Open Thread 1-7 June | 175 comments (175 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Population Doom (none / 0)

Firstly, the observation of discrepancy between "redneck" and liberal birth rates is not based on that one chart. I gave two other articles, one of them is statistics heavy. That is the broad subject we are talking about, if it needs to be spelled out.

Secondly, "cherry picking" the most extreme cases of birth rate and observing the color consistency is a totally fair game. Your can surely analyze further the middle pot, isolatedness. But your "double dough" is not on target. The less isolated, less conservative states are more mixed cases, thus their middle range birth rate is fully consistent with the supposed high discrepancy between conservatives and liberals. The researcher says, the discrepancy on the "county by county" level is only more clear.

So you will only worry when the absolute numbers even out? No discussion until then? Then I say, there is always sleep or the Nile.

by das monde on Fri Jun 5th, 2015 at 04:44:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Population Doom (none / 1)

I must admit I miss the Nile reference.

Is it a reference to Brave New World and the early attempts to teach kids during their sleep? A play on word with nil or nihilist?

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Sat Jun 6th, 2015 at 04:34:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Population Doom (4.00 / 2)

It's a play on words. "The Nile" sounds like "denial".

by fjallstrom on Sat Jun 6th, 2015 at 05:24:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

doubtful quotes (4.00 / 2)

"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.", usually attributed to Mark Twain

by Katrin on Sat Jun 6th, 2015 at 07:35:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Population Doom (4.00 / 4)

The chart is a "Wow!" chart. It relies on displaying outliers in a distribution to make a point. That is indeed a form of cherry-picking, especially when the other 27 states are considered, that present a much more ambiguous picture. Why present only 10 red states but 13 blue? Because 3 more red states would have muddied the picture presented? Why show Florida (not a particularly true-blue state) on 59.6, but not the neighbouring red states that are on 60-61?

das monde:

So you will only worry when the absolute numbers even out? No discussion until then?

"No discussion" is a strawman. There's plenty of discussion. If it doesn't say what you believe, that's tough.
Given the fertility rates cited across the whole distribution, and given the total population figures I gave for the outliers, it would seem that it'll be a long time before the population of those red states equals that of those blue states. And this is without considering mobility -- what will an increased population in the isolated interior have to build a life on? How many will leave for the exterior states? How many will then change their cultural and political attitudes (see melvin's comment)?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Jun 6th, 2015 at 04:59:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Population Doom (none / 0)

By "No discussion until then?" I refer to your strongly dismissal tone, as if we should not even think about this matter (until overwhelmed by numbers, presumably). It does not mean I have no moles (with tight beliefs) to whack here.

by das monde on Mon Jun 8th, 2015 at 03:34:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Population Doom (4.00 / 2)