Lower Fertility: a Wise Investment

[LouieK]

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=31&articleID=0001B5B7-389A-14E3-B89A83414B7F0000

Gasp!

[Enzo]

Interesting that his solution to the problem is having the poor countries breed less, rather than the rich countries wasting and consuming less.

Further I find suspect the notion that the poorer countries will rise up to our consumption levels with all the concomittant stuff. I find it much more likely that as they do that, the richer countries will find their standards of living diminishing, and world income will average out rather than everybody on top.

[Lance]

Regardless of the motives, wouldn't it still be a good idea?

[Мастер]

I find it much more likely that as they do that, the richer countries will find their standards of living diminishing,

Maybe. I'm not so sure though.

It has often been observed that rich people have fewer children than poor people, and this seems to cut across national and cultural boundaries. At least as of a few years ago, many of the demographic models were predicting that world population would peak at around double its current value, then begin to decline. . .

[Dragon Star]

Regardless of the motives, wouldn't it still be a good idea?

Yes.

I am going to try to not get into this topic very heavy because I feel very strongly about poverty VS. birth control.

I very strongly believe we need to control birth rates and start to raise adoption so we can end much of the poverty in the world...which lowers crime rates and makes economy boom.

[Мастер]

I very strongly believe we need to control birth rates and start to raise adoption so we can end much of the poverty in the world...which lowers crime rates and makes economy boom.

Not exactly my area of specialty, but I haven't seen much evidence that lower birth rates lead to economic booms. (They do lead to increases in per capita GDP because a larger percentage of the population is in the work force, but this is a temporary phenomenon.) I have seen evidence that economic booms lead to lower birth rates.

[Dragon Star]

The lowering birth rates does practically nothing, except increase adoption, THAT is what increases economy by removing poor children who are living on rotten banana peels and giving them the chance to benefit society.

If you don't understand what I mean, here is an example:

- world wide no one women is legally allowed to have more then two children during her life span. A women and her husband want to have a larger family of 5 children...so, if she can only give birth too 2 children, then she can adopt the other 3.

Adoption-->Lowered birth rates-->Removing the poor-->Increased economy.

[Lance]

If you don't understand what I mean...

I can't believe you just said that to KOS.

[Dragon Star]

If you don't understand what I mean...

I can't believe you just said that to KOS.

Yes, sometimes even KOS night not know what I mean, hell, half the time I don't. But I never addressed KOS specifically, I was talking to everyone. :D

[Мастер]

The lowering birth rates does practically nothing, except increase adoption, THAT is what increases economy by removing poor children who are living on rotten banana peels and giving them the chance to benefit society.

If you don't understand what I mean, here is an example:

- world wide no one women is legally allowed to have more then two children during her life span. A women and her husband want to have a larger family of 5 children...so, if she can only give birth too 2 children, then she can adopt the other 3.

Adoption-->Lowered birth rates-->Removing the poor-->Increased economy.

Is there any evidence that this is true?

[Dragon Star]

Nah, just in my mind it's common sense.

[hippietrekx]

- world wide no one women is legally allowed to have more then two children during her life span. A women and her husband want to have a larger family of 5 children...so, if she can only give birth too 2 children, then she can adopt the other 3.

Flaw: Religion

I don't know about any other religion, but Catholicism is strictly against birth control (Although Pope John Paul II condoned the use of condoms to lower the spread of AIDS, it was was not approval of birth control). My aunts all have over three children, and one is pregnant again.

Other religions may share the same view on birth control as Catholics, or they may believe that people are meant to have children.

--hippie

[Dragon Star]

I have nothing against religion until it destroys the world as we know it, which it is...well, as I see it anyways, but meh, what do I know...

[LouieK]

Nature finds a way to control the populace. Technologically advanced countries have made it possible for people to live longer, and cure diseases that once kept the population from growing too quickly. Now the globe is faced with a problem with demand and supply of natural resources.

There is a gross imbalance of the world's resources as it is. Why point the finger at poorer nations and tell them to stop breeding? That's like blaming fast food restaraunts for making you obese when nobody is forcing you to eat there. We have the power to moniter the resource we use ourselves.

[Dragon Star]

There is a gross imbalance of the world's resources as it is. Why point the finger at poorer nations and tell them to stop breeding? That's like blaming fast food restaraunts for making you obese when nobody is forcing you to eat there.

:?

No, I never said that at all! This is a world wide problem, thus the world wide must deal with it and fix it together, I would never say it was another countries/minorities fault for our problems, I blame humanity for our problems. In fact I basically stated just the opposite, that other, poorer nations are a key to help the problems we face.

[umop ap!sdn]

From how the article is written, my understanding is that it's all about voluntary cooperation. Offering poor people access to birth control, for instance, rather than forcing it on them. As long as it's entirely voluntary I don't see what's so bad about it (aside from whatever the long term consequences are which I have no idea how to guess at) whereas if it were forced it'd be a very bad thing indeed.

If it is entirely voluntary, it reminds me of these folks.

[Мастер]

Now the globe is faced with a problem with demand and supply of natural resources.

What specifically is the problem?

[LouieK]

LouieK wrote:
There is a gross imbalance of the world's resources as it is. Why point the finger at poorer nations and tell them to stop breeding? That's like blaming fast food restaraunts for making you obese when nobody is forcing you to eat there.

