No one blames over-population for our diminishing natural resources! WHY NOT?

[Racoon]

The correlation between Womens education and family size is unmistakable.

Therefor, the answer to Human Overpopulation is either War,Disease,Famine, Or educating Women...




Look at any sociological study regarding that issue.

[Kayra]

I think there are other significant forces at work as well. Well, they are at work when birth control is available and social/religious taboos do not prevent them.

Most of the world exists in different stages of a demographic transition from high infant mortality to low infant mortality. Some countries are completely through the transition already. In those countries, the average fertility is well below 2 children per woman. In the 25 countries of the EU, it is at 1.5 on average. Japan is at 1.3. North America is 2.

The “cost” of having too few children is no free labor and no old age security. The “Cost” of having too many children is a tremendous burden and hardship on the family itself to maintain its own level of living. From these forces comes a balance that seeks for the unit to perpetuate itself, plus a little bit more or less. It is a natural state of mankind and can be shown before and after the demographic transition brought about by the current causes of population increases.

I guess what I am trying to say is that within 1 or 2 generations, with no intervention by man or government, each society has, and I believe will continue to, self adjust it’s own birthrate. I personally think it will end up somewhere between 9 and 10 billion, and decline from there naturally.

There are some animations on this website that show some of what I mean.

[Little Bang]

No one wants to attack the sanctity of humans right to have as many children as they want. The majority of people with IQ's higher than average have less than three children, where those that are lower have anywhere from 4 to 10. What does that tell you about the direction the average is moving?

[pgrmdave]

IQ isn't passed down that simply, though education levels might be...

[Symbology]

Originally Posted by Racoon

Men are usually willing to fill the hole between a womans thighs regardless of education or socio-economics.

While many native Louisianian's are quite ok with being called a coonass, my guess is that most women reading this board would not appreciate their anatomy being referred to as a hole.

[Symbology]

Originally Posted by Racoon

The correlation between Womens education and family size is unmistakable.

Therefor, the answer to Human Overpopulation is either War,Disease,Famine, Or educating Women...




Look at any sociological study regarding that issue.

Are there any fair studies that happen to have male education rates beside the female? My expectation is in many places the education level of male and female is near equal. I appreciate the intent of getting education to people. But this set of diagrams just smacks of sexism to me. It still leaves the implication that the responsibility lies with the females and that's just BS.

[Racoon]

Agree to disagree then Symbiology.

Thats what my Socio Profs stated. Its what the data correlates. Its what the textbooks show.

That was just one graph you can quickly google.. But the rest are very similar.

I'm not wrong. Prove me wrong.


Yeah, men should be wearing rubbers all the time.. But guess what?? They don't; and they don't have Symbiology from Hypography right there telling that to them in a hut in Africa, or a shanti in South America.

Thats just the facts.


and there are numerous other words to call a vagina. If you don't think its a "hole" to stick your penis into, then I'm sorry if you can't bear other terminology.
Good grief...

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by charles brough

....because no one wants to offend the Religious Right! Marxist China seems to be the only place on Earth that grasps the problem and does something about it.

Are we failing to face what is really causing our environmental and pollution problems because we hate to admit that their truly defective system still has
SOMETHING right?

It is a big mistake to think that science and technology will enable us to keep on growing in numbers without ending in an immense population crash. What is happening is that the growth of religiouness in our society and, indeed, in others as well, is cutting down science. Religious reaction is growing and has been for the last some 40 years. Even the periodic liberal phases of this cyclical down-trend are characterized by being always LESS liberal than the last such cycle.

A good source of info on this is the Atheistic Science Institute - home page* *

charles

I can't agree more with these points. Birth control is needed to stop our suicidal population growth, that will eat up resources/ pollute everything into oblivion. Everybody keeps on about the financial crash but this 'theoretical', not 'real' ('You cannot eat money' American Indian statement about our social token of exchange). Before this crash came a real moral/ morale one came as community started to break down and Learning (education) stopped. The answer to the financial crisis is to pour more money in - is the answer to worthlessness and pointlessness of life, to pour more bodies in?

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by Little Bang

No one wants to attack the sanctity of humans right to have as many children as they want. The majority of people with IQ's higher than average have less than three children, where those that are lower have anywhere from 4 to 10. What does that tell you about the direction the average is moving?

It's quality over quantity - smaller classrooms/ families, lead to more individual attention and better quality of life and education - this is the science behind why things 'work' this way and fail to the other way (Big families occur in Third World Countries to compensate for higher mortality rates - so better hygiene and medicine is the answer here). When I was in Scientology (God forgive me) they had a saying that you rewarded up statistics and punished down statistics - this means tough love or 'logic' dictated that you kept stupid actions under control as Rudi Guilliani did with New York (Too many single girls at home having babies - get them back to work by cutting down their state benefits or whatever).

The problem is that nobody wants to get tough at the grass roots level and bring in drastic population control methods and if they don't as Racoon says that means population control will occur naturally at the adult end (War, famine, pestilence). Sensible, middle class people do the former (educated) and the latter create the above scenario (Thanks for that point Little Bang!).

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by Symbology

While many native Louisianian's are quite ok with being called a coonass, my guess is that most women reading this board would not appreciate their anatomy being referred to as a hole.

'Symbology' - can we get a little reality in here? Sexism my backside - we are talking about problems of existence and you are pussy footing about womens feelings? If you were pregnant all the time, would you care a damn about what others called your vagina? I don't think so. As for the education thing - it is female suppression by men that is being addressed here, not whether men are educated or not and that is 'real sexism' not the pseudo-joke you are talking here.