Hey DO! There's reality, you're the one looking away from it and instead basing your opinion on some generalization of Hispanic males.
Posted on 03/04/2002 2:06:32 PM PST by Torie
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:46:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
It's not often that a scholarly paper declares its implications "momentous," but a newly released report by the United Nations Population Division does just that. And with good cause. In a proposal sexily titled "The Future of Fertility in Intermediate-Fertility Countries," the U.N. concludes that in this century we can expect a "slowing of population growth rates" followed by "slow reductions in the size of world population."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I would bet a large sum that there is a direct co-relation between certain "wealth" indicators and birthrates, with a lag of course, that depends on the free disemination of direct information, cultural deference to authority, religeous upbringing, and general immunity to "alarmest" effects.
Perhaps something as simple as the availability of milk, amount of life-threatening crime, or the simple freedom to defend oneself.
Mmmm...the glass is half empty?
What the graph indicates is a drop of nearly 70% in the birth rate.
Interesting lack of responses too.
Take a look at the world populace and how long it took to double the last time. Well, that's going to happen again. It's not slowing down. The states with the highest level of income have taken the population of this planet to be an important issue. The third world never will.
The only reason the UN would dare make such a stupid prediction is because they are pefectly happy with the third world overpopulating at the expense of the western world. That is exactly what is happening.
When my first wife was pregnant with our children, she was ignored by all men except one group. When she was nearly full term, she was still getting harassed by hispanic men who would make cat calls and try to pick her up. I can't explain it. Wouldn't even attempt to. I'm just telling you what she experienced.
I take it the real numbers simply aren't your bag. Or are you going to allow your anecdotal experiences in the US to allow the tail to wag the dog? I prabably should get the Hispanic fertility rates in the US for you, but what useful purpose would that serve? Or do you think the numbers the UN posted are false, including the number of the current fertility rate in Mexico putting aside the clear trend line?
Translation: "I have my opinion, and if reality doesn't match it, then reality is wrong."
Hey DO! There's reality, you're the one looking away from it and instead basing your opinion on some generalization of Hispanic males.
Regarding the world wide numbers, review the bar chart again, and review it closely. Then add up the population numbers for China, India, Brazil, Korea, Eqypt and Mexico. You can then toss in the numbers for Indonesia. Toss in Thailand, Phillipines, Malaysia and South Africa for kicks. What number are we up to now? And we haven't counted a single soul yet in the highly developed world.
0550 ...250,000,000 Fall of Rome
1567 ...450,000,000
1825 1,000,000,000
1886 1,500,000,000
1927 2,000,000,000
1954 3,000,000,000
1978 4,000,000,000
1999 6,000,000,000
PBS Historical Population TimeLine
Population Projection TimeLine
Around the fall of Rome PBS estimates there were 250 million people on earth. It took roughly 1,100 years before the population doubled. Let's look at how long it took for the population to double since then.
550 - 1650....1,100 years (...500,000,000)
1650 - 1825.......175 years (1,000,000,000)
1825 - 1927.......102 years (2,000,000,000)
1927 - 1978.........51 years (4,000,000,000)
1978 - 1999.........21 years (6,000,000,000) (population grew by 50%, a rate of 42 years to double)
I'd like to know on what basis the United Nations claims any numbers other than the 12 million we are likely to have on the planet by 2040.
The rates of growth have slowed slightly during the last twenty years. Is it temporary? Even at slower rates the population is still going to double at least by 2050. The projections of 9 billion by 2050 fly in the face of just short of 1500 years of history. But based on several years of abnormally slower growth, the UN is gifted with the insight to know what populace we'll have by 2050. B/S!
Just twenty years ago the same UN had the western world so freaked out that this segment of the world's populace cut back on their reproduction rates to save the planet. Now, twenty years later the same organization tells us it knows precisely what our population will be in 2050. And guess what, it won't be so bad. LOL And some of the blithering idiots on this forum actually buy it.
Isn't it interesting that when the western world's populace dipped below sustainable numbers, all of a sudden the population explosion wasn't a dire problem after all. Nope, it was just a coincidence.
Bump for Facts and the inability to refute them.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
By the way, when I am blown out, I cut my loses. Has that tactic ever occurred to you? Probably not. LOL.
For decades, demographers have assumed that fertility rates in developing countries will eventually fall to replacement level -- about 2 children per woman -- and then stabilize at that level. However, over the past decade, more and more developing countries have joined developed countries in seeing their fertility levels fall below this replacement fertility floor, challenging the assumption that there is some inherent magnet drawing populations to a replacement-level equilibrium.
In all of history it took us until 1954 to realize three billion people on the planet. In 1999, just 45 years later, we doubled that figure. In the last twenty years we have added two billion people or fifty percent to the population of the planet. That growth rate would see the population doubled in 42 years. Despite this two billion increase in the last 20 years, the UN is thrilled. It thinks the populace is going to top out despite the fact that the population is growing more rapidly than it every has.
It's almost comical, actually is down right sad, to watch people convince themselves that at least six thousand years of history will be overruled by ten years of what may or may not be an anomoly, may or may not be factual numbers. We witness the actions of the UN all over the planet. They lie when it comes to the middle east. They vilify anyone in Europe who doesn't want to see their nation overrun by immigrants from asia. They think that we are wrong to try to enforce our borders. Despite this, people on this forum find the UN's fishy numbers to be very accurate when it plays into their fantacies.
The fact is we had 4 billion people in 1978. We had 6 billion in 1999. We will have roughly eight billion by 2020. The numbers show that we are still adding around 100 million each year. One of the links I provided shows that the world population is 6,227 billion. By 2020 we'll have 1.8 billion more people on the planet. And the UN will still be lying to people like you who will still be more than happy to support them.
Torie, you may not agree with me, but the numbers clearly show that we're headed for 8 billion by 2020. How can you accept that the UN states we will only have 9 billion by 2050? Even if I am off by a factor, that 9 billion figure is pure fantasy.
I would tell you, but everytime I point out to someone who does just that, they get pissed at being called a name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
.gif){kind=link}