"Unprecedented Demographic Stagnation"

You don't have to wait for 2020 census results to know the big trends of the past decade. That's because demographer William H. Frey of the Brookings Institution has revealed the biggies in a recent report. According to Frey, this is what the 2020 census will show...

1. "Unprecedented stagnation in population growth," says Frey. The 2010s are likely to have been the decade with the slowest population growth in U.S. history. Until the 2010s, the U.S. was one of the fastest growing countries in the industrialized world.

2. Ongoing decline in geographic mobility. The annual mobility rate has been falling through most of the 2010s, reaching an all-time low of 9.3 percent in 2019–20. While the coronavirus pandemic may boost mobility temporarily, Frey thinks it will then resume its long-term decline.

3. The continued aging of the population, thanks to the Baby-Boom generation. 

4. "A first-time decline in the nation's white population," Frey predicts for the 2010s, largely due to the fact that whites are older than other race groups. "This means that other racial and ethnic groups are responsible for generating overall population growth," says Frey.

5. Great diversity in the Millennial and younger generations compared to Boomers and older Americans. "The generational divide in diversity...has impacted politics in ways that are sometimes divisive," Frey notes.

The biggest trend to be revealed by the 2020 census, according to Frey, is this: the nation is in the midst of unprecedented demographic stagnation. One way to break out of the stagnation is to increase immigration, he says. "Given our rapidly aging native-born population, immigration will ensure growth—especially among the critical youth and labor force populations."

Source: Brookings, What the 2020 Census Will Reveal about America; Stagnating Growth, an Aging Population, and Youthful Diversity

100 Years of Baby Names

Over the past century, James has been the number-one most popular boy's name, according to the Social Security Administration. Between 1919 and 2018, nearly 5 million boys have been named James. The second and third most popular boys' names of the past century are John and Robert, followed by Michael, William, David, Richard, Joseph, Thomas, and Charles, to round out the top 10.

James is still a popular name. During the decade of the 2010s, it was in 9th place on the top-10 list. William and Michael were also on the 2010s list—in 5th and 7th place. The number-one boys' name of the past decade, however, was Noah. Also making an appearance on the top-10 list of the 2010s were Liam, Jacob, Mason, Ethan, Alexander, and Elijah.

Girls' names are more diverse than boys' names. All told, 35 million boys have received one of the top 10 names of the century compared to 15 million girls. Mary is the number-one most popular girls' name of the past 100 years. Between 1919 and 2018, 3.3 million girls have been named Mary. Other girls' names on top of the century list are Patricia, Jennifer, Linda, Elizabeth, Barbara, Susan, Jessica, Sarah, and Karen.

None of those names appear on the top-10 list of girls' names of the 2010s. Emma was the number-one girls' name of the past decade, followed by Sophia, Olivia, Isabella, Ava, Mia, Abigail, Emily, Madison, and Charlotte. The name Mary ranked a lowly 125th in popularity in the 2010s.

For a look at how names have changed over the past 100 years, here are the three most popular boys' and girls' names in each decade...

The 3 most popular names for boys by decade
2010s: Noah, Liam, Jacob
2000s: Jacob, Michael, Joshua
1990s: Michael, Christopher, Matthew
1980s: Michael, Christopher, Matthew
1970s: Michael, Christopher, Jason
1960s: Michael, David, John
1950s: James, Michael, Robert
1940s: James, Robert, John
1930s: Robert, James, John
1920s: Robert, John, James

The 3 most popular names for girls by decade
2010s: Emma, Sophia, Olivia
2000s: Emily, Madison, Emma
1990s: Jessica, Ashley, Emily
1980s: Jessica, Jennifer, Amanda
1970s: Jennifer, Amy, Melissa
1960s: Lisa, Mary, Susan
1950s: Mary, Linda, Patricia
1940s: Mary, Linda, Barbara
1930s: Mary, Betty, Barbara
1920s: Mary, Dorothy, Helen

Note: Alexa was the 90th most popular girls' name in 2018, the most recent year for which data are available. This ranking is well below Alexa's peak a few years earlier. It was the 32nd most popular girls' name in 2015—the same year Amazon introduced its Alexa to the general public.

