In the US alone .. close to 60 million citizens .. consumers are not alive today ..

[Sufjon]

Hardly – an increase of about 55%.
What we do need is to face reality.
See: demographicwinter.com

Europe’s Demographic Winter threatening the U.S.A.
Having Children: Anatomy of a Cultural Strategy
“…for the first time, the birth rate in the United States has fallen below the replacement level. All of this is finally generating a buzz. If you’re a young Catholic looking for an effective long-term strategy to reclaim Western culture, having a large family should be on your short list.”

“Demographic winter” denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.

Demographer Philip Longman (author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity) observes: "The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st century." Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility.

“Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes. For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.”

Well, if growth has been 100% or 55% (as you say), that is a significant and alarming increase for 40 years. As for the website you posted. One of the main academic proponents of their message was Paul Ehrlich, who had long maintained that growing population and affluence will continue to put unsustainable pressure on the global environment. He now says that a book that he wrote on population growth was one of the most dangerous books ever written. He has publicly stated that he has in his lifetime issued one of the most dangerous opinions ever published. The question is whether his opinions then were dangerous, or his opinions now are dangerous. The dangers of unchecked population growth have been cited by many credible sources, and I think are intuitively apparent.

Oh, and here is an excellent expose on the organization that you posted the website to:

bastardlogic.wordpress.com/2008/02/17/the-demographic-winter/

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Abu]

Sufjon
The dangers of unchecked population growth have been cited by many credible sources, and I think are intuitively apparent….here is an excellent expose on the organization that you posted the website to

There are no credible sources about the reality of population decline in that website mishmash, merely propaganda against supposed “right–wingers” with such as “how the American religious far-right is tapping nativist insecurity in Europe to take its made-in-the-USA anti-choice message global….and The American Christian right, increasingly seeking influence abroad, has recognized that this anxiety over shifting national identities creates fertile terrain for spreading its ideology of traditional sexual morality as a quick fix for a postmodern age.”

That apology for commonsense is pushing abortion and sexual immorality and caricaturing virtues and values as “the American religious far-right.”

Erhlich has been discredited eons ago. His fantasy and myopia deserve oblivion.

Even in 1998, we have the Declaration by the Pontifical Council for the Family issued in Rome on February 27, 1998: On Decrease of Fertility in the World, L’Osservatore Romano, p 6-7, April 22, 1998:
“For 30 years, the rate of growth of the world’s population has continued to decline at a regular and significant rate. At this point, following an impressive drop in their fertility, 51 countries in the world (out of 185) are no longer able to replace their population. To be precise, these 51 countries represent 44 per cent of the population of the world. In other words, the total fertility rate (TFR) in these countries, that is to say, the number of children born of each woman, is lower than 2.1. This is the minimum level of fertility needed for the replacement of the population in a country which has the optimum public health conditions.

“This situation is found to be the same on almost every continent. There is below-replacement-level fertility in America (the United States, Canada, Cuba, and most of the Caribbean islands), in Asia (Georgia, Thailand, China, Japan and South Korea), in Oceania (Australia) and in almost all the countries of Europe. On this continent, the effect of aging on population leads to depopulation, with the number of deaths surpassing the number of births. This negative balance is occurring in 13 countries already, including Estonia, Latvia, Germany, Belarus, Bulgary, Hungary, Russia, Spain and Italy.”

 

[Sufjon]

There are no credible sources about the reality of population decline in that website mishmash, merely propaganda against supposed “right–wingers” with such as “how the American religious far-right is tapping nativist insecurity in Europe to take its made-in-the-USA anti-choice message global….and The American Christian right, increasingly seeking influence abroad, has recognized that this anxiety over shifting national identities creates fertile terrain for spreading its ideology of traditional sexual morality as a quick fix for a postmodern age.”

That apology for commonsense is pushing abortion and sexual immorality and caricaturing virtues and values as “the American religious far-right.”

