamaniac is designing his socialist dream to make evrey American dependent on the government, that's why.

NaveedXVO
NaveedXVO

@byrondelaney Automation and offshoring. So pessimistic :P. We don't need so many people who's only skill is to be a cog. We should support a declining population and zero low skill immigration.

eagle11772
eagle11772

@jcrouse222 That's what The Obamaniac and his cronies, cohorts, and minions want. So they can create more Democratic voters who will vote for his socialist welfare state.  You guys voted for this BUM, not me !

MBAPhotography1
MBAPhotography1

@eagle11772 @byrondelaney  


Again with this STUPID socialist argument. Look at so called "socialist countries" such as those like Sweden, Denmark, or Finland. Guess what? Their students out perform ours, there is actually greater social mobility between economic classes, people are healthier, government is more representative, and people report higher levels of life satisfaction. OMG, THAT SOUNDS TERRIBLE!They are not depend on the government. They are free to innovate because constraints like the high cost of health care do not factor into risk. 


Hell even Canada is doing much better than the US with (gasp) socialized medicine!


I am a Democrat, but no fan of Obama. Your idea of socialism is confused with authoritarian communism. The reason many of our "safety net" programs, not to mention public parks, libraries, hospitals, etc even exist is because of the socialist / progressive movement that sought to counter the soul sucking inequality of the Gilded Age. Obama has made plenty of mistakes, but he in many ways has fallen far shorter of the reformer everyone envisioned. In fact, he has kept in place many of the same policies as Bush!



MBAPhotography1
MBAPhotography1

@eagle11772 @jcrouse222 


Or maybe, Republicans could do more to entice our growing minority population. Many Latinos would be more amenable to voting for you guys IF there weren't such a focus on kicking them out! The era of the old white male is over. Get over it. Evolve or become extinct.

Heavy19
Heavy19

@eagle11772 @jcrouse222 If you think your job at 7-11 is going to fund your retirement, think again.  Your going to be supported by social security.  Does that make you a socialist?

eagle11772
eagle11772

@Heavy19 Of COURSE I exercise my 2nd Amendment RIGHT to own weapons !  I own 4 pistols, 2 rifles 2 semi-automatic rifles, one .50 caliber machinegun, and some other things I can't mention here.  I have three 53' shipping containers buried here in the desert in southern Arizona which I've converted into a cozy home.  The only thing you can see from above is a plexiglass turret from a B-17 which I got at a good price on ebay, so I can peer outside to watch for The Obamaniac's black helicopters and gestapo storm troopers.  "From my cold, dead hands........."

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,105 other followers