Source: Demo Memo analysis of the Social Security Administration's Popular Baby Names by Decade

Teens Are Driving Less

The nation's teenagers are driving less than they once did. Only 50 percent of 16-to-17-year-olds drive on an average day, according to the 2017 National Household Travel Survey. This is down from 58 percent in 2009 and 63 percent in 2001.

Percentage of 16-to-17-year-olds who drive on an average day
2017: 50%
2009: 58%
2001: 63%

What's behind the decline in teen driving? One factor is that fewer 16-to-17-year-olds have a driver's license. Only 27 percent of 16-year-olds had a driver's license in 2018, down from 34 percent in 2001. Among 17-year-olds, the figure fell from 54 to 46.5 percent during those years, according to the Federal Highway Administration.

But there may be another reason for teens' lack of interest in cars. As the National Household Travel Survey report explains, "given the fact that teens have grown up in a society that is largely connected by technology, their travel patterns may be different in 2017 as compared to 2001." In other words, the smartphone is an easier and cheaper way to stay in touch with friends than the automobile.

Source: Federal Highway Administration, National Household Travel Survey, Travel Trends for Teens and Seniors

Trends of the 2020s: Slow-Go Boomers

Lists, rankings, and reviews. The end of a decade brings a torrent of retrospective. If you're tired of looking back, then let's look ahead. Using the demographics as a crystal ball, Trends of the 2020s will be a series of occasional posts identifying the major trends of the decade ahead.

Here's one of the major trends of the 2020s: Slow-Go Boomers. The oldest Boomers turn 74 this year. During the next two decades, the number of people aged 75 to 84 will expand by 84 percent as Boomers pass through the age group. The number of 75-to-84-year-olds is projected to rise from 16.6 million this year to 30.5 million by 2040, according to the Census Bureau. In the decades ahead, the Baby-Boom generation will downshift from the "Go Go" (65 to 74) lifestage of old age to the "Slow Go" (75 to 84) and "No Go" (85-plus) lifestages.

The 2010s was characterized by rapid growth in the number of 65-to-74-year-olds as the oldest Boomers filled the age group—the Go-Go years of old age. Recently retired and still physically robust, Boomers were eager to embrace new experiences. The next few decades will not be as easy. At ages 75 to 84, the Slow-Go years, physical difficulties and health conditions begin to limit activities and shape lifestyles. At ages 85-plus, the No-Go years, it gets worse.

Most in the Go-Go years of old age have no difficulty taking care of themselves (self-care), getting around (mobility), or doing chores (household activities), according to a Department of Health and Human Services study, Disability and Care Needs of Older Americans. With advancing age, however, the percentage of older Americans with difficulties rises steeply...

Percentage of people aged 75-plus with difficulties in self-care, mobility, or household activities
Aged 75 to 79: 48.5%
Aged 80 to 84: 59.4%
Aged 85 to 89: 75.0%
Aged 90-plus: 85.3%

During the 2020s, the oldest Boomers will age into the Slow-Go years, a time when difficulties become the norm. Most of those with difficulties receive help from unpaid caregivers—family and friends, primarily. Already, 40 million unpaid caretakers (16 percent of the population aged 15 or older) are helping the nation's elderly, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' report, Unpaid Eldercare in the United States. And the oldest Boomers haven't even turned 75 yet. That happens in 2021.

2010s: Slowest Population Growth in U.S. History?

We await the April 1, 2020 census datapoint, but so far it looks like the 2010s will go down in U.S. history as the decade with the slowest population growth. In the years between April 1, 2010 and July 1, 2019, the U.S. population grew by just 6.3 percent, according to the Census Bureau's newly released population estimates for 2019. When the April 1, 2020 census count is released next year, the growth rate of the 2010s is likely to remain below the current record low of 7.3 percent recorded in the 1930s.

U.S. population growth by decade has been slowing since the 1950s. During the 1950s, the population grew by 18.5 percent—more than double the growth of the 1930s—coinciding with the birth of the baby-boom generation. In every decade since, population growth has been slower than in the previous decade with the exception of the 1990s...