Erhlich has been discredited eons ago. His fantasy and myopia deserve oblivion.

Even in 1998, we have the Declaration by the Pontifical Council for the Family issued in Rome on February 27, 1998: On Decrease of Fertility in the World, L’Osservatore Romano, p 6-7, April 22, 1998:
“For 30 years, the rate of growth of the world’s population has continued to decline at a regular and significant rate. At this point, following an impressive drop in their fertility, 51 countries in the world (out of 185) are no longer able to replace their population. To be precise, these 51 countries represent 44 per cent of the population of the world. In other words, the total fertility rate (TFR) in these countries, that is to say, the number of children born of each woman, is lower than 2.1. This is the minimum level of fertility needed for the replacement of the population in a country which has the optimum public health conditions.

“This situation is found to be the same on almost every continent. There is below-replacement-level fertility in America (the United States, Canada, Cuba, and most of the Caribbean islands), in Asia (Georgia, Thailand, China, Japan and South Korea), in Oceania (Australia) and in almost all the countries of Europe. On this continent, the effect of aging on population leads to depopulation, with the number of deaths surpassing the number of births. This negative balance is occurring in 13 countries already, including Estonia, Latvia, Germany, Belarus, Bulgary, Hungary, Russia, Spain and Italy.”

Yes, I am familiar with the far religious right preoccupation with scaring people about population growth to feed what they believe is the need for a birth race with Islam. I think it’s great though that there are people who are good enough with bending facts that they can convince people that in the midst of unprecedented population growth that there is a threat of population decline. Let’s face it, the people who are pushing this agenda and the website you posted aren’t worried about population decline. They are worried about the decline of CERTAIN populations (people like them) and the GROWTH of other populations (people they are afraid of). Scary bunch of people in my estimation.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Abu]

Sufjon
I think it’s great though that there are people who are good enough with bending facts that they can convince people that in the midst of unprecedented population growth that there is a threat of population decline

Such myopia, devoid of fact, is a deadly affliction.

lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/jul/10072903
World Population Report: ‘Aging Populations; Fewer Workers; Decline of Developed Countries’, By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
WASHINGTON, DC, July 29, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The 2010 World Population Data Sheet, published by the Population Reference Bureau (PBR) on July 28, says that a shrinking pool of working-age populations is jeopardizing social support and long-term health care programs for the elderly, and points to a decrease in the populations of developed countries.

The report states that worldwide in 1950, there were 12 persons of working age for every person age 65 or older. By 2010, that number had shrunk to 9. By 2050, this elderly support ratio, which indicates levels of potential social support available for the elderly, is projected to drop to 4.

The report also shows the contrasts between developing and developed countries and highlights that while developing countries will see populations increase, developed countries are beginning to see population shrinkage.

Phillip Longman. The Global Baby Bust, Foreign Affairs (May/June 2004):catholiceducation.org/articles/population/pc0044.htm
“A closer look at demographic trends shows that the rate of world population growth has fallen by more than 40 percent since the late 1960s. And forecasts by the UN and other organizations show that, even in the absence of major wars or pandemics, the number of human beings on the planet could well start to decline within the lifetime of today’s children. Demographers at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis predict that human population will peak (at 9 billion) by 2070 and then start to contract. Long before then, many nations will shrink in absolute size, and the average age of the world’s citizens will shoot up dramatically. Moreover, the populations that will age fastest are in the Middle East and other underdeveloped regions. During the remainder of this century, even sub-Saharan Africa will likely grow older than Europe is today.”

 

[Sufjon]

Such myopia, devoid of fact, is a deadly affliction.

lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/jul/10072903
World Population Report: ‘Aging Populations; Fewer Workers; Decline of Developed Countries’, By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
WASHINGTON, DC, July 29, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The 2010 World Population Data Sheet, published by the Population Reference Bureau (PBR) on July 28, says that a shrinking pool of working-age populations is jeopardizing social support and long-term health care programs for the elderly, and points to a decrease in the populations of developed countries.

The report states that worldwide in 1950, there were 12 persons of working age for every person age 65 or older. By 2010, that number had shrunk to 9. By 2050, this elderly support ratio, which indicates levels of potential social support available for the elderly, is projected to drop to 4.

The report also shows the contrasts between developing and developed countries and highlights that while developing countries will see populations increase, developed countries are beginning to see population shrinkage.

Phillip Longman. The Global Baby Bust, Foreign Affairs (May/June 2004):catholiceducation.org/articles/population/pc0044.htm
“A closer look at demographic trends shows that the rate of world population growth has fallen by more than 40 percent since the late 1960s. And forecasts by the UN and other organizations show that, even in the absence of major wars or pandemics, the number of human beings on the planet could well start to decline within the lifetime of today’s children. Demographers at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis predict that human population will peak (at 9 billion) by 2070 and then start to contract. Long before then, many nations will shrink in absolute size, and the average age of the world’s citizens will shoot up dramatically. Moreover, the populations that will age fastest are in the Middle East and other underdeveloped regions. During the remainder of this century, even sub-Saharan Africa will likely grow older than Europe is today.”

Again, you can bend a number to say whatever you want it to say. As your articles cite, population GROWTH started to slow in the 1960’s, but that’s because the 1950’s produced the highest growth of any period in history - a trend that could not and should not be sustained. Population in NUMBERS have, however, steadily climbed. The rate of growth has slowed. Your article states that the population of the world will hit 9 billion by 2027. That is over 23% higher than it is today.

In 1800 there were 1 billion people on this planet. There are now over 7 billion. So from the time that humans appeared on this planet (a very long time ago) until 1800 we achieved 1 billion people. In the brief space of time since then we have grown that population 7 times over. In just the brief 12 years between 1987 and 1999, the population of the world grew by 1 billion, or simply stated, as much as the world population grew in the prior TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS that humans have inhabited this planet.

Also, the human species very adaptable and snaps back quickly. During the plague of Justinian, the population of Europe dropped by 50%. During the plagues of the 14th century, the world’s population dropped by nearly another 25%. It snapped back in less than 200 years, with no knowledge of medical science to speak of.

Your articles cite that the ratio of unproductive old people to ostensibly productive young people is growing quickly. That is a whole different problem. The solution is not to crank ever more numbers of young people (who will themselves in turn grow old) into the system.

By the way, I wonder how we will sustain that 9 billion in 2070. That is the more immediate problem. Especially if a large number of them are in need of elder care. Population decline is on my list of things to worry about. Right behind worrying how long it takes a one legged grasshopper to kick all the seeds off a dill pickle.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[paedagogo]

Again, you can bend a number to say whatever you want it to say. As your articles cite, population GROWTH started to slow in the 1960’s, but that’s because the 1950’s produced the highest growth of any period in history - a trend that could not and should not be sustained. Population in NUMBERS have, however, steadily climbed. The rate of growth has slowed. Your article states that the population of the world will hit 9 billion by 2027. That is over 23% higher than it is today.

In 1800 there were 1 billion people on this planet. There are now over 7 billion. So from the time that humans appeared on this planet (a very long time ago) until 1800 we achieved 1 billion people. In the brief space of time since then we have grown that population 7 times over. In just the brief 12 years between 1987 and 1999, the population of the world grew by 1 billion, or simply stated, as much as the world population grew in the prior TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS that humans have inhabited this planet.

Also, the human species very adaptable and snaps back quickly. During the plague of Justinian, the population of Europe dropped by 50%. During the plagues of the 14th century, the world’s population dropped by nearly another 25%. It snapped back in less than 200 years, with no knowledge of medical science to speak of.

Your articles cite that the ratio of unproductive old people to ostensibly productive young people is growing quickly. That is a whole different problem. The solution is not to crank ever more numbers of young people (who will themselves in turn grow old) into the system.

