An article from The Wall Street Journal (May 1st) titled Surge in U.S. Hispanic Population Driven by Births, Not Immigration, illuminates just how profoundly the U.S. demographic shifts that are currently taking place will forever change the nation — and the breakneck speeds at which those changes are occurring.

The 45.5 million Hispanics currently in the U.S. are up from 35.7 million in 2000, with the growth among Hispanics responsible for half of the U.S. population gains between 2000 and 2007. While that increase is nothing short of astronomical, what is most surprising is how it’s happened. According the article:

“Hispanics now account for more than 15% of the U.S. population, and their surge is largely the result of births among people already in the country–not immigration. In the 1990s, a flood of Hispanic immigrants explained most of the group’s population rise. That has changed in recent years. Between 2006 and 2007, about 62% of the increase in Hispanics came from births.”

Hispanic families tend to have more children, while white families are having less. But what is also increasing is Hispanics’ purchasing power. As the article states:

“Growth in spending by Hispanics is likely to outstrip that of the general population in coming years. Hispanics control more disposable income than any other minority group. The figure stands at $860 billion a year and is expected to hit $1.3 trillion by 2012, according to Jeffrey Humphreys, who monitors Hispanic demographic and economic trends at the University of Georgia’s Selig Center.

Between their numbers and disposable income, Hispanics are already a vital market for politicians and marketers. But these numbers point to how they’ll only become more so. And while Hispanics are quickly redefining mainstream America, they’re also fragmenting into many micro-niches who seek products that align with their cultural heritage as well as the country they now call home.

That only leaves the door open for more innovations across many industries including television programs, music, fashion and, most notably, specialty foods. After all, our markets are changing, so too must our branding. Watch a three-minute video by The Wall Street Journal on the Hispanic market’s dramatic growth and its implications.

[Source: US Census Bureau March 2002] This report presents data on the demographic, social, and economic characteristics of the Black population in the United States, based on the Annual Demographic Supplement to the March 2002 Current Population Survey (CPS). The topics covered are geographic distribution; age, sex, and marital status distribution; family type and family size; educational attainment; labor force participation and unemployment; occupation; family income; and poverty status. Data for these characteristics are compared with those of the non-Hispanic White population.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

Blacks continue to be concentrated in the South.

In March 2002, 36.0 million people in the United States, or 13 percent of the civilian non-institutionalized population, were Black. The majority of Blacks lived in the South (55 percent), a similar proportion (18 percent) lived in the Northeast and the Midwest, and 9 percent lived in the West.Blackregions

Over one-half (52 percent) of all Blacks lived in a central city within a metropolitan area, compared with 21 percent of non-Hispanic Whites. In contrast, 57 percent of non-Hispanic Whites lived outside the central city but within the metropolitan area, compared with 36 percent of Blacks. Only 13 percent of Blacks and 22 percent of non-Hispanic Whites lived in non-metropolitan areas.

AGE, SEX, AND MARITAL STATUS DISTRIBUTION

The Black population is younger than the non-Hispanic White population.

In 2002, 33 percent of all Blacks were under 18, compared with 23 percent of non-Hispanic Whites. Only 8 percent of Blacks were 65 and older, compared with 14 percent of non-Hispanic Whites.

A larger proportion of Black males than non-Hispanic White males were under 18 (36 percent compared with 24 percent). In contrast, 7 percent of Black males and 12 percent of non-Hispanic White males were 65 and over. A greater percentage of Black females (30 percent) than non-Hispanic White females (22 percent) were under age 18, while 9 percent of Black females and 16 percent of non-Hispanic White females were 65 and over.

Blacks are less likely to be married than non-Hispanic Whites.

Among the 26.2 million Blacks and the 158.3 million non-Hispanic Whites 15 and older, 10 percent of each were divorced and about 6 percent of each were widowed, but 43 percent of Blacks had never married, compared with 25 percent of non-Hispanic Whites. Blacks were less likely than their non-Hispanic White counterparts to be currently married (35 percent and 57 percent, respectively).

The marital distributions of Blacks and non-Hispanic Whites varied by sex. In 2002, in both groups, women were more likely than men to be widowed, separated, or divorced, and less likely to be never married or currently married. Black men were more likely than their non-Hispanic White counterparts to be never married: 45 percent and 28 percent, respectively. The comparable figures for women were 42 percent and 21 percent.

FAMILY TYPE AND FAMILY SIZE

Fewer Black families are married-couple families.

In 2002, there were 8.8 million Black families and 53.6 million non-Hispanic White families in the United States. Nearly 43 percent of Black families were maintained by women with no spouse present, and 9 percent were maintained by Black men with no spouse present.

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

More Black women than Black men aged 25 and over have earned at least a bachelor’s degree.

Of the 20.4 million Blacks and 133. 4 million non-Hispanic Whites 25 and older, a lower percentage of Blacks had earned at least a high school diploma (79 percent and 89 percent, respectively). The proportion of all non-Hispanic Whites with at least a bachelor’s degree (29 percent) was higher than that of all Blacks (17 percent).Blackeducation

More Black women than Black men had earned at least a bachelor’s degree (18 percent compared with 16 percent, while among non-Hispanic Whites, a higher proportion of men than women had earned at least a bachelor’s degree (32 percent and 27 percent, respectively).

LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION AND UNEMPLOYMENT

Blacks participate in the labor force at a lower rate than non-Hispanic Whites.

Among the 216.8 million members of the civilian population aged 16 and over in 2002, 25.4 million (12 percent) were Black and
155.1 million (72 percent) were non-Hispanic White. Non-Hispanic White men had a higher civilian labor force participation rate than Black men (73 percent compared with 68 percent), and for both groups, men had higher rates than women.9 However, the rate for Black women (62 percent) was higher than that for non-Hispanic White women (60 percent).

Unemployment is higher among Blacks than non-Hispanic Whites.

In March 2002, the unemployment rate for Blacks was twice that for non-Hispanic Whites (11 percent and 5 percent, respectively). This finding was consistent for both men (12 percent compared with 6 percent) and women (10 percent compared with 4 percent).

POVERTY STATUS

Blacks accounted for about one quarter of the population in poverty in 2001.

An estimated 8.1 million Blacks lived below the poverty level in 2001. The poverty rate, which was 12 percent for the total population, was 23 percent for Blacks and 8 percent for non-Hispanic Whites. Among all children under age 18, the poverty rate was 16 percent, but it was three times as high for Black children (30 percent) as for non-Hispanic White children (10 percent).

Blackpoverty About 10 percent of all men were below the official poverty line in 2001, but the rate for Black men (20 percent) was nearly three times that for non-Hispanic White men (7 percent). Among men 65 and over, the rate for Blacks was three times as high (16 percent) as the rate for non-Hispanic Whites (5 percent). In 2001, the poverty rate for Black women (25 percent) was more than twice that for non-Hispanic White women (9 percent); for women 65 and older, the rates were 26 percent and 10 percent,respectively.

Families maintained by women with no spouse present have higher poverty rates overall.

In 2001, 1.8 million Black families and 3.1 million were non-Hispanic White. However, a greater percentage of Black families than of non-Hispanic White families were poor: 21 percent compared with 6 percent. A larger proportion of Black married-couple families (8 percent) than of non-Hispanic White families (3 percent) were poor. Poverty was highest in families maintained by women with no spouse present: 35 percent for Black families compared with 19 percent for non-Hispanic White families. Black families maintained by men with no spouse present were more likely to live in poverty (19 percent) than comparable non-Hispanic White families (10 percent).

# # #

For more information, download the US Census Report.

[Source: US Census Bureau] This report presents data on the demographic, social, and economic characteristics of the Asian and Pacific Islander population in the United States , based on the Annual Demographic Supplement to the March 2002 Current Population Survey (CPS). The topics covered are geographic distribution; age distribution; marital status; family type and family size; educational attainment; labor force participation, unemployment, and occupation; family income; and poverty status. Data for these characteristics are compared with those of the non-Hispanic White population.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION
One-half of Asians and Pacific Islanders live in the West.  In March 2002, 12.5 million Asians and Pacific Islanders lived in the United States, representing 4.4 percent of the civilian non-institutionalized population. While one-half lived in the West (51 percent), 19 percent lived in the South, 12 percent in the Midwest, and 19 percent in the Northeast (see Figure 1).

In comparison, 194.8 million (69 percent) of the United States population was non-Hispanic White and 19 percent lived in the West, 33 percent in the South, 27 percent in the Midwest, and 21 percent in the Northeast. Nearly all Asians and Pacific Islanders live in metropolitan areas.

Ninety-five percent of all Asians and Pacific Islanders lived in metropolitan areas, a much greater proportion than of non-Hispanic Whites (78 percent). Of the two populations, Asians and Pacific Islanders were twice as likely to live in central cities located in metropolitan areas (41 percent compared with 21 percent). However, among those living in metropolitan areas but not in central cities, Asians and Pacific Islanders were only 3 percentage points below non-Hispanic Whites (54 percent and 57 percent, respectively).

AGE DISTRIBUTION
The Asian and Pacific Islander population is young. In 2002, Asians and Pacific Islanders were younger than  non-Hispanic Whites. Twenty-six percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders were under 18, compared with 23 percent of non-Hispanic Whites; while 7 percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders were 65 and over, compared with 14 percent of non-Hispanic Whites.

MARITAL STATUS
The proportion of Asians and Pacific Islanders who are divorced is one-half that for non-Hispanic Whites. Of the 9.8 million Asians and Pacific Islanders and 158.3 million non- Hispanic Whites 15 and older in 2002, 57 percent of each population was married,8 but the percentage of divorced Asians and Pacific Islanders was one-half that of non-Hispanic Whites (5 percent compared with 10 percent, respectively). Asians and Pacific Islanders were less likely than non-Hispanic Whites to be widowed (4 percent compared with 7 percent), but were more likely to have never married (33 percent compared to 25 percent, respectively).9 Marital status varied by sex for both the Asian and Pacific Islander and non-Hispanic White populations (see Table 1). Asian and Pacific Islander women were more likely than their male counterparts to be married, widowed, separated, or divorced. However, in the non-Hispanic White population, men were more likely to be married, but women were more likely to be divorced, separated, or widowed.