Percent change in U.S. population by decade
2010 to 2019: 6.3% (incomplete data)
2000 to 2010: 9.7%
1990 to 2000: 13.1%
1980 to 1990: 9.8%
1970 to 1980: 11.4%
1960 to 1970: 13.4%
1950 to 1960: 18.5%
1940 to 1950: 14.5%
1930 to 1940: 7.3% (record low)

Note: Percent changes by decade are calculated using April 1 census counts except for 2010 to 2019, which is the percent change from April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019.

There are two reasons for the slow rate of population growth during this decade. The ongoing baby bust is one reason, with the fertility rate at a record low. The annual rate of natural increase (births minus deaths) fell from 4.7 to just 2.9 per 1,000 population from 2010 to 2019. The number of people added to the population each year through natural increase fell from 1.5 million between 2010 and 2011 to just 957,000 between 2018 and 2019.

Falling net migration (immigrants minus emigrants) is the other factor that has resulted in what is likely to be the slowest decade of population growth in U.S. history. The annual rate of net migration fell from 2.5 to 1.8 per 1,000 population from 2010 to 2019. The population gain from net migration during this decade peaked at more than 1 million in 2015 and 2016. But between 2018 and 2019, a net of only 595,000 migrants were added to the population.

Source: Census Bureau, National Population Totals and Components of Change: 2010—2019

Here's Why Median Household Income Did Not Grow

For a full decade, median household income struggled to return to the pre-Great Recession peak of $62,700 in 2007 (in 2018 dollars). It finally got there in 2017 and stayed there in 2018. Some might question why American households have made no economic progress in more than a decade, but a look at trends in household income by age group reveals that most households have gained ground.

Percent change in median household income by age of householder, 2007 to 2018 (in 2018$)
Total households: 0.8%
Under age 25: 9.7%
Aged 25 to 34: 3.5%
Aged 35 to 44: 4.2%
Aged 45 to 54: 3.4%
Aged 55 to 64: –3.7%
Aged 65 to 74: 16.7%
Aged 75-plus: 20.5%

Note: Percent change calculations between 2007 and 2018 were made after adjusting 2007 median household income to make it comparable to 2018 income as per Census Bureau guidance in: Survey Redesigns Make Comparisons to Years Before 2017 Difficult.

While the overall median did not increase significantly between 2007 and 2018, every age group but one experienced a significant increase, after adjusting for inflation. How could the overall median remain unmoved when almost everyone experienced a gain?

The answer is the changing age structure of the population, thanks to baby boom and baby bust. In 2018, there were many more older householders (with lower incomes) than in 2007 as boomers aged into their sixties and seventies. The share of households headed by people aged 65 or older grew from 21 to 27 percent of the total during those years. Conversely, there were fewer middle-aged householders (in their peak-earning years) in 2018 than in 2007 because the small Generation X was in the 35-to-54 age groups. The share of households headed by 35-to-54-year-olds fell from 40 to just 34 percent during those years. These shifts depressed growth in the overall median and will continue to do so until the large Millennial generation is more of a presence in the peak-earning age groups.

Source: Demo Memo analysis of the Census Bureau's Historical Income Tables: Households

10 Questions: An Update (Part 2)

Two years ago Demo Memo presented 10 vital demographic questions and asked how many answers to these questions we would have once we had more data in hand. Two years later, the same questions are still of great importance. We have more data. So how much more do we know? Questions 1 through 5 were examined in this post. Here's a look at the rest...

6. Is the average American getting richer? With the benefit of hindsight, the answer to this question is yes and no. The wealth of American households plunged in the aftermath of the Great Recession. Median household net worth fell from $139,700 in 2007 to a post-Great Recession low of $83,700 in 2013, then climbed to $97,300 in 2016, after adjusting for inflation—still 30 percent below the 2007 peak. An analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis finds that the wealth of Americans born in the 1950s and earlier has recovered from the Great Recession losses, while the wealth of those born in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s has not.

7. Who voted in the 2016 election? This question was answered by the Census Bureau's survey of voting and registration, released in the spring of 2017. We now know that the number of older non-Hispanic White voters surged in 2016. Largely because of the aging of the baby-boom generation, 2.8 million more non-Hispanic Whites aged 65 or older voted in 2016 than in 2012. This trend is only going to intensify as the baby-boom generation continues to fill the 65-plus age group. While minorities will become the majority of the population in 2044, they will not become the majority of voters until 2064.

