3 ms·

You are wrong. San Francisco does not even build enough homes to match natural population growth. Neither do most cities on the Peninsula.

mc32 4y ago
As I posted below, here are the natural growth rates: Look at the figures: https://www.newgeography.com/content/007550-total-fertility-rate-metros-san-francisco-lowest-jacksonville-highest#:~:text=Major%20Metropolitan%20Areas%20with%20the%20Lowest%20TFRs,with%20a%20TFR%20of%201.52 https://www.newgeography.com/content/007550-total-fertility-.... Imgur: https://imgur.com/a/FQ7tVqs https://imgur.com/a/FQ7tVqs SF: 1.49 SJ: 1.59 That's not growth, it's decline.
- rcpt 4y ago
  Which is flat out insane given the economy
- shuckles 4y ago
  Your link 404s, and fertility rates are not measures of net new natural population growth. If everyone lives longer, you can still have more births than deaths with sub replacement fertility. In any case, the California Department of Finance gives counts of births and deaths by county, and you are wrong: https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E-2_Report_July-2010-2021_w.xlsx https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographi...
linuxftw 4y ago
There's almost no natural population growth in the US. It's all coming from immigrants.
- shuckles 4y ago
  There was not a single year in 2010-2019 where California had more deaths than births.
  - linuxftw 4y ago
    From [1]: > A rate of 2.1 children per woman is necessary to maintain a population at its current level (immigration and migration aside). California and the nation had fertility rates near population replacement levels in 2008, but every state falls below those levels today. California has fallen faster than most, dropping from 2.15 to 1.52 Well below replacement rates on births. I imagine a very large portion of the births are immigrant births as well, which would push the rate even lower. 1: https://www.ppic.org/blog/californias-plunging-birth-rates/ https://www.ppic.org/blog/californias-plunging-birth-rates/
    - shuckles 4y ago
      Why is everyone trying to infer net new births from fertility rates? We have the exact data: https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E-2_Report_July-2010-2021_w.xlsx https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographi... People can live longer, and natural population increase can persist long after fertility drops below replacement.

mc32 4y ago

As I posted below, here are the natural growth rates: Look at the figures: https://www.newgeography.com/content/007550-total-fertility-rate-metros-san-francisco-lowest-jacksonville-highest#:~:text=Major%20Metropolitan%20Areas%20with%20the%20Lowest%20TFRs,with%20a%20TFR%20of%201.52 https://www.newgeography.com/content/007550-total-fertility-.... Imgur: https://imgur.com/a/FQ7tVqs https://imgur.com/a/FQ7tVqs SF: 1.49 SJ: 1.59 That's not growth, it's decline.

rcpt 4y ago
Which is flat out insane given the economy
shuckles 4y ago
Your link 404s, and fertility rates are not measures of net new natural population growth. If everyone lives longer, you can still have more births than deaths with sub replacement fertility. In any case, the California Department of Finance gives counts of births and deaths by county, and you are wrong: https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E-2_Report_July-2010-2021_w.xlsx https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographi...

linuxftw 4y ago

There's almost no natural population growth in the US. It's all coming from immigrants.

shuckles 4y ago
There was not a single year in 2010-2019 where California had more deaths than births.
- linuxftw 4y ago
  From [1]: > A rate of 2.1 children per woman is necessary to maintain a population at its current level (immigration and migration aside). California and the nation had fertility rates near population replacement levels in 2008, but every state falls below those levels today. California has fallen faster than most, dropping from 2.15 to 1.52 Well below replacement rates on births. I imagine a very large portion of the births are immigrant births as well, which would push the rate even lower. 1: https://www.ppic.org/blog/californias-plunging-birth-rates/ https://www.ppic.org/blog/californias-plunging-birth-rates/
  - shuckles 4y ago
    Why is everyone trying to infer net new births from fertility rates? We have the exact data: https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E-2_Report_July-2010-2021_w.xlsx https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forecasting/Demographi... People can live longer, and natural population increase can persist long after fertility drops below replacement.