Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Decreasing White Majority in the US

  1. May 11, 2004 #1
    US Population by Race:

    1970:
    White 82.9%
    Hispanic 5.2%
    Black 11.1%
    Asian 0.7%

    1980:
    White 79.8%
    Hispanic 6.4%
    Black 11.7%
    Asian 1.5%

    1990:
    White 75.2%
    Hispanic 9%
    Black 12.1%
    Asian 2.9%

    2000:
    White 69.1%
    Hispanic 12.5%
    Black 12.3%
    Asian 3.6%

    2050 Projection:
    White 53%
    Hispanic 22%
    Black 15%
    Asian 9%

    Source: US Census Bureau


    For more detailed information and many nifty graphs, go here:
    http://www.mbda.gov/documents/mbdacolor.pdf [Broken]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. May 11, 2004 #2

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Do you have similar statistics at your fingertips for eye color, hair color, blood type?
     
  4. May 11, 2004 #3

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    race? ethnic group??

    Here's a quote from a http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html [Broken]: "note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean a person of Latin American descent (including persons of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)".

    But BlackVision's post starts "US Population by Race:" and says "Source: US Census Bureau".

    Is there an inconsistency here?

    Also, IIRC, there is a wealth of data (from the US Census Bureau?) on 'inter-racial marriages' (they're probably, in fact, marriages between people who are from different ethnic backgrounds) - both the number and proportion (expressed as a percentage of marriages between partners of the same ethnic background) are increasing, in some cases rapidly. Assuming that such marriages are no less 'fertile' than others, this suggests that many within the US have a rich ancestry. How does this diverse ethnic heritage of many individuals show up in the stats?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  5. May 11, 2004 #4
    Hispanic isn't a race. I knew that. And hopefully you knew it as well. People defined as Hispanic are usually a mixture of 3 primary races. Caucasian, Native American, and Black. Depending on region.

    But to be more specific. Hispanic is a mix of Caucasian and Native American in these countries: Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Colombia, Venezuela, and Chile

    And a mix of Caucausian and African in these countries: Cuba and Dominican Republic

    Some hispanic countries are more purebreed Caucasian such as Argentina.

    What's ironic is that people think interracial breeding will eliminate racial division. What it ends up doing is creating a new "racial" group like Hispanic, and cause even more division.

    Also I never ever brought up Hispanics into the other discussion. So don't know what "inconsistency" you are talking about.
     
  6. May 11, 2004 #5
    There is a "2 race or more/mixed race" box in the Census Bureau form. Only 2.4% of Americans marked that box.
     
  7. May 11, 2004 #6

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Given what the Census Bureau says about the group it calls 'Hispanic', isn't it inconsistent to put it in the same group as 'White', 'Black', and 'Asian'? I mean, presumably each person who answered 'Hispanic' in the 1980 census (for example; the 2000 census brings new inconsistencies) *also* ticked a box like 'white', 'black', 'Hawaiian', ... yet all your percentages add up to close to 100%.
     
  8. May 11, 2004 #7
    Hispanics if not giving the hispanic option, will pretty much all of them, mark the "white" box. This is why the box called "white non hispanic" has emerged. And the statistics I gave here for white is "white non hispanic"
     
  9. May 11, 2004 #8

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    As I see it, white's are still by far the single largest population.

    I think we all agree that Hispanic is an ethnic, not racial classification. Most Hispanic's would be classified as "white" for race since "caucasian" is no longer used. So that would definitely bump the overall "white" race to a huge majority. So, the statement that there is a decreasing white majority is really negligible. And who cares? I didn't realize that the US is supposed to be primarily white. I must have missed that part in the constitution.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  10. May 11, 2004 #9

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    ... and such a choice was introduced only in the 2000 census, I believe.

    This makes the stats harder to understand ... based solely on the marriage rates, and assuming that children of 'mixed marriages' would select the box you refer to, there is considerable under-reporting of this category.

    That doesn't create inconsistencies as long as the data are interpreted as the CB says they should be ... (from a quote in an earlier post of BlackVision's, my emphasis): "The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups." - self-selection, sociopolitical constructs, ...

    However, if the data is to be interpreted in terms of ancestry, or DNA, (etc), there would clearly need to be a lot of heavy analysis to remove both the obvious confounding factors and, no doubt, a whole host of not-so-obvious ones.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2004
  11. May 11, 2004 #10

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That is a rather important clarification, don't you think?

    How did you (or the CB) count those who ticked '2 or more races'?
     