8. Are we back to square one with health insurance? Although Republican efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act have not been successful, this question still matters after a federal judge in Texas declared the entire Affordable Care Act invalid—a case that may be headed for the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, a growing share of the public has a favorable view of the ACA, the figure rising from 43 percent in November 2016 to 53 percent in November 2018. This battle is ongoing.

9. How big is the gig economy? Are gig workers a tiny and stable fraction of the workforce, or are they an enormous and growing share of workers—24 percent according to one study and 31 percent according to another? We still don't know. In the past year, the BLS failed in its attempt to measure the gig economy, but nevertheless claimed gig workers to be few, far between, and not growing as a share of workers. Researchers scoffed at the BLS findings, theorizing that the Current Population Survey's labor force questions failed to capture gig work. The BLS fired back with a defense of the CPS. As the dust settles from this kerfuffle, all we know is that the size of the gig economy ranges from negligible to enormous.

10. Are we over the automobile? The evidence is building that we are past the point of peak transportation spending. The percentage of the household budget devoted to transportation is well below the all-time high of 19-plus percent of the mid-1980s and early 2000s. In 2017, transportation consumed a smaller 15.9 percent of the household budget. With transportation the second biggest expense for the average household, helping Americans cut their transportation costs is a no-brainer for both businesses and governments. It also helps explain the appeal of cities: urban households spend much less than their rural counterparts on transportation.

10 Questions: An Update (Part 1)

Two years ago Demo Memo presented 10 vital demographic questions and asked how many answers to these questions we would have once we had more data in hand. Two years later, the same questions are still of great importance. We have more data. So how much more do we know? Let's take a look...

1. When will the baby bust end? We now know it might not end. The decline in births since the 2007 peak is as great as the decline in the aftermath of the Great Depression (a 10.7 percent drop). But this may be more than a dip in the road. An analysis by the Center for Retirement Research suggests the fertility decline may be permanent, driven by structural changes in childbearing patterns. The United States appears to be adopting the low-fertility regime common in other developed countries.

2. Why is life expectancy declining? In two of the past three years, life expectancy in the United States has declined. We now know that the declines in 2015 and 2017 were due in large part to rising mortality rates among people under age 65—primarily from drug overdoses and suicides. The biggest increases in drug overdoses and suicide rates have occurred in rural areas—see Question 4, below.

3. Will homeownership make a comeback? The homeownership rate hit a post-Great Recession low of 63.4 percent in 2016, then climbed to 63.9 percent in 2017—the first statistically significant rise in more than a decade. While the increase is encouraging, the homeownership rate is unlikely to return to the highs of the early 2000s. The Millennial generation—now at the age of first-time home buying—is burdened by student loan payments. Student loans delay homeownership by 7 years, according to the National Association of Realtors. Consequently, the age of first-time home buying (the age at which the homeownership rate first surpasses 50 percent) has shifted from the early to the late thirties.

4. What will save small town and rural America? Corporate America will not be coming to the rescue, judging by Amazon's choice to place its second headquarters in two of the largest and richest metropolitan areas in the country. The continuing allure of urban areas makes this question more important than ever—and we don't yet have any answers. But we may know more about why rural areas are falling behind. A statistical concept called "gambler's ruin" explains it, says economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. The gambler (small town or rural area) who starts with the fewest pennies (economic opportunities) is the one most likely to go bankrupt. Small towns and rural America have a shrinking pile of pennies to play with and are increasingly likely to face ruin because of it. We still don't know how to solve this problem or even if we can.

5. When will Millennials marry? The median age at first marriage continues to rise, reaching a new record high in 2017 of 27.8 years for women and 29.8 years for men. Why are Millennials delaying marriage? One reason is that a much larger share of them go to college, which delays marriage and childbearing. Another reason is student loan debt, which not only delays homeownership but also marriage, according to the National Association of Realtors.

To be continued tomorrow...

This is the 3,000th Post

This is Demo Memo's 3,000th blog post. I know this because demographers like to count things. In the 12 years Demo Memo has been online, this blog has spotted and tracked a lot of demographic trends. It has reported on many groundbreaking studies. It has kept its readers up-to-date on the government's latest survey results.

