Its nature at work, if the land can't sustain them, the population will decline until it can. If we throw aid at every country like this then eventually the entire world will be effected. Imagine if every bit of inhabitable land was so densely packed as it is in some areas of India and China. Eventually something has got to give, and it's better to let it do it now when nature wants to then push the boundaries.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I think we have switched sides here without realising, now you're the pessimistic oneFlaming_Maniac wrote:
China's population growth rate is dropping dramatically. As that graph shows, there is a good chance the population will begin declining within the next couple decades thanks to strict population control measures put in place by the Chinese government.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
Leave them to it. They're not even asking for help tbh. They'll sort it out themselves. No need to start crying over other countries going "look at those poor people" with a sense of superiority and smugness, let them do what they gotta do. Both China and India are growing at crazy rates. They'll come up with their own solution when (if) the time comes. They'll be significantly richer too. And by if I mean if we even get to that stage and Nuclear War doesn't do the world a favour and get rid of 80% of the world population.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
The question is do we help them figure something out, or leave them to flounder while people die?
The thread is not about the population growing out of control in India - that much is fact. It's about whether the nations with the means to aid them have the responsibility to do so or not.
I don't think India will just "come up with a solution", that's the whole point here. There is nothing in history remotely like their situation to look at, and they don't have a lot going for them. Richer? Where is that money coming from? More people does not mean more money.
As for richer, didn't they project that the two economies will be the biggest two, especially China beating the US somewhere in the next few decades (2025 or something) and India catching up a few decades after that. I don't know much about that though. Infact, both of us don't even know much about these countries at all. Who are we to talk about shit like this tbh.
Medium-term i.e the next 30-50 years. Things will look good for them. But in the long term, 100+ years. They will be fucked big time. Moreso India if it doesn't curb its population growth which is quite insane. I think economic prosperity and family size go hand in hand.
Think about it, even here in the West there were huge families up until post WW2 when things really took off for the general population in terms of wealth
A one-child policy works in China, because it's China. You do what chairman say or you're fucked.
Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-07-29 09:25:42)
If your a 12 year old girl and Mao comes back, you're fucked either way.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
You do what chairman say or you're fucked.
I'm not being pessimistic, I'm being realistic. The population problem isn't what the thread is about, the numbers speak for themselves. The thread is about whether we should help them or not, which I don't think I have stated an opinion one way or the other. (though admittedly I didn't work very hard at making the OP unbiased)Mek-Stizzle wrote:
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I think we have switched sides here without realising, now you're the pessimistic one
As for richer, didn't they project that the two economies will be the biggest two, especially China beating the US somewhere in the next few decades (2025 or something) and India catching up a few decades after that. I don't know much about that though. Infact, both of us don't even know much about these countries at all. Who are we to talk about shit like this tbh.
Medium-term i.e the next 30-50 years. Things will look good for them. But in the long term, 100+ years. They will be fucked big time. Moreso India if it doesn't curb its population growth which is quite insane. I think economic prosperity and family size go hand in hand.
Think about it, even here in the West there were huge families up until post WW2 when things really took off for the general population in terms of wealth
America has 300 million people, India and China have over 1 billion people each. Their economies should be larger, but that does not mean their standard of living is better by any means.
The population predictions speak for themselves as far as India. My dad went there on business a few months ago, and he was being constantly harassed by beggars. The power at his place of business regularly went out at least a few times a day. You can own someone there for ten American cents a day. It's like putting a ten-piece puzzle together.
Which was exactly my point about Japan and India. You can't use the same policies somewhere else because the situation is fundamentally different.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
A one-child policy works in China, because it's China. You do what chairman say or you're fucked.