Dragon Star wrote:
No, I never said that at all! This is a world wide problem, thus the world wide must deal with it and fix it together, I would never say it was another countries/minorities fault for our problems, I blame humanity for our problems. In fact I basically stated just the opposite, that other, poorer nations are a key to help the problems we face.

I appologize, I was commenting on the article, not what you said Dragon Star. :(

[LouieK]

Now the globe is faced with a problem with demand and supply of natural resources.

What specifically is the problem?

"Climate change, water stress, habitat destruction, over-hunting and over-fishing, pollution...scarce and depleting resources, especially fossil fuels and natural habitats vital to other species...over-harvesting of ocean fisheries."

[Dragon Star]

LouieK wrote:
There is a gross imbalance of the world's resources as it is. Why point the finger at poorer nations and tell them to stop breeding? That's like blaming fast food restaraunts for making you obese when nobody is forcing you to eat there.

Dragon Star wrote:
No, I never said that at all! This is a world wide problem, thus the world wide must deal with it and fix it together, I would never say it was another countries/minorities fault for our problems, I blame humanity for our problems. In fact I basically stated just the opposite, that other, poorer nations are a key to help the problems we face.

I appologize, I was commenting on the article, not what you said Dragon Star. :(

Oh shit...I'm sorry, what are you apologizing for? You ought to be jumping down my throat!

Well I feel like a dummy now.

[Enzo]

I don't see what's so bad about it

In and of itself, nothing. I worry when I see presentations like this that we collectively will say "Yay, let's tell all the poor countries to breed less and that will help the world." Then thinking what a good deed we had done, we would hop into our separate SUVs and drive to different grocery stores for our favorite brand of arugula. In other words, I doubt it will have much impact, but we will have satified our need to be "involved."

- world wide no one women is legally allowed to have more then two children during her life span. A women and her husband want to have a larger family of 5 children...so, if she can only give birth too 2 children, then she can adopt the other 3.

What world wide government would be enforcing this dictum? And why stop at two kids? The CHinese mandate only one. And very serious sanctions if you have an extra one.

Further, I doubt that the starving people in Darfur or someplace will be importing adoptive children from other overpopulated spots just to have a large family. In parts of the world, children are a resource to a family. True it is another mouth to feed, but it is also another body to work the field, work a job, help the mother. Not only that, in many places life expectancy is low, mortality is high. They have a lot of children to insure that at least some will make it to adulthood to pass on the family genes. If a mother has only two kids and then waits until they are old enough to marry, and they die, then the mother has to "start over" and may be too old. DOn't ovulate all your eggs in one basket so to speak. If you can expect that only 2 of your ten kids will make it, then you have ten to wind up with the two you want them to have.

[Мастер]

Now the globe is faced with a problem with demand and supply of natural resources.

What specifically is the problem?

"Climate change, water stress, habitat destruction, over-hunting and over-fishing, pollution...scarce and depleting resources, especially fossil fuels and natural habitats vital to other species...over-harvesting of ocean fisheries."

If you are concerned that there is a problem with demand and supply of fossil fuels, resulting in low prices, then it seems to me this sort of policy would result in even lower prices. Regarding the other resources you mention, I would suggest ending the policy of giving them away for free. I don't think there is any need to use the language of a market mechanism (supply and demand), when no such mechanism exists.

[Мастер]

In parts of the world, children are a resource to a family.

Imagine that, and here I was thinking they were just having a lot of children because they weren't as enlightened as the cafe classes in rich countries. . .

[Lonewulf]

In parts of the world, children are a resource to a family.

Imagine that, and here I was thinking they were just having a lot of children because they weren't as enlightened as the cafe classes in rich countries. . .

Heh.

That's a good one.

[Dragon Star]

I don't see what's so bad about it

In and of itself, nothing. I worry when I see presentations like this that we collectively will say "Yay, let's tell all the poor countries to breed less and that will help the world." Then thinking what a good deed we had done, we would hop into our separate SUVs and drive to different grocery stores for our favorite brand of arugula. In other words, I doubt it will have much impact, but we will have satified our need to be "involved."

- world wide no one women is legally allowed to have more then two children during her life span. A women and her husband want to have a larger family of 5 children...so, if she can only give birth too 2 children, then she can adopt the other 3.

What world wide government would be enforcing this dictum? And why stop at two kids? The CHinese mandate only one. And very serious sanctions if you have an extra one.

Further, I doubt that the starving people in Darfur or someplace will be importing adoptive children from other overpopulated spots just to have a large family. In parts of the world, children are a resource to a family. True it is another mouth to feed, but it is also another body to work the field, work a job, help the mother. Not only that, in many places life expectancy is low, mortality is high. They have a lot of children to insure that at least some will make it to adulthood to pass on the family genes. If a mother has only two kids and then waits until they are old enough to marry, and they die, then the mother has to "start over" and may be too old. DOn't ovulate all your eggs in one basket so to speak. If you can expect that only 2 of your ten kids will make it, then you have ten to wind up with the two you want them to have.

Fair enough, but let me ask you this, why is the life expectancy so low, Enzo?

:wink: