General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#22 |
|
USA is wealthier than Europe + Canada, and you have a higher birthrate than either.
Northern Europe (Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Finland and the UK) have higher birthrates than Spain, Greece and Italy, and are all wealthier. The exception to this is Germany. You are making a silly argument, because you are comparing First World countries. A more accurate measure would be comparing this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...%29_per_capita Against this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_birth_rate Yes, it's not 100% congruent, but obviously, the poorest nations which overwhelmingly exist in the Global South also have higher birthrates than those richer nations in the Global North. |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
|
Ireland has 15.5/1000 births, with a GDP of $42,110.
USA has a birthrate of 14/1000, with a GDP of $47,440. Again, you ignore, Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, UK, not to mention all of eastern europe, Russia and Japan. All have lower per capita income than the USA, and lower birthrates. I'm glad you can poke holes, but the elephant in the room is still there. Yes, I am aware that IN GENERAL, the US has a higher birth rate and a higher per capita GDP than the rest of the 1st World. HOWEVER, the 1st World has an OVERWHELMINGLY higher per capita GDP, and an OVERWHELMINGLY lower birth rate than the rest of the world. Not questioning that. I'm just questioning the utility of anti-natal policies in the first world. They are at best, useless, and at the worst, harmful. |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
|
The only country I'm aware of with an actively anti-natal policy is the People's Republic of China, yet the economy of the PRC has been rapidly expanding year over year for quite a while. If you want, I'll get you specific economic growth numbers, but I don't think you want to dispute that China's economy has been growing. Oh I don't dispute it, but by 2014, which is only 5 years from now, their workforce will be shrinking.
If China wants to have any influence on the world, they will have to act sometime before then. Their growth is already slowing. |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
|
Well, I think it fair to compare apples to apples. I bet if you looked at the birthrate by state, the trashy southern US hick states would win that battle too. |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
|
FWIW, high birth rates are correlated with two main things:
1) General stupidity and religiosity of the population. The more religious areas don't know how to use contraception and/or don't believe in it, leading to families of 16 kids and a PRAISE JESUS HE IS BLESSING MY 14 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER BY GETTING HER KNOCKED UP attitude 2) General poverty and their lack of access to contraceptives and sexual education The notion that high birthrates correlate to economic success is off-the-charts stupid. |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
|
Shock of shocks, I'm right.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...enbirths_N.htm The highest teen birth rates are in the South and Southwest; Mississippi is highest with 68.4 per 1,000, followed by New Mexico, with a rate of 64.1 and Texas, with 63.1. The lowest rates are in the Northeast. New Hampshire had the fewest teen births with 18.7 per 1,000. Vermont, with 20.8 per 1,000, and Massachusetts, with 21.3 per 1,000, were also low. Decreases were noted in New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia. |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|