Why the world population won’t exceed 11 billion
- Thread starter yennus
- Start date
It's simple economics. As we become more prosperous we have less need for large families.
SlyGuy
Active Member
The economics might factor in a bit... but breeding rate and selection is, and always will be, controlled by the women. A prosperous male partner and high household income would actually enable the woman to be a stay-at-home and have more kids. However, we all know that is becoming more and more rare, due to both females educating themselves and higher standards of living which are now difficult to afford without dual parent incomes. The richest people are having the fewest kids on average; they have usually spent so long in school and working hard for job promotions that they have few fertile years left... or many people who were born rich want to enjoy life and just relax with few or no kids to slow them down. Homosexuality is also on the increase, and by making that choice, those men and women are likely to have no kids.
The issue is even much simpler than econ, though: it is common sense and knowledge. The best form of birth control is to educate the women.
As populations become more educated and free, they have less need for outdated religion, more scientific interest, and less hesitation to using birth control. When you allow for freedom and easy access to birth control and college education, nearly every woman will choose to advance their education and self development (just like men always have). The women almost all put off having kids during education... and some choose to forego it altogether. Even if they have kids, they will likely still work or stay in school, so it's tough (and too expensive) to pop out a whole big litter anymore.
Every first world country already has slowing or negative population growth now. Even without war, the world might not ever reach 10 billion. Information spreads fast, and the only major barrier to effective use of birth control is old school religious laws and brainwashing. Even muslim countries have large black markets for birth control methods. The only countries you really see having high average numbers of kids are the truly poor places that also have high infant mortality and low life expectancy. We shall see...
Last edited:
Opening the borders of advanced countries to the third world will increase population growth exponentially unfortunately.
SlyGuy
Active Member
Quite the opposite... yes, the immigrants will initially stick with their known ways in the new country. That will seem to work ok, even great, since they have increased resources and health care which may save some of their kids which would otherwise starve or get disease in the old country.
...however, those immigrants will rapidly start to emulate the free and educated country's use of birth control. The kids will see they are a part of a big family... a big poor family. They will quickly realize that the path to prosperity lies in education and self development (especially learning the native language), not simply a numbers game to survive. You will be amazed at the rate that happens... typically just a generation or two.
It doesn't happen overnight, but they pay attention and learn pretty quick. The key is the womens' rights, educational opportunities, and access to birth control. It works wonders... even for the heathens. I agree that it has to be controlled inflow, though. You can't just remove all borders and immigration restrictions.
In some religions, no matter where the subscribers of said faith are residing geographically, the women are not allowed independence nor freedom. If your sk. "faith" says women are less than half as good as men, that they are practically property of men, and birth control is not allowed I think it is difficult to see a positive societal development occurring. There is ample evidence that not all migrants have the intention to integrate. With the higher fertility rate and lack of willingness to integrate to local laws and norms, I think it is inevitable that segregation will increase, not decrease. I'm fully expecting to see more gated communities developing as the original populations dwindle and migrants proportionally increase. Especially in countries which pride on their generous welfare systems (think Scandinavia) there's a lot of unhealthy incentives for migrants to keep breeding.
I would have to disagree due to the doctrine of “Demographic Jihad”, also known as “The Great Replacement” being taught in certain religious institutions. It is a a duty to have at least 5 children in the “new country’ in order to displace the non-believer and usher in the new order.
Stumbled across this a while back...not sure of the veracity of this site http://www.deagel.com/country/ but it predicts a somewhat different future.
Once you click thru the link, select a country and compare 2017 to 2025.....could be BS but then again someone may know something we don't. Screen shot for Aust below.
Once you click thru the link, select a country and compare 2017 to 2025.....could be BS but then again someone may know something we don't. Screen shot for Aust below.
I appreciate your point, but it is economic development that precedes education, political freedom etc. Or i should be more precise - technological development which raises the economic standard of a given population.
The industrial revolution gave jobs to the poor agrarian based workers. In turn, this meant that they could afford more free time, especially for their children which enabled them to get an education instead of digging turnips and sleeping with pigs.
China has been the latest beneficiary of an economic revolution which has raised their living standards to be comparable to ours.