Demo Memo began in 2006 with this post and continued on from there to report on the first signs of the housing collapse, the historic decline in the mobility rate, the rising age at first marriage, the steep loss in net worth, the beginnings of the baby bust, fun things like the Tchotchke Index and its updates, and a favorite of Demo Memo—technological adoption of cell phones, smartphones, and the internet.

More recently, Demo Memo has been examining why small-town America is in decline, when minorities will become the majority of voters, the resistance to self-driving cars, the 30-year low in births, the early peak in the non-Hispanic White population, the decline of life expectancy, and the extraordinary rise in spending on pets.

Demo Memo has been a lot of work and also a lot of fun. Here's to 3,000 more!

What's Wrong with the White Working Class?

When the white working class sneezes, America catches a cold. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis examines what may be ailing America in an analysis of trends in the wellbeing of this largest segment of Americans. It defines the white working class as households headed by non-Hispanic Whites without a four-year college degree. The white working class accounts for the 42 percent plurality of the nation's households. Another 26 percent are headed by whites with a college degree and 32 percent are headed by Blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities.

Using data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, researchers at the Fed analyzed trends in the socioeconomic wellbeing of the white working class, comparing its experience over the past few decades to that of college educated whites and to nonwhites. Relative to the other segments, the white working class has declined...

• The share of income accruing to the white working class fell from 45 percent in 1989 to 27 percent in 2016. Meanwhile, the share of income accruing to college educated whites and to nonwhites increased. 
• The share of wealth accruing to the white working class fell from 45 percent in 1989 to 22 percent in 2016. At the same time the share of wealth accruing to college educated whites and to nonwhites increased. 
• The median household income and median net worth of white working class households has fallen relative to the national medians, and their homeownership rate, marriage rate, and self-reported health status also have deteriorated.

These declines may be "the result of circumstances unique to the white working class," say the researchers. The circumstances include: 1) rising high school graduation rates for Blacks and Hispanics, which has increased the competition with nonwhites for jobs; 2) less racial and ethnic discrimination in the labor market, which has increased the competition with nonwhites for jobs; and 3) globalization, which has reduced job opportunities.

"The long-term decline of the white working class may be due, in part, to the reduction over time of their previous advantages over nonwhite working classes," the study concludes.

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, The Bigger They Are, The Harder They Fall: The Decline of the White Working Class

Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation

If your customers are people who hunt, fish, or watch birds and other wildlife, you're in luck. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides an in-depth look at them in its 2016 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. The report provides detailed demographic, spending, and activity profiles of Americans aged 16 or older who participated in hunting, fishing, and/or wildlife observation. The survey, which is fielded by the Census Bureau every five years, has been ongoing since 1955.

Among the three recreational activities examined, wildlife watching is by far most popular. More than one-third (34 percent) of Americans aged 16 or older participated in wildlife watching in 2016 compared with 14 percent who fished and 4 percent who hunted. The survey defines wildlife watching as closely observing, feeding, and/or photographing wildlife, or visiting natural areas with wildlife observation as the primary objective.

Wildlife watching is more popular than fishing or hunting, and it is growing faster and generates more spending. Between 2006 and 2016, the number of wildlife watchers grew 21 percent—from 71 million to 86 million. The number of birdwatchers alone (45 million) almost surpasses the number of anglers and hunters combined. Wildlife watchers spent $76 billion in 2016. The number of people who fish grew from 30 million to 36 million between 2006 and 2016. Anglers spent $46 billion on fishing equipment and services in 2016. The number of hunters fell during the decade, from 12.5 million to 11.5 million. Hunters spent $26 billion in 2016.

Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2016 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation

Big-City Counties Still Fastest Growing, but...

The nation's most urban counties continue to grow faster than any other county type according to the Census Bureau's 2017 county population estimates. A Demo Memo analysis of 2010-to-2017 county population trends along the Rural-Urban Continuum documents ongoing metro growth (the bigger, the better) and continuing rural decline. But the 2017 data reveal changing patterns of growth.

The Rural-Urban Continuum is the federal government's way of classifying counties by their degree of urbanity. The continuum is a scale ranging from 1 (the most urban counties, in metropolitan areas of 1 million or more) to 9 (the most rural counties, lacking any settlements of 2,500 or more people and not adjacent to a metropolitan area). If you sort the nation's 3,000-plus counties by their rank on the continuum, then measure population change between 2010 and 2017 for each rank, this is the result...

County population change 2010-2017 by Rural-Urban Continuum Rank
1. 7.1% for counties in metros with 1 million or more people
2. 5.5% for counties in metros of 250,000 to 1 million people
3. 3.5% for counties in metros with less than 250,000 people
4. 0.3% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, adjacent to metro
5. 1.6% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, not adjacent to metro
6. –1.0% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, adjacent to metro
7. –1.4% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, not adjacent to metro 
8. –1.3% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, adjacent to metro 
9. –1.7% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, not adjacent to metro 

Counties with a rank of 1 on the continuum (the most urban) have grown faster than any other county type in every year since 2010. But the pattern of growth is changing as the decade progresses. Average annual growth rates in smaller metro counties (rank 2 and 3) are increasing, while average annual growth is slowing in the largest urban counties. Some nonmetro counties saw their population losses turn to small gains in 2017 (rank 6 and 8). These emerging trends are signs that the economic recovery is increasingly widespread.  

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service, Rural-Urban Continuum Codes and Census Bureau, County Population Totals and Components of Change: 2010–2017

When it Comes to Technology, Never Say Never

Technological change turns the novel into the essential. Such is the case with cell phones, according to a Gallup analysis of cell phone adoption over time.

Way back in 2000, Gallup surveyed the public to determine cell phone ownership. Fifty percent of people aged 18 or older owned a cell phone in 2000 and another 25 percent planned to get one. But a substantial 23 percent of Americans reported that they would never get a cell phone—17 to 21 percent of people under age 65 and fully 50 percent of people aged 65 or older.

"Many in the 2000 poll misjudged themselves or the technology—or both," notes Gallup in its report, linking to the results of a 2018 Pew Research Center survey of cell phone ownership...

Percent owning a cell phone in 2018
Total adults: 95%
Aged 18 to 29: 100%
Aged 30 to 49: 98%
Aged 50 to 64: 94%
Aged 65-plus: 85%

Demographic change contributed to the rise of cell phone ownership, Gallup acknowledges. "Many older Americans who may have accurately predicted their non-adoption of cellphones have passed away since 2000." But demographic change doesn't account for the entire rise in adoption, Gallup says. The introduction of the smartphone in 2007 turned cell phones into an essential tool of modern life.

Source: Gallup, Gallup Vault: Misjudging Cellphone Adoption

Spending on "Taxi Fares" Has Soared since 2010

Ride sharing has exploded since Uber rolled out in 2011. According to the Consumer Expenditure Survey, average household spending on what the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls "taxi fares and limousine services" climbed 47 percent between 2010 and 2016, after adjusting for inflation. The Uber effect is especially strong among Millennials...

Percent change in average household spending on "taxi fares," 2010 to 2016
Under age 25: –10%
Aged 25 to 34: +156%
Aged 35 to 44: +97%
Aged 45 to 54: +17%
Aged 55 to 64: –4%
Aged 65-plus: +17%

Drilling down to spending on "taxi fares" in home city only (excluding taxi fares on trips) and the increase in average household spending is even greater—55 percent overall and 181 percent for householders aged 25 to 34.

Source: Demo Memo analysis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Expenditure Survey

Top 10 Emerging Trends of the 2000s

The 21st century has been a wild ride so far, and it has only just begun. The speed with which events are unfolding is creating turmoil and confusion, necessitating a step back to see the big picture—the emerging trends behind so many of today's headlines. This is no idle exercise, but imperative for businesses intent on surviving the next decade and for policymakers struggling to adapt to profound changes in the way we live.

What are the emerging trends of the 21st century, the tipping points that have occurred since 2000? Many trends are important, but a handful stand out because of their far-reaching consequences. These are documented in New Strategist's Demographics of the U.S.: Trends and Projections, a reference tool for trend trackers. Using consequences as a measure of importance, these are the 10 most important emergent trends of the 2000s.

1. The income decline: The decline began long before the Great Recession, and it has hit the American middle class hard. Men's incomes were falling well before 2000, the household income decline began in 2000, and women's steady income growth came to a halt in the 2000s. The political repercussions of the resulting economic anxiety are well known.

2. The wealth decline: To rub salt into the economic wound of waning incomes, household net worth collapsed with the Great Recession as the housing bubble burst. Median household net worth fell 40 percent between 2007 and 2013, after adjusting for inflation.

3. The homeownership decline: The homeownership rate peaked in 2004. The number of homeowners peaked in 2006. By 2015, there were 1.4 million fewer homeowners than in the peak year. The homeownership rate in 2015 was the lowest since 1967.

4. Majority acceptance of gay marriage: The percentage of Americans who support the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry climbed from just 31 percent in 2004 (the first year the General Social Survey asked the question) to 59 percent in 2016. Rarely has massive social change occurred so rapidly.

5. Increase in health insurance coverage: The percentage of Americans without health insurance fell to a record low in 2015, thanks to the Affordable Care Act. Although still reviled by many, the ACA has grown in popularity now that Americans better understand the alternatives. But continual threats to repeal the Affordable Care Act are taking their toll on the nation's already fragile sense of wellbeing.

6. The marriage decline: The Millennial generation is postponing marriage longer than any previous cohort of young adults. Delayed marriage has contributed to other emerging trends—the decline of homeownership, the baby bust, and population loss in nonmetropolitan areas.

7. The birth decline: The number of births in the U.S. peaked in 2007 at 4.3 million. Since then, births have fallen in nearly every year and have been stuck below 4 million since 2009. Fertility rates are at a record low for women under age 30, with Hispanic fertility falling the most. The steep decline in Hispanic fertility may delay by a few years the coming minority majority forecast for the 2040s.

8. The life expectancy decline: Life expectancy at birth fell in 2015 for the first time since 1993. All of the decline was due to rising death rates among people under age 65. What's going on? A big factor is a rise in "deaths of despair," a consequence of rural and small town stagnation.

9. City growth and rural decline: Urban centers have been experiencing a resurgence, thanks to Millennials seeking job opportunities. At the other extreme, since 2010 for the first time, nonmetropolitan America has been losing population. The disparity between flourishing urban centers and languishing small-town and rural America has upended the nation's politics.

10. The mobility decline: The geographic mobility rate hit an all-time low in 2015–16, in part because some residents of small towns and rural areas are trapped in their shrinking local economies. Many either cannot or will not move to pursue an American Dream in which they no longer believe.

These are the top emerging trends of the 21st century. Most are stories of decline—which is a trend of significance in itself. For more of the trends shaping American society right now, see New Strategist's Demographics of the U.S.: Trends and Projections.

The New Income Estimates

The Census Bureau thinks long and hard before tinkering with the all-important Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC), from which emanates much of what we know about the economic status of the American people. But sometimes change is necessary, and this is one of those times. The Census Bureau has been working on a redesign of the ASEC income questions for 14 years, attempting to improve the accuracy of the nation's official income statistics. When the bureau releases the 2015 CPS ASEC results on September 16 (with income data for 2014), the redesign will be fully implemented. Here's what you need to know...

• A redesign of the CPS ASEC income questions has been sorely needed, in part because the original questions failed to capture most withdrawals from IRAs and 401(k)s. The redesign counts these withdrawals as income. 
• Analyzing income trends will be problematic—at least in the short run. Data from the redesigned questions are not comparable with data from the original questions. To provide a bridge, the Census Bureau has released 2013 income data from a 2014 ASEC sample that was asked the new questions. At the above link, there are two sets of 2013 tables—the original and the redesign, allowing researchers to compare the original numbers with the redesign and also to determine the 2013-to-2014 trend when the 2014 data are released on September 16. 
• The redesigned income questions boosted overall aggregate income in 2013 by 4.2 percent, according to a comparison of data from the original and redesigned questions. While earned income did not change, unearned income was 12.4 percent higher in the redesign. 
• Median household income in 2013 was 3.2 percent greater with the redesigned questions. While there was no statistically significant change in median household income among younger adults, the median income of households headed by people aged 55 or older was about 5 percent higher primarily because of retirement account withdrawals. 
• Many more Americans reported receiving income from an IRA, Keogh, or 401(k)—the figure rising from 1 million in the original to 5 million in the redesign.

