Amish population growing even faster than thought

[damni]

won't be alive long enough to be affected by it, dgaf

[openair]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6723886.shtml

The remarkable growth is almost entirely due to the Amish birth rate

Nice out of context! The "remarkable growth" stated in that article ranges from 7% to 19%. A far cry from 100% shown by your numbers. Population estimates =/= recorded growth rates.

[Kokolums]

Its possible these numbers are still lowball estimates. Amish have very few converts to their way of life. Once they start to become the dominant culture in certain regions and states, they might start to convert increasing numbers of people, leading to an even faster growth rate.

[Solzan Nemesis]

...Some how I find this all to be funny.

[Kokolums]

Nice out of context! The "remarkable growth" stated in that article ranges from 7% to 19%. A far cry from 100% shown by your numbers.

The 7% and 19% growth rates are for one year, which is roughly in line with the 100% growth every 14 years that I quoted.

---------- Post added 2011-02-27 at 06:43 AM ----------

The Amish population growth rate for the state of the New York was 19% in 2010 alone.

[openair]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lation_density

The population density of the United States is very low compared to other developed countries because of its large geographical size. For example, the population density of the U.S. is one seventh that of Germany, and one fifteenth that of South Korea (as of 2010).[1]

About half of the population of Alaska lives in the Anchorage metropolitan area. Most of Alaska is largely unpopulated, and it is the largest state by far.

/sigh... The current pop density of amercian is very low. The current pop of america is ~300million, in ~9.5 million square km. Population of China is ~1.3 billion in ~9.5 million square km. "Also 1 billion Americans (or approx 4 times the current US pop) would require even larger cities and urban development, and result in a America with a population density similar to china."

[Tore]

Amish population rising = more butter churned = cheaper butter = fatter Americans.

Great.

[Kokolums]

won't be alive long enough to be affected by it, dgaf

In our lifetimes, we will likely see large regions of certain states become Amish territory. Those of us who live very long lives (like close to 100) may see an entire state become Amish.

[openair]

The 7% and 19% growth rates are for one year, which is roughly in line with the 100% growth every 14 years that I quoted.

---------- Post added 2011-02-27 at 06:43 AM ----------

The Amish population growth rate for the state of the New York was 19% in 2010 alone.

2010 alone is a VERY VERY small sample size. Chances of that holding for 14 years, let alone 100 years is...

[Kokolums]

/sigh... The current pop density of amercian is very low. The current pop of america is ~300million, in ~9.5 million square km. Population of China is ~1.3 billion in ~9.5 million square km. "Also 1 billion Americans (or approx 4 times the current US pop) would require even larger cities and urban development, and result in a America with a population density similar to china."

1 billion Americans is pretty much the most generous estimate out there. Some researchers suspect total US population may level off or actually shrink over the next 100 years, if overall birth rates decline as they do in most westernized nations.

---------- Post added 2011-02-27 at 06:50 AM ----------

2010 alone is a VERY VERY small sample size. Chances of that holding for 14 years, let alone 100 years are...

I agree and never claimed to believe that rate would hold.

[Pendraeg]

The fastest growing demographic of the US population are the Amish. Amish families are the largest in the 50 states, and the culture retains many of its members. The growth rate was thought to be exponential, doubling every 20 years. New census data from 2010 reveals that the Amish population is actually doubling every 14 years, give the 10% growth from 2008 (227k) to 2010 (249k).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish

Given their new current rate of growth, here are the projections for the number of Amish living in the US in the future:

250k 2010
500k 2024
1m 2038
2m 2052
4m 2066
8m 2080
16m 2094
32m 2108
64m 2122
128m 2136
256m 2150

Future estimates of total US population are iffy, with a range somewhere between 280m (given a increasingly negative birth for developed nations) to 1 billion by 2100.
http://www.mnforsustain.org/united_s...owth_graph.htm

If we take the average growth and estimate 600m Americans in 2100, about which time 20m will be Amish, or 3% of the population. The total population will be around 800m in 2150, at which point 256m will be Amish.

If American birth rates fall like a typical developed nation, and it stands at 280m in 2100, Amish will comprise 7.5% of the total population. The startling thing is what happens between 2100 and 2150. Amish would go from 7.5% to almost matching the entire population, and the US becomes an Amish nation.

Certain regions of the country will probably go all-Amish first. Ohio has the largest population of Amish of any state in the union, so they would probably go Amish much sooner. Ohio has 11m total residents, 67,000 of which are Amish. That would reach 1m Amish residents by 2066, or 10% of the total current population. By 2100, there will be 10m Amish in Ohio. Pennsylvania, Indiana, and New York, with their large Amish communities, will likely also undergo a transformation in the 21st century to an Amish-dominated region.

The bottom line is, unless non-Amish Americans start having lots and lots of babies, in 150 years, America will be Amish.

/Facepalm

There's a problem with extrapolated data.