  12. May 11, 2004 #11
    Hispanic is not a racial classification but an ethnic classification. You are correct.

    I never stated that the US should be primarily white. I never stated that it was good nor bad that the white population is decreasing. I was merely showing the future ethnic makeup of America.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2004
  13. May 11, 2004 #12
    People who marked 2 races are more is grouped separately. For more information. Visit www.census.gov
     
  14. Jun 16, 2004 #13
    Just out of curiosity, what "races" do you think well be on the 2050 census, and do you think we, as a whole, we even care by then (will their be as much racism as their is know).

    Personal i think we should define people by ethinciy/culture, if we have the urge to define someone at all. I know pleanty of who are of a certain race, but have an different ethicincity.
     
  15. Jun 16, 2004 #14

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Sorry dude. I was a census enumerator in the year 2000 and there was no such box. There was also no box to mark for two or more races. It was a contentious issue because we had to tell all of the hispanic people we encountered that they must select "white" as their race, but that they could select "hispanic of (insert national origin)" as the answer to the following question. Heck, half of our training probably consisted of going over how to handle this. Given the difficulty with these forms, I doubt that the statistics the Census Bureau has are really all that reliable. Another thing: We were also instructed to tell the people filling out the forms that they could select whatever they wanted as their race and ethnicity, that it was entirely a matter of their self-perception.

    What's your point anyway? Are you afraid of a nation in which whites do not have such a large majority?
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2004
  16. Jun 16, 2004 #15

    Kerrie

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    blackvision, i am a little concerned with your fixiation on race...i agree that we all need equality, but race is only an issue when it is made an issue.
     
  17. Jun 16, 2004 #16

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm wondering the same thing. What was the point of posting those statistics? Is there a point BlackVision is trying to make? Is there a question he or she has about those statistics? Is he/she awaiting a tutorial on anthropology, or population dynamics, or the methods of how the US Census Bureau collects their statistics? Or should we be discussing what assumptions were used to project the population composition in 2050? I'm actually curious about the last of those. Though, I'm also content to keep myself healthy enough to still be alive in 2050 to see for myself what really happens. :biggrin:
     
  18. Jun 17, 2004 #17

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    If you're going to comment on the statistics you post, you should at least be somewhat knowledgeable about how they are collected. Read your own links. The 2000 Census did not include Hispanic as an option in the race question, it was a separate question entirely. 5.5% of the population checked off a newly created category called "some other race" in the race question, and the Census Bureau reports that the majority of those checking off "some other race" were Hispanic.

    Also stated by the Census Bureau:

    "The question on race for Census 2000 was different from the one for the 1990 census in several ways. Most significantly, respondents were given the option of selecting one or more race categories to indicate their racial identities. 3
    "Because of these changes, the Census 2000 data on race are not directly
    comparable with data from the 1990 census or earlier censuses.
    Caution must be used when interpreting changes in the racial composition of the U.S. population over time."

    I've added the boldface for emphasis.

    Source of the above quoted text (a pdf available on the census website):
    Issued March 2001
    C2KBR/01-1
    Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin 2000
    Census 2000 Brief
    By
    Elizabeth M. Grieco and
    Rachel C. Cassidy
     
  19. Jun 17, 2004 #18
    I am knowledgeable. Notice that the White percentage is a decent amount larger than "White Non Hispanic" And the fact that a category called "White Non Hispanic" even exists. There's your first clue that Hispanics would mark the White box if there is no Hispanic option.

    Even if most of the "some other race" are Hispanic, that doesn't change the fact that most Hispanics do mark "White"
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2004
  20. Jun 19, 2004 #19

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There was no such category as "White Non Hispanic" on the 2000 Census. The question on whether someone in the household was of hispanic origin was entirely independent from the question about race and was asked in two parts. First, to check off if any member of the household was hispanic, and second to obtain more detail on country of origin (i.e., Cuban, Puerto Rican, Mexican).
    47.9% of people identifying themselves as Hispanic or Latino also identified themselves as white only. Not even a majority, let alone "most."
     
  21. Jun 19, 2004 #20
    White persons, not of Hispanic/Latino origin, percent, 2000. 69.1%

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html [Broken]


    Why does the Census Bureau have this statistic? I don't see Asian persons not of Hispanic origin or Black persons not of Hispanic origin. Yup only White persons not of Hispanic origin. This is certainly an statistic that the Census Bureau wishes to gather.

    If the Hispanic origin is separate, why would the Census Bureau need a "White Non Hispanic" box? You're arguing a moot point here.

    What definition of most or majority are you using? The fact is there is more Hispanics marking "White" than any other box. Are you really going to refute that fact? If so please give the number of hispanics marking asian, black, etc.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  22. Jun 19, 2004 #21
    Concerned? How? I do not have a fixation of race. I do however consider it an important field to study. Regardless of how taboo some people want to make it. Some people just go hostile of any sort of racial study regardless of how important or relevant it is.
     
