'Falling birth rates could see the end of our civilization'

[wa3zrm]

The notion of population growth as a threat to our future as a species is totally false.
In fact we are heading in a different direction.
The birth rates keeps on falling far below the 2.1 live births per woman required to maintain population equilibrium.
In Germany, the birth rate has sunk to just 1.36, in Spain 1.48, Italy 1.4, Holland and Belgium, 1.8.

(Excerpt) Read more at thisisleicestershire.co.uk ...

[lxskllr]

Oh no, the ponzi scheme of capitalism might fail! Cash out while you can!!

[Premium Parrots]

can easily solve that problem......



start sending the women to me.

[Zimobog]

People are also living longer. But I agree that the over-poulation crisis is far fetched.

[truthwolf1]

ABORTION-CLINIC WORKER: BABY 'SWIMMING' IN TOILET

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/abortion-...ing-in-toilet/

[Zimobog]

^Backstroke, sidestroke, breaststroke, or free-style?

[OregonNative]

I think we have to many people on earth anyway. 1/2 the current population would be sweet. Of course, who's going to volunteer to be part of the 50% that opts out?

[Darwin]

Half the current population of the planet? Right. No way that there could possibly be any unpleasant unintended consequences.

[truthwolf1]

^Backstroke, sidestroke, breaststroke, or free-style?

I actually found the story to be quite disturbing and I am not even a humanist.

[Zimobog]

I knew it would be disturbing so I didn't read it.

[Paco]

My own personal opinion on this is 7 billion people for the planet is far to many anyway. If people are having less children because they don't want to bring a kid into this crazy ass world then I think that's a good thing. I'd rather have a world with 4 billion people then a world with 8 billion where over half of the population is suffering. I would never recommend "weeding" out the population but if people voluntarily are having less children for now is fine.

Also I just started reading the article and the author spells civilization wrong in the title so it's going to be hard for me to take his/her opinion seriously.

[Nuusku]

I think this is a bit far fetched..

[Zimobog]

I don't care how many people live on this planet so long as they are free from tyranny.

[Paco]

I tend to agree as long as the planet can sustain the population I.E. food sources etc. The article itself disturbed me more then the information it contained. To me it was simply propaganda against abortion.

[Zimobog]

I think the planet can make up it's own mind if there are too many people or not without people resorting to abortion to keep their numbers down. If people had to feed the children they produced, people would choose to have less children. This would be especially true in the West.

As larger quanities of food are available to the 3rd world thru the trade and advancements, the surplus in food allows a diversification of the labor force away from subsistance farming. This is what lead to our own industrial age and smaller family sizes. When farms became more efficient the labor became less critical, workers were displaced from agricultural work and the surplus labor reorganizes elsewhere in the economy like in services and industry. No one needs to breed large families for cheap farm labor when the economy becomes more diverse.

The only industrialized nations that place great emphasis on large families are:
1) those ruled by tyrannies preparing for war.
2) managed economies where the government's mistakenly think that their citizens should not have the freedom to pursue the highest paying job possible.
3) xenophobic tyrannies who refuse to trade with other countries and obsess about "self-sufficent" economy.


My take on the first article was that it was written by an extreme Catholic.