It will take a while to digest these changes. The Census Bureau plans to provide a research file with adjusted income data, allowing for historical comparisons. Until then, the starting point for income trend analysis will be 2013.

Source: Census Bureau, 2013 Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Products Based on Redesigned Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement Questions

The Top 10 Trends of 2013, Part 2

We live in interesting times, and these are the trends that make our times so interesting. Here are the remaining five of the Top 10 Trends of 2013. To see the first five, click here.

6. Household spending is growing. Despite stagnant incomes, the average household spent 1.4 percent more in 2012 than in 2011, after adjusting for inflation. The $51,442 spent by the average household in 2012 was still 6.7 percent below the 2006 spending peak, when the average household spent $55,119 (in 2012 dollars). But the trend is in the right direction. See Household Spending Rises

7. First-time homebuyers are aging. Before the collapse of the housing market in the wake of the Great Recession, the nation's first-time homebuyers were aged 30 to 34. The homeownership rate typically surpassed 50 percent in that age group. No longer. Only 47.5 percent of householders aged 30 to 34 were homeowners as of the third quarter of 2013. Now the typical first-time homebuyer is aged 35 to 39, almost in middle age. See First-Time Homebuyer Watch: 3rd Quarter 2013

8. College enrollment is declining. After years of rising enrollment, the number of college students plunged between 2011 and 2012. The 467,000 decline (from 20.4 million in 2011 to 19.9 million in 2012) occurred primarily among students at four-year schools. Colleges are scrambling to adjust to the lower numbers. See College Enrollment Plunges

9. Household wealth is below peak. You might have seen news reports about how the nation's net worth is at a new peak, based on Fed data. Those reports are about the aggregate and do not account for inflation or population growth. After adjusting for inflation and population growth, net worth per household is still 45 percent below its 2007 peak, according to the St. Louis Fed. See Wealth: Crawling Out of the Hole

10. The Internet is changing time use. Millions of Americans are spending a lot of leisure time online, according to an NBER study by Scott Wallsten. On an average day in 2012, 13 percent of people aged 15 or older spent leisure time online. Those who did devoted about one-third of their leisure time to online activities—and that doesn't include time spent gaming. See "What Are We Not Doing When We're Online" and More about Computer Use for Leisure

The Top 10 Trends of 2013, Part 1

We live in interesting times, and these are the trends that make our times so interesting. Here are five of the Top 10 Trends of 2013 (see tomorrow's post for the next five)...

1. Cities are growing. Between 2010 and 2012, the nation's largest cities (with populations of 50,000 or more) grew 2.1 percent. This was nearly double the 1.1 percent growth elsewhere. During the same time, the USDA reports that nonmetropolitan areas lost population—their first recorded population loss. See City Growth by Size, Why Metros Are Growing, and Population Change along the Rural-Urban Continuum

2. Minorities now have power. In 2012, Asians, blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities accounted for 37 percent of the nation's population. Rising above the one-third threshold is an important milestone for minorities because of the One-Third Rule: when a segment of the population surpasses one-third of the total, it wields enough economic and political power to change the status quo. See Race and Hispanic Origin, 2012

3. Nuclear families are declining. As young adults postpone marriage and childbearing, the number of married couples with children under age 18 fell from 27 million (24 percent of households) to 25 million (21 percent of households) between 2007 and 2013. Nuclear families are the only household type that is declining. See 2 Million Fewer Nuclear Families

4. Fertility rate is at a record low. The fertility rate continues to set a new record low each time the National Center for Health Statistics issues an updated report. For the 12-month period ending in June 2013, the fertility rate—which is the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44—fell to 62.7, yet another record low. See Births Stable, Fertility Rate Fell through June 2013

5. Women's earnings are no longer growing. Over the years, the increase in women's earnings has kept families afloat as men's earnings stalled. Since 2010, however, the growth in women's earnings has come to a halt. Consequently, household incomes are stagnant. The $51,017 median household income of 2012 was lower than the $51,892 of 2010 and well below the $55,627 of 2007, after adjusting for inflation. See The End of the Rise in Women's Earnings and Median Household Income in 2012