  23. Jun 19, 2004 #22
    If Hispanic is a separate section, the statistic for "White Non Hispanic" can be extracted simply by cross reference eliminating the need for the box but still giving the Census Bureau their desire to gather this statistic.

    Here is the Census Bureau's statement regarding that:


    Two or more races. People may have chosen to provide two or more races either by checking two or more race response check boxes, by providing multiple write-in responses, or by some combination of check boxes and write-in responses.

    The point is whatever you wish to make for it. Some people will care and some will not. Some will find interesting, some will not. Some will find it important, some will not. Make what you wish of it.
     
  24. Jun 19, 2004 #23

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    They do have those statistics as well (see below). However, the major point about the Census is that they don't actually have a reason for collecting any particular data. They collect as much information as they can and calculate tons of statistics on it assessing every permutation of the questions possible. The only reason the census is mandated is for political purposes. The population in a state determines how many representatives they have in the House of Representatives, and this information is also used to determine the number of electoral votes each state gets during a presidential election. Beyond that, it helps the folks in Congress get some sense of the demographics of their district so they can decide what issues to support or not support or who they need to campaign to. Keep in mind the Census has a LOT more questions than just race and ethnicity. Once you get past counting heads, the rest is mostly a waste of taxpayer money, little more.

    The point is they did NOT have any such box on the census form. Go look it up, this information is on the census bureau website you provided a link for, so I know you know where to find it.


    I agree "most" can be an ambiguous term, but even the simplest definition of majority requires more than 50%. Do the math, if 47.9% of hispanics identify themselves as white, then 52.1% checked something other than just the white box, whether it was black, black, American Indian or Alaska Native, some combination of multiple races, or "some other race."

    Again, from the same source:

    "Nearly half (48 percent) of
    Hispanics reported only White,
    while approximately 42 percent
    reported only Some other race,
    when responding to the question
    on race (see Table 10). Less than
    4 percent of Latinos reported Black
    or African American alone,
    American Indian and Alaska Native
    alone, Asian alone, or Native
    Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
    alone. In contrast, 79 percent of
    the non-Hispanic population reported
    only White and 0.2 percent
    reported only Some other race."

    Beyond discussing how the statistics are actually collected, what is the subject you wish to discuss here? You started this thread with the title, "The Decreasing White Majority in the US." So, is there some significance you attribute to that statement that you thought it was worthy of starting a discussion about it, or are you just posting statistics for the sake of statistics to clutter up the board for no reason?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  25. Jun 19, 2004 #24
    I know they do but the ONLY one they showed in clear black and white in most of their statistic work is "White Non Hispanic" as shown by my link.

    If you have ever filled out an application you should also have noticed that "White Non Hispanic" is a very common box and statistic. "Asian Non Hispanic" or "Black Non Hispanic" is practically unheard of.

    Yeah they do. But even those questions are broken down into specific race categories.

    Please look up "moot"

    Many will consider a majority as the largest group. For example, often times people will state that UC Berkeley has an Asian majority. You can use the term greatest minority but that term is extraordinarily misleading as it gives the impression that there is a bigger majority.

    The board members are certainly free to discuss whatever it is they wish.

    I could have called it "The Increasing Minority Population in the US" and it wouldn't have made an inch of a difference. The point is the demographic of the US is changing. You can make whatever you want out of it.

    Ah so you think these statistics are useless. How did I figure that out? Let's see. Oh yes because it has to do with race. Like I stated before, people are hostile toward any racial study or racial dicsussion. YOU are one of them.

    What is the significance of 99% of threads of this forum? I certainly have ran into a lot of pointless and useless threads on this forum. Yet I have never seen a comment stated by you in any of them. Hmm. Strange. You singled this thread out. The reason why is indeed quite obvious.

    The fact is there is a multitude of different topics of discussions to be had with this statistic. People are free to discuss any one of them. I certainly will not take away that freedom of people by trying to fixate it into one subject and putting my bias in it. You might want to start by clicking on the link I provided in the 1st post. But of course you think that report is just a waste of a PDF file because it's simply showing the demographic change yes?
     
  26. Jun 19, 2004 #25

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Perhaps they calculated it this way, but I can tell you for sure that there was no separate box one could mark that was labeled "White Non-Hispanic." The fact that you thought there was just goes to show that your research wasn't very complete when you posted this thread. But at least you're getting a nice little education here.


    Again, there is no box one could mark that read "Two or More Races." It might be a minor point, or what you would call a "moot" point, but it still shows that you didn't complete your research.

    And what do you make of it, Mr. Vision? Are you concerned that whites may not have a majority in this nation forever? Are you happy? Are you indifferent? Surely, in order for you post this, you must find it interesting. Why?
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook