Brazil and the United States are the two most populous countries in the Americas today. In 1500, the year that Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in present-day Brazil and claimed it for the Portuguese crown, it is estimated that there were roughly one million people living in the region. Some estimates for the present-day United States give a population of two million in the year 1500, although estimates vary greatly. By 1820, the population of the U.S. was still roughly double that of Brazil, but rapid growth in the 19th century would see it grow 4.5 times larger by 1890, before the difference shrunk during the 20th century. In 2024, the U.S. has a population over 340 million people, making it the third most populous country in the world, while Brazil has a population of almost 218 million and is the sixth most populous. Looking to the future, population growth is expected to be lower in Brazil than in the U.S. in the coming decades, as Brazil's fertility rates are already lower, and migration rates into the United States will be much higher. Historical development The indigenous peoples of present-day Brazil and the U.S. were highly susceptible to diseases brought from the Old World; combined with mass displacement and violence, their population growth rates were generally low, therefore migration from Europe and the import of enslaved Africans drove population growth in both regions. In absolute numbers, more Europeans migrated to North America than Brazil, whereas more slaves were transported to Brazil than the U.S., but European migration to Brazil increased significantly in the early 1900s. The U.S. also underwent its demographic transition much earlier than in Brazil, therefore its peak period of population growth was almost a century earlier than Brazil. Impact of ethnicity The demographics of these countries are often compared, not only because of their size, location, and historical development, but also due to the role played by ethnicity. In the mid-1800s, these countries had the largest slave societies in the world, but a major difference between the two was the attitude towards interracial procreation. In Brazil, relationships between people of different ethnic groups were more common and less stigmatized than in the U.S., where anti-miscegenation laws prohibited interracial relationships in many states until the 1960s. Racial classification was also more rigid in the U.S., and those of mixed ethnicity were usually classified by their non-white background. In contrast, as Brazil has a higher degree of mixing between those of ethnic African, American, and European heritage, classification is less obvious, and factors such as physical appearance or societal background were often used to determine racial standing. For most of the 20th century, Brazil's government promoted the idea that race was a non-issue and that Brazil was racially harmonious, but most now acknowledge that this actually ignored inequality and hindered progress. Racial inequality has been a prevalent problem in both countries since their founding, and today, whites generally fare better in terms of education, income, political representation, and even life expectancy. Despite this adversity, significant progress has been made in recent decades, as public awareness of inequality has increased, and authorities in both countries have made steps to tackle disparities in areas such as education, housing, and employment.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Data used in Population differences in the length and early-life dynamics of telomeres among European pied flycatchers. Includes three different datasets and variable explanations.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Differences in the marital status estimates when produced using the old and new methodologies, by sex
The world's population first reached one billion people in 1805, and reached eight billion in 2022, and will peak at almost 10.2 billion by the end of the century. Although it took thousands of years to reach one billion people, it did so at the beginning of a phenomenon known as the demographic transition; from this point onwards, population growth has skyrocketed, and since the 1960s the population has increased by one billion people every 12 to 15 years. The demographic transition sees a sharp drop in mortality due to factors such as vaccination, sanitation, and improved food supply; the population boom that follows is due to increased survival rates among children and higher life expectancy among the general population; and fertility then drops in response to this population growth. Regional differences The demographic transition is a global phenomenon, but it has taken place at different times across the world. The industrialized countries of Europe and North America were the first to go through this process, followed by some states in the Western Pacific. Latin America's population then began growing at the turn of the 20th century, but the most significant period of global population growth occurred as Asia progressed in the late-1900s. As of the early 21st century, almost two-thirds of the world's population lives in Asia, although this is set to change significantly in the coming decades. Future growth The growth of Africa's population, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, will have the largest impact on global demographics in this century. From 2000 to 2100, it is expected that Africa's population will have increased by a factor of almost five. It overtook Europe in size in the late 1990s, and overtook the Americas a few years later. In contrast to Africa, Europe's population is now in decline, as birth rates are consistently below death rates in many countries, especially in the south and east, resulting in natural population decline. Similarly, the population of the Americas and Asia are expected to go into decline in the second half of this century, and only Oceania's population will still be growing alongside Africa. By 2100, the world's population will have over three billion more than today, with the vast majority of this concentrated in Africa. Demographers predict that climate change is exacerbating many of the challenges that currently hinder progress in Africa, such as political and food instability; if Africa's transition is prolonged, then it may result in further population growth that would place a strain on the region's resources, however, curbing this growth earlier would alleviate some of the pressure created by climate change.
New population concentration projections (from 2000 to 2040) were compared between the Going Places 2040 Concentrated Development Vision and Local 2040 Plans.2040 population data for the Local 2040 Plans were projected based on the adopted future land use plan of each local jurisdiction.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Comparison between admin-based population estimates and Census 2021 estimates by Lower layer Super Output Area in England and Wales.
The world population surpassed eight billion people in 2022, having doubled from its figure less than 50 years previously. Looking forward, it is projected that the world population will reach nine billion in 2038, and 10 billion in 2060, but it will peak around 10.3 billion in the 2080s before it then goes into decline. Regional variations The global population has seen rapid growth since the early 1800s, due to advances in areas such as food production, healthcare, water safety, education, and infrastructure, however, these changes did not occur at a uniform time or pace across the world. Broadly speaking, the first regions to undergo their demographic transitions were Europe, North America, and Oceania, followed by Latin America and Asia (although Asia's development saw the greatest variation due to its size), while Africa was the last continent to undergo this transformation. Because of these differences, many so-called "advanced" countries are now experiencing population decline, particularly in Europe and East Asia, while the fastest population growth rates are found in Sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, the roughly two billion difference in population between now and the 2080s' peak will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, which will rise from 1.2 billion to 3.2 billion in this time (although populations in other continents will also fluctuate). Changing projections The United Nations releases their World Population Prospects report every 1-2 years, and this is widely considered the foremost demographic dataset in the world. However, recent years have seen a notable decline in projections when the global population will peak, and at what number. Previous reports in the 2010s had suggested a peak of over 11 billion people, and that population growth would continue into the 2100s, however a sooner and shorter peak is now projected. Reasons for this include a more rapid population decline in East Asia and Europe, particularly China, as well as a prolonged development arc in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset provides values for POPULATION reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.
Learn how to access and use p-value tables to compare state-level estimates from the 2021-2022 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Thep-value tablesaccompany the2021-2022 NSDUH State Estimates of Substance Use and Mental Disorderswhich contain 35 measures of substance use and mental health across the nation, four Census regions, 50 states, and the District of Columbia. The guide describes the files and how to use the p-value tables to determine whether differences between two geographic areas are statistically significant.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the Fort Bragg population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Fort Bragg across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.
Key observations
In 2023, the population of Fort Bragg was 6,919, a 1.30% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Fort Bragg population was 7,010, a decline of 0.60% compared to a population of 7,052 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Fort Bragg increased by 34. In this period, the peak population was 7,351 in the year 2018. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
Data Coverage:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Fort Bragg Population by Year. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
All population differences (% percentage differences for log transformed variables) were adjusted for age and sex. Blood pressure was also adjusted for instrument and room temperature.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the Amherst population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Amherst across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.
Key observations
In 2023, the population of Amherst was 12,928, a 0.36% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Amherst population was 12,882, an increase of 0.24% compared to a population of 12,851 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Amherst increased by 1,153. In this period, the peak population was 12,928 in the year 2023. The numbers suggest that the population has not reached its peak yet and is showing a trend of further growth. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
Data Coverage:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Amherst Population by Year. You can refer the same here
When data are not available at the finer resolution scale, classification of priority areas becomes less efficient. For example, roughly 660,000 people living in sub-counties with no reported cases would be categorized as living in high priority counties.
Estimation of responses of organisms to their environment using experimental manipulations, and comparison of such responses across sets of species, is one of the primary tools in ecology research. The most common approach is to compare response of a single life stage of species to an environmental factor and use this information to draw conclusions about population dynamics of these species. Such approach ignores the fact that interspecific fitness differences measured at a single life stage are not directly comparable and cannot be extrapolated to lifetime fitness of individuals and thus species’ population dynamics. Comparison of one life stage only while omitting demographic information can strongly bias conclusions, both in experimental studies with a few species, and in large comparative studies. We illustrate the effect of this omission using both an exaggerated fictitious example, and biological data on congeneric species differing in their demography. We are showing, taking sim...
https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.htmlhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
We used this dataset to assess the strength of isolation due to geographic and macroclimatic distance across island and mainland systems, comparing published measurements of phenotypic traits and neutral genetic diversity for populations of plants and animals worldwide. The dataset includes 112 studies of 108 species (72 animals and 36 plants) in 868 island populations and 760 mainland populations, with population-level taxonomic and biogeographic information, totalling 7438 records. Methods Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: We searched the ISI Web of Science in March 2017 for comparative studies that included data on phenotypic traits and/or neutral genetic diversity of populations on true islands and on mainland sites in any taxonomic group. Search terms were 'island' and ('mainland' or 'continental') and 'population*' and ('demograph*' or 'fitness' or 'survival' or 'growth' or 'reproduc*' or 'density' or 'abundance' or 'size' or 'genetic diversity' or 'genetic structure' or 'population genetics') and ('plant*' or 'tree*' or 'shrub*or 'animal*' or 'bird*' or 'amphibian*' or 'mammal*' or 'reptile*' or 'lizard*' or 'snake*' or 'fish'), subsequently refined to the Web of Science categories 'Ecology' or 'Evolutionary Biology' or 'Zoology' or 'Genetics Heredity' or 'Biodiversity Conservation' or 'Marine Freshwater Biology' or 'Plant Sciences' or 'Geography Physical' or 'Ornithology' or 'Biochemistry Molecular Biology' or 'Multidisciplinary Sciences' or 'Environmental Sciences' or 'Fisheries' or 'Oceanography' or 'Biology' or 'Forestry' or 'Reproductive Biology' or 'Behavioral Sciences'. The search included the whole text including abstract and title, but only abstracts and titles were searchable for older papers depending on the journal. The search returned 1237 papers which were distributed among coauthors for further scrutiny. First paper filter To be useful, the papers must have met the following criteria: Overall study design criteria: Include at least two separate islands and two mainland populations; Eliminate studies comparing populations on several islands where there were no clear mainland vs. island comparisons; Present primary research data (e.g., meta-analyses were discarded); Include a field study (e.g., experimental studies and ex situ populations were discarded); Can include data from sub-populations pooled within an island or within a mainland population (but not between islands or between mainland sites); Island criteria: Island populations situated on separate islands (papers where all information on island populations originated from a single island were discarded); Can include multiple populations recorded on the same island, if there is more than one island in the study; While we accepted the authors' judgement about island vs. mainland status, in 19 papers we made our own judgement based on the relative size of the island or position relative to the mainland (e.g. Honshu Island of Japan, sized 227 960 km² was interpreted as mainland relative to islands less than 91 km²); Include islands surrounded by sea water but not islands in a lake or big river; Include islands regardless of origin (continental shelf, volcanic); Taxonomic criteria: Include any taxonomic group; The paper must compare populations within a single species; Do not include marine species (including coastline organisms); Databases used to check species delimitation: Handbook of Birds of the World (www.hbw.com/); International Plant Names Index (https://www.ipni.org/); Plants of the World Online(https://powo.science.kew.org/); Handbook of the Mammals of the World; Global Biodiversity Information Facility (https://www.gbif.org/); Biogeographic criteria: Include all continents, as well as studies on multiple continents; Do not include papers regarding migratory species; Only include old / historical invasions to islands (>50 yrs); do not include recent invasions; Response criteria: Do not include studies which report community-level responses such as species richness; Include genetic diversity measures and/or individual and population-level phenotypic trait responses; The first paper filter resulted in 235 papers which were randomly reassigned for a second round of filtering. Second paper filter In the second filter, we excluded papers that did not provide population geographic coordinates and population-level quantitative data, unless data were provided upon contacting the authors or could be obtained from figures using DataThief (Tummers 2006). We visually inspected maps plotted for each study separately and we made minor adjustments to the GPS coordinates when the coordinates placed the focal population off the island or mainland. For this study, we included only responses measured at the individual level, therefore we removed papers referring to demographic performance and traits such as immunity, behaviour and diet that are heavily reliant on ecosystem context. We extracted data on population-level mean for two broad categories of response: i) broad phenotypic measures, which included traits (size, weight and morphology of entire body or body parts), metabolism products, physiology, vital rates (growth, survival, reproduction) and mean age of sampled mature individuals; and ii) genetic diversity, which included heterozygosity,allelic richness, number of alleles per locus etc. The final dataset includes 112 studies and 108 species. Methods for processing the data: We made minor adjustments to the GPS location of some populations upon visual inspection on Google Maps of the correct overlay of the data point with the indicated island body or mainland. For each population we extracted four climate variables reflecting mean and variation in temperature and precipitation available in CliMond V1.2 (Kritikos et al. 2012) at 10 minutes resolution: mean annual temperature (Bio1), annual precipitation (Bio12), temperature seasonality (CV) (Bio4) and precipitation seasonality (CV) (Bio15) using the "prcomp function" in the stats package in R. For populations where climate variables were not available on the global climate maps mostly due to small island size not captured in CliMond, we extracted data from the geographically closest grid cell with available climate values, which was available within 3.5 km away from the focal grid cell for all localities. We normalised the four climate variables using the "normalizer" package in R (Vilela 2020), and we performed a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using the psych package in R (Revelle 2018). We saved the loadings of the axes for further analyses. References:
Bruno Vilela (2020). normalizer: Making data normal again.. R package version 0.1.0. Kriticos, D.J., Webber, B.L., Leriche, A., Ota, N., Macadam, I., Bathols, J., et al.(2012). CliMond: global high-resolution historical and future scenario climate surfaces for bioclimatic modelling. Methods Ecol. Evol., 3, 53--64. Revelle, W. (2018) psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych Version = 1.8.12. Tummers, B. (2006). DataThief III. https://datathief.org/
Population profile - total, rate of change, age, and density.
Annual Intercensal Resident Population Estimates by Age Group, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin for the United States, States, and Counties, and by Age Group and Sex for Puerto Rico Commonwealth and Its Municipios: April 1, 2000 to April 1, 2010 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // Note: 'In combination' means in combination with one or more other races. The sum of the five race-in-combination groups adds to more than the total population because individuals may report more than one race. Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. Hispanics may be of any race. Responses of 'Some Other Race' from the 2000 and 2010 Censuses are modified. This results in differences between the population for specific race categories shown for the 2000 and 2010 Census populations in this file versus those in original 2000 and 2010 Census data. For more information, see http://www.census.gov/popest/research/modified.html. // The April 1, 2000 Population Estimates base reflects changes to the Census 2000 population from the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // For detailed information about the methods used to create the intercensal estimates, see http://www.census.gov/popest/methodology/index.html. // The intercensal estimates for 2000-2010 for the United States and Puerto Rico populations are produced by the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program by modifying the 2000-2010 postcensal estimates prepared previously for the United States and Puerto Rico, to account for differences between the postcensal estimates for April 1, 2010 and the 2010 Census counts. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. The Population Estimates Program provides additional information including historical and current estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, and research papers on its website: http://www.census.gov/popest/index.html
Datasets supporting findings and visualizations behind McManamay et al. (2024) Divergent urban land trajectories under alternative population projections within the shared socioeconomic pathways. Environmental Research Letters, DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ad2eec Using a spatial modeling experiment at high resolution (1-km), this study compared how two alternative US population projections, varying in the spatially explicit nature of demographic patterns and migration, affect urban land dynamics simulated by the Spatially Explicit, Long-term, Empirical City development (SELECT) model for SSP2, SSP3, and SSP5. The numerical experiment, inputs and outputs are fully described in McManamay et al. (2024). The datasets summarize SELECT model simulations within urban areas and rural areas of the conterminous United States. For code to reproduce the results, please refer to https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/mcmanamay_etal_2024_erl Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details. Descriptions of the datasets are provided below. Dataset(s) Descriptions: Urban_Land_delta_UA_County.csv: Urban land area for original (default) population, updated population, and urban land delta (difference between the two) according to Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and year. Urban land is summarized for U.S. counties (FIPS code) and urban areas (GEOID) as unique areas within various counties. JO_Gao_pop_ufdelta.csv: Comparison of population differences and urban land differences between the origial (default) and updated population projections. City_Case_studies.csv: Differences in urban land areas arising from different population projections summarized for selected cities (Atlanta, Los Angeles, Houston, and New York) and their surrounding rural areas UA_county_FID.zip: Zipped folder of .tiff file depicting unique combination of urban areas and US counties used for summarizing urban land differences in urban and rural areas based on different population projections. ULD_clusters.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting normalized changes in urban land delta (difference in urban land arising from population projections) and the respective Ward's hierarchical clusters, which group urban and rural areas based on similarities in temporal trends. Urban_Percent_change_2100.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting percent changes in urban land area for year 2100 based on differences in the original (default) population and updated population. Each file is for SSPs and urban or rural areas.
Current rising temperatures are threatening biodiversity. It is therefore crucial to understand how climate change impacts male and female fertility and whether evolutionary responses can help in coping with heat stress. We use experimental evolution to study male and female fertility during real-time evolution of two historically differentiated populations of Drosophila subobscura under different thermal selection regimes for 23 generations. We aim to (1) tease apart sex-specific differences in fertility after exposure to warming conditions during development, (2) test whether thermal selection can enhance fertility under thermal stress, and (3) address the role of historically distinct genetic backgrounds. Contrary to expectations, heat stress during development had a higher negative impact on female fertility than on male fertility. We did not find clear evidence for enhanced fertility in males or females evolving under warming conditions. Population history had a clear impact o...
Important variation in the shape and strength of density-dependent growth and mortality is observed across animal populations. Understanding this population variation is critical for predicting density-dependent relationships in natural populations, but comparisons among studies are challenging as studies differ in methodologies and in local environmental conditions. Consequently, it is unclear whether: (1) the shape and strength of density-dependent growth and mortality are population-specific; (2) the potential trade-off between density-dependent growth and mortality differs among populations; and (3) environmental characteristics can be related to population differences in density-dependent relationships. To elucidate these uncertainties, we manipulated the density (0.3-7 fish/m2) of young-of-the-year brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) simultaneously in three neighboring populations in a field experiment in Newfoundland, Canada. Within each population, our experiment included...
Brazil and the United States are the two most populous countries in the Americas today. In 1500, the year that Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in present-day Brazil and claimed it for the Portuguese crown, it is estimated that there were roughly one million people living in the region. Some estimates for the present-day United States give a population of two million in the year 1500, although estimates vary greatly. By 1820, the population of the U.S. was still roughly double that of Brazil, but rapid growth in the 19th century would see it grow 4.5 times larger by 1890, before the difference shrunk during the 20th century. In 2024, the U.S. has a population over 340 million people, making it the third most populous country in the world, while Brazil has a population of almost 218 million and is the sixth most populous. Looking to the future, population growth is expected to be lower in Brazil than in the U.S. in the coming decades, as Brazil's fertility rates are already lower, and migration rates into the United States will be much higher. Historical development The indigenous peoples of present-day Brazil and the U.S. were highly susceptible to diseases brought from the Old World; combined with mass displacement and violence, their population growth rates were generally low, therefore migration from Europe and the import of enslaved Africans drove population growth in both regions. In absolute numbers, more Europeans migrated to North America than Brazil, whereas more slaves were transported to Brazil than the U.S., but European migration to Brazil increased significantly in the early 1900s. The U.S. also underwent its demographic transition much earlier than in Brazil, therefore its peak period of population growth was almost a century earlier than Brazil. Impact of ethnicity The demographics of these countries are often compared, not only because of their size, location, and historical development, but also due to the role played by ethnicity. In the mid-1800s, these countries had the largest slave societies in the world, but a major difference between the two was the attitude towards interracial procreation. In Brazil, relationships between people of different ethnic groups were more common and less stigmatized than in the U.S., where anti-miscegenation laws prohibited interracial relationships in many states until the 1960s. Racial classification was also more rigid in the U.S., and those of mixed ethnicity were usually classified by their non-white background. In contrast, as Brazil has a higher degree of mixing between those of ethnic African, American, and European heritage, classification is less obvious, and factors such as physical appearance or societal background were often used to determine racial standing. For most of the 20th century, Brazil's government promoted the idea that race was a non-issue and that Brazil was racially harmonious, but most now acknowledge that this actually ignored inequality and hindered progress. Racial inequality has been a prevalent problem in both countries since their founding, and today, whites generally fare better in terms of education, income, political representation, and even life expectancy. Despite this adversity, significant progress has been made in recent decades, as public awareness of inequality has increased, and authorities in both countries have made steps to tackle disparities in areas such as education, housing, and employment.