I've been warning about this for years. As of 2024, the fertility rate in the United States is 1.64. The fertility rate is a somewhat difficult number to measure, but can roughly be thought of as the number of children an average woman will give birth to over the course of their lifetime. For a population to remain stable, you need 2.1 children per woman.
The population of the US is still increasing, primarily on the basis of the Millennials, which followed a pattern similar to but more muted than the Baby Boomers. The growth rate is the first derivative of the population and is still (barely positive), but the growth acceleration rate, the second derivative, shifted negative about fifteen years ago. Not counting immigration, the US population will peak in about 2040, about 15 years ahead of what was predicted at the turn of the century. Immigration is likely to continue for some time after that, but by 2050 or thereabouts, the same phenomenon will be hitting immigration rates, and it is likely that we'll see signs of that by as soon as 2037 or so.
What's worth noting, however, is that immigration for the most part is concentrated in a few key areas - around the southern border with Mexico and northwards to about Colorado, along Florida and the Gulf Coast, and various population groups that are facing wars or similar actions (the number of Ukranians emigrating to the US, mostly the elderly and children) has spiked, not surprisingly). In general, recent immigrants don't immediately impact schools, though the next generation generally is schooled.
In many parts of the country, where immigration is usually not an immediate factor, the birth rate differential of -0.46 births is already being felt, with it predicted to exceed -0.5 births within the next decade. This rate of decline would be faster except that woman are having children later in life as in vitro fertilization becomes more widely used, but because this is such a slowly changing number, there is still an open question about how significant the latter effect is.
Regardless, the upshot of all of this is that we are looking at a demographic shift that is due to several factors all pointing to a long term (multigenerational) stabilization (and ultimately decline) in population that is already affecting our schools, our workplaces and ultimately our senior years. As with other crises, the effects have occurred slowly at first, but are now becoming noticeable. We probably can't change anything in any meaningful way as far as stopping this (nor, to be honest, would this decline necessarily be a bad thing for humanity) but it does mean that we need to start adapting our institutions to recognize that the status is going to be increasingly non-quo, and that if we expect things to remain the same, we will be guaranteed nothing but disappointment.
New story with Sara Randazzo: Many American school systems are struggling with the exact same problem: too many schools and not enough students. But closing schools is educationally and politically fraught. https://lnkd.in/exGeyFPt
America Has Too Many Schools
wsj.com
I help startups with financial projections, investor pitch decks, and compliance| $20M raised for 3,200+ clients in 20+ countries| I streamline financial growth and regulatory success| Ex- Deloitte
3moYou've highlighted a crucial aspect of urban dynamics, especially in the post-pandemic era. The shift from in-person to remote work has indeed reshaped job markets, disproportionately affecting those without digital skills. This has led to a migration trend not necessarily tied to birth rates but to the pursuit of better employment opportunities. Your point about the role of lawmakers in creating jobs and providing retraining for the digital economy is key. Such initiatives could certainly help stabilize urban populations and keep families in their communities. Focusing on economic development and education reform could indeed mitigate the challenges faced by urban school districts.