By the way, I wonder how we will sustain that 9 billion in 2070. That is the more immediate problem. Especially if a large number of them are in need of elder care. Population decline is on my list of things to worry about. Right behind worrying how long it takes a one legged grasshopper to kick all the seeds off a dill pickle.

Your friend
Sufjon

Hold on now… hominids date back over 3.5 million years, but homo sapiens are established now at 60,000 years, give or take 30.000. There is genetic evidence that Adam lived 60,000 or so years ago, and that on human was the genetic originator of our race.

Call me silly, but your emphasis on the 200,000 years caught my eye, and I decided to pipe up with more current research.

 

[Abu]

The benefits of medical science, the opportunities for sufficient and better diets, the giant strides through free enterprise, based on reason and faith, have all contributed to longer life, more healthy children growing to adulthood, and societies better equipped to overcome problems.

Against these valuable human endeavours have intruded the humanly destructive trends against reason and faith – the contraceptive mentality which has become the abortion mentality, and of euthanasia, IVF, and other degrading activities, apart from the evils of Communism and Socialism.

The indomitable endeavours based on reason and faith have produced GMC and many other agricultural advances which will continue to ensure adequate productivity and quality in food.

Underdeveloped countries will continue in their state where aid is squandered, rulers feather their own nests rather than attending to the common good, and where the prudent, thrifty, and technically educative needs of populations are neglected.

The decline of populations is present, unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable future, and the essentials of reason and faith are in need of constant, intensive and widespread cultivation.

 

[Sufjon]

The benefits of medical science, the opportunities for sufficient and better diets, the giant strides through free enterprise, based on reason and faith, have all contributed to longer life, more healthy children growing to adulthood, and societies better equipped to overcome problems.

Against these valuable human endeavours have intruded the humanly destructive trends against reason and faith – the contraceptive mentality which has become the abortion mentality, and of euthanasia, IVF, and other degrading activities, apart from the evils of Communism and Socialism.

The indomitable endeavours based on reason and faith have produced GMC and many other agricultural advances which will continue to ensure adequate productivity and quality in food.

Underdeveloped countries will continue in their state where aid is squandered, rulers feather their own nests rather than attending to the common good, and where the prudent, thrifty, and technically educative needs of populations are neglected.

The decline of populations is present, unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable future, and the essentials of reason and faith are in need of constant, intensive and widespread cultivation.

Hi again Abu: You are a good person to have concern over the sanctity of life. My point is that we have to be ever-watchful for those who would use their knowledge of our concerns for these things to push an agenda. We should always look up the organizations that back the websites we go to, or who sponsors the organizations publishing the ideas. They usually salt their positions with a credible source here and there, and use subtle twists on one or two words in a sentence to turn an absurdity into a legitimate sounding talking point. A quick slight of hand makes it sound as though a decline in population growth represents a decline in population, when in fact, we have anything but a decline in population on our hands. Sustained growth in large percentages are difficult to sustain as the sample being measured increases in size. In the case of populations it is even more difficult. Fifty percent growth of a population of 7 billion exerts significantly more stresses on social, economic and ecological systems than does the same fifty percent growth in a population of one billion or 4 billion. These same systems that are stressed by the growth invariably start to act as inhibitors that over time will attenuate sustained growth at those same rates. Were it nor for such inhibitors, we would have a much bigger problem on our hands.

Communism and other social conventions or economic systems are probably the subject of another thread.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Abu]

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=9936
**Europe: fertility remains well below replacement level, April 11, 2011 **
Between 2003 and 2009, the fertility rate of the 27 nations of the European Union increased from 1.47 children per woman to 1.60-- a figure that remains well below the replacement level of 2.1.

The nations with the highest fertility rates in 2009 were Iceland (2.23), Turkey (2.1), Ireland (2.07), and France (2.00), while Latvia (1.31) and Portugal (1.32) had the lowest rates.