#  #  #

To view the complete report, download the PDF.

[source: US Census Bureau] Nearly one in every 10 of the nation’s 3,141 counties has a population that is more than 50 percent minority. In 2006, eight counties that had not previously been majority-minority pushed the national total to 303, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today.

Highlights for the various groups:

Hispanic

• Los Angeles County had the largest Hispanic population
  (4.7 million) in 2006, followed by Harris County, Texas, and Miami-Dade
  (1.5 million each). (See table Excel
  | PDF.)
• Maricopa County, Ariz. (home of Phoenix), had the biggest
  numerical increase in the Hispanic population (71,000) since July 2005,
  followed by Harris County, Texas (63,000).
• Starr County, Texas had the highest Hispanic proportion
  of its total population in 2006, at 97 percent. In fact, each of the 11
  counties with the highest Hispanic proportion of its total population was
  in Texas.

Black

• Cook County had the largest black population (1.4 million)
  in July 2006, followed by Los Angeles County (1 million).
• Harris County had the largest numerical increase (52,000)
  between 2005 and 2006, with East Baton Rouge Parish next (19,000).
• Claiborne County, Miss., had a population that was 85 percent
  black in 2006, which led the nation. All 50 counties with the highest percentage
  black population were in the South.

Asian

• Los Angeles County had the largest Asian population (1.4
  million) in 2006, with Santa Clara County, Calif. (home of San Jose) the
  runner-up (556,000).
• Santa Clara County had the largest numerical increase (17,600)
  from 2005 to 2006, followed by Los Angeles (15,700).
• Honolulu County, Hawaii, led the nation with a population
  that was 59 percent Asian. One other county – Kauai, Hawaii –
  was also majority Asian. San Francisco County, Calif., led the continental
  United States, with 34 percent of its population Asian.

American Indian and Alaska Native

• Los Angeles County had the largest population of American
  Indians and Alaska Natives in 2006 (150,000) with Maricopa County, Ariz.,
  ranking second (95,000).
• Maricopa County had the largest numerical increase between
  2005 and 2006 (3,700), followed by Riverside County, Calif. (1,600).
• Shannon County, South Dakota led the country in 2006, with
  88 percent of its total population of 13,800 being a member of this group
  in 2006. Shannon was first of 10 counties/county equivalents that were majority
  American Indian and Alaska Native.

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander

• Honolulu County had the largest population of this race
  (177,000) in 2006, with Los Angeles County (59,000) second.
• Hawaii County, Hawaii and Clark County, Nev. (home of Las
  Vegas) had the largest numerical increases in this race since July 2005,
  around 900.

Non-Hispanic White Alone

• Los Angeles County had a nation-leading 2.9 million residents
  who were part of this group in 2006, with Cook, Ill., second at 2.4 million.
• The largest numerical increase from 2005 to 2006 belonged
  to Maricopa County, Ariz. (35,500). Wake, N.C. (home of Raleigh), ranked
  second, gaining 18,700.
• Magoffin County, Kentucky, with an estimated 13,400 total
  residents, and Mitchell County, Iowa, with an estimated 10,900 total residents,
  led the nation with 98.9 percent of their population being non-Hispanic
  white alone in 2006.

Tabulations by age released today showed:

• The 10 counties with the highest proportion of people 65
  and older is dominated by Florida which contributed four counties to the
  list, led by Charlotte County at 31.2 percent.
• Georgia, Alaska and Colorado combined accounted for seven
  of the 10 counties with the lowest proportion of people 65 and older. Chattahoochee
  County, Ga. — home of the Army’s Fort Benning — had the
  lowest percentage in the country at 2.6 percent.
• Seven of the 10 counties with the highest proportion of
  their population younger than 5 were in Texas, South Dakota or Utah. Webb
  County, Texas (home of Laredo), topped the list at 13.1 percent.

-X-

The minority population is defined as anyone who indicated that they
were either Hispanic or a race other than white alone. The percent rankings
for race, Hispanic origin, and age are based on counties with population in
2006 of 10,000 or more in 2006.

Unless otherwise specified, the data refer to the population who
reported a race alone or in combination with one or more other races. The
detailed tables show data for both this group and those who reported a single
race only. Censuses and surveys permit respondents to select more than one
race; consequently, people may be one race or a combination of races. Hispanics
may be any race.

The federal government treats Hispanic origin and race as separate
and distinct concepts. In surveys and censuses, separate questions are asked
on Hispanic origin and race. The question on Hispanic origin asks respondents
if they are Spanish, Hispanic or Latino. Starting with Census 2000, the question
on race asked respondents to report the race or races they consider themselves
to be. Thus, Hispanics may be of any race. (See U.S. Census Bureau Guidance
on the Presentation and Comparison of Race and Hispanic Origin Data.)
More detailed information on race and Hispanic origin can be found at <http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/compraceho.html>.