Hacker News Reader

Comment by darth_avocado | Hacker News Reader

Linked in the article, but it looks like Black, Asian and other races will stay relatively stable in terms of % of population all the way to 2050. And the main changes will be that the % of Hispanic population will go up (immigration + higher fertile age population) and % of White population will go down (mostly aging). It's not as much as % of "people of color" going up as it is framed.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/census-shows-americas-pos...

View on HN

> And the main changes will be that the % of Hispanic population will go up (immigration + higher fertile age population) and % of White population will go down (mostly aging).

This is misleading, because it's not tracked like this on the US census. Hispanic is a separate question from race - people are "White Hispanic" or "Black Hispanic" or "(something) Hispanic", not just "Hispanic".

useful exposition https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/05/who-is-hi...

Both liberals and conservatives have determined that the two races are "white" and "whatever." More Hispanics means that the "whatever" group is rising.

What I wonder is if they've accounted for the lobbying of various subgroups to leave the "white" category, such as Hispanics themselves did in the late 60s - early 70s (speaking Spanish is neither a race nor a single culture.)

Every time a former white person declares themselves Latino (or MENA for that matter), the ratio changes.

I'm "white" but neither side of my family was considered white when they came to the US.

Hispanics will become "white," as will Asians (East Asians and Desis). The story of America will continue to be blacks getting left behind, and we'll continue to argue about what to do about it.

East Asians and Indians won’t become “white”. They’ll just continue to grow more prosperous. By white do you mean “doing well”?

By that he means that Irish were considered by racists from 100 years ago a subrace of white, as were eastern European until the late 90s (that sentiment still exist in some places), and Italian were considered 'colored' until the 70s.

Racism do not have any internal consistency, that's why I heavily judge the intelligence of those subscribing to it. Indians were 'black' until weren't in my country.

that is sort of funny to see, since people from India are "caucasians" by US terms .. this classification is also changing over time

I think you're on to something here. There is definitely a much looser standard for whiteness in the United States. The one drop rule was used only w.r.t. former slaves. But the definition of whiteness in the United States seems to be much broader these days.

Contrast that with Europe, where whiteness is a very strict category. This could partially explain the unrest that's going on in the UK. I saw a group of X users arguing with a British citizen with an Italian surname. They claimed that he was not really English (really what they were implying was, he wasn't white), even though his passport said so. I found it strange, because in the States we often consider Italian Americans to be white.

Yeah white Canadians aren't from the United States either.

JFYI hispanic is actually listed as an "ethnicity" so you still have to pick white or whatever.

> Both liberals and conservatives have determined that the two races are "white" and "whatever.“

That’s a broad generalization about what people believe.

My understanding is domestic births are practically irrelevant compared to border crossings, the growth isn’t people being born here.

Per the report [0] linked in TFA, your understanding is wrong. More than twice as many hispanics came from natural increases (~2.21 million), compared to net immigration (~0.94 million)

[0] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/census-shows-americas-pos...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com