3 ms·
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-francisc
by 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 agoWhich is flat out insane given the economy
- shuckles 4y agoYour 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...