Look at this, as an example:


Time Athlete Nationality Date Venue
4:14.4 John Paul Jones United States 31 May 1913[4] Allston, Mass.
4:12.6 Norman Taber United States 16 July 1915[4] Allston, Mass.
4:10.4 Paavo Nurmi Finland 23 August 1923[4] Stockholm
4:09.2 Jules Ladoumègue France 4 October 1931[4] Paris
4:07.6 Jack Lovelock New Zealand 15 July 1933[4] Princeton, N.J.
4:06.7* Glenn Cunningham United States 16 June 1934[4] Princeton, N.J.
4:06.4 Sydney Wooderson United Kingdom 28 August 1937[4] Motspur Park
4:06.1* Gunder Hägg Sweden 1 July 1942[4] Göteborg
4:06.2 Arne Andersson Sweden 10 July 1942[4] Stockholm
4:04.6 Gunder Hägg Sweden 4 September 1942[4] Stockholm
4:02.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1 July 1943[4] Göteborg
4:01.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 18 July 1944[4] Malmö
4:01.3* Gunder Hägg Sweden 17 July 1945[4] Malmö
3:59.4 Roger Bannister United Kingdom 6 May 1954[4] Oxford
3:57.9* John Landy Australia 21 June 1954[4] Turku
3:57.2 Derek Ibbotson United Kingdom 19 July 1957[4] London
3:54.5 Herb Elliott Australia 6 August 1958[4] Santry, Dublin
3:54.4 Peter Snell New Zealand 27 January 1962[4] Wanganui
3:54.04* Peter Snell New Zealand 17 November 1964[4] Auckland
3:53.6 Michel Jazy France 9 June 1965[4] Rennes
3:51.3 Jim Ryun United States 17 July 1966[4] Berkeley, Cal.
3:51.1 Jim Ryun United States 23 June 1967[4] Bakersfield, Cal.
3:51.0 Filbert Bayi Tanzania 17 May 1975[4] Kingston
3:49.4 John Walker New Zealand 12 August 1975[4] Göteborg
3:48.95* Sebastian Coe United Kingdom 17 July 1979[4] Oslo
3:48.8 Steve Ovett United Kingdom 1 July 1980[4] Oslo
3:48.53 Sebastian Coe United Kingdom 19 August 1981[4] Zürich
3:48.40 Steve Ovett United Kingdom 26 August 1981[4] Koblenz
3:47.33 Sebastian Coe United Kingdom 28 August 1981[4] Bruxelles
3:46.32 Steve Cram United Kingdom 27 July 1985[4] Oslo
3:44.39 Noureddine Morceli Algeria 5 September 1993[4] Rieti
3:43.13 Hicham El Guerrouj Morocco 7 July 1999[4] Rome

By May 15, 2721, humans will be able to run a mile so fast, they'll cross the finish line in the same instant that the timer starts. On foot. That's really fast, huh?

Moral of the story: Trend lines are only valid within a data set, and are only of limited value outside it.

[ishootblanks]

u really have no idea how ignorant you sound its mind boggling really

apparently I don't.. you'll have to explain this one to me.. I'm curious as to how I chose the incorrect mindset..

[openair]

1 billion Americans is pretty much the most generous estimate out there. Some researchers suspect total US population may level off or actually shrink over the next 100 years, if overall birth rates decline as they do in most westernized nations.[COLOR="red"]

I agree and never claimed to believe that rate would hold.

Both numbers are in your op.

[Kokolums]

/Facepalm

There's a problem with extrapolated data.

Look at this, as an example:

By May 15, 2721, humans will be able to run a mile so fast, they'll cross the finish line in the same instant that the timer starts. On foot. That's really fast, huh?

Moral of the story: Trend lines are only valid within a data set, and are only of limited value outside it.

That's an interesting point but it doesn't really apply to this. Keep in mind the Amish currently convert NO-ONE. If 50 years from now, their culture is dominant enough to start converting many non-Amish Americans into Amish, these rates could be much, much faster. We could be an Amish nation well before 2100, depending on a future nonzero conversion rate.

[Hoopajoo]

...Some how I find this all to be funny.

I second this, especially since the Amish population's gene pool is...limited.

Edit: Yes, I'm talking about inbreeding.

[Kokolums]

I'm of the opinion that the Amish population will hit critical mass at some point in the next 100 years, and begin to convert non-Amish into Amish. As such, I actually think all of these estimates lowball what will actually occur.

[Sorrior]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lation_density

The population density of the United States is very low compared to other developed countries because of its large geographical size. For example, the population density of the U.S. is one seventh that of Germany, and one fifteenth that of South Korea (as of 2010).[1]

About half of the population of Alaska lives in the Anchorage metropolitan area. Most of Alaska is largely unpopulated, and it is the largest state by far.

Anchorage citizen says hi. And that is changing the military owns ALOT of land around anchorage and while areas like eagle river are counted as anchorage other areas like wasilla and fairbanks are growing pretty quickly from what i;ve heard so odds are we're not gonna have most of the population for much longer maybe 20-30 years tops. Oh and to me even 1000 years is a short amount of time for some reason.

[Deleted]

oh noes! well have to deal with slow buggies and a surge of quality furniture ware! the horror!

IKEA watch out!


And no, if you think the backwards, technologicly impaired Amish are ever gonna influence the rest of America; No. Just no.

[Pendraeg]

u really have no idea how ignorant you sound its mind boggling really

Actually....no, he doesn't sound ignorant at all. Not politically correct or multi-culturally friendly, but 100% accurate. Don't get me wrong, I have Islamic friends, and they weren't rioting or sending letter bombs, but they did take it personally. As far as I know, the Islamic community is the only community in the world that DOES react literally violently something outside their sphere of influence. I mean, you don't see Catholics sending tanks in about Jesus jokes, or Buddhists burning down the Buddha doll factories. I mean, really. Yes, they consider it a personal affront, I get that. It's their religion. However, by that same token, if you spit in my face, does that give me the right to take out a gun and shoot you? Again, I realize this isn't the entire culture, but it's enough that it makes the culture look bad.

[ashley2ashes]

oh well.. I suppose it's better to have your nation overrun by people who keep to themselves and just don't like technology than have it overrun by people who will riot and burn half your country over a cartoon...

^^ what this guy said