Well, here’s a contrarian view. The world’s population problem isn’t that the birth rate is too high; it’s that the death rate is too low:
Infants and small children consume without producing, but they are the very people who will provide the productive adults of the future who will build their communities, their nations, and the world. They represent future production that can vastly outweigh their current consumption. Yes, a minority will die before they can produce, but the majority will far out-weigh them in impact.
Adults over 65 are different. Either voluntarily or out of sheer necessity, they cease to produce, but they do not cease to consume. In fact, their consumption of many resources (that is what the fuss is all about), notably health care, can increase dramatically. Yes, a minority may successfully return to production, but the majority will far out-weigh them in impact.
I read a great deal about the “impossibility†of supporting the consumption of essential resources by a larger global population, but I do not see anyone who provides a comparison of the current and future impact of a 5-year-old child with the current and future impact of 65-year old adult. They persist in either saying or implying that the problem lies at one end of the human lifespan. They have it upside-down. They’re looking at the wrong end.
Lots of interesting graphs that may challenge some of your preconceived notions.
Update
The more I thought about this the more I recognized the profoundly pessimistic and, I think, perverse school of thought in the world today. We should rejoice when a baby is born, someone lives to an advanced age, or the cure to a deadly disease is found not the other way around.
We’re at replacement level globally? Talk about under-reported. I had no idea. Of course the population continues to rise for a while, but wow. That’s a very significant reality. Must digest that.
I don’t know who this jerk is, but Mark Steyn had a saner and more productive and insightful treatment in a book he wrote.
George Friedman expressed a similar view, about shrinking birthrates all over the world, in his book The Next 100 years.
However, to my best recollection, he didn’t express a dichotomy between infants and old people, relative to their importance or rates of consumption. His premise mainly revolved around maintaining viable employment in aging countries where birthrates have gotten lower.
Friedman also predicted, instead of closing our borders, we would eventually be flinging them open with incentives, in order to draw younger workers here.
Drew,
You might be referencing this Mark Steyn’s book, America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It. I bought it some time ago, but haven’t as yet read it.
Note that there are two inflection points in the world fertility rate graph. I can explain the one in the late 70s: that’s when the “One Child Policy” was introduced.
But I’m at a loss to explain the one in the 1960s. “The Pill”/rise of feminism?
But I’m at a loss to explain the one in the 1960s. “The Pillâ€/rise of feminism?
The pill, creating a level playing field between the genders dealing with drugs, sex, rock & roll, and being responsibly irresponsible.
Yes, Jan, that’s the book.
The central theme is that the birth rates in the Muslim world vs Europe, and Europes immigration stance, almost have ordained Muslim dominance of the continent over time, as politicians are simply too beholden to the Muslim view.
The other theme is that the dominance of the Catholic faith in Mexico and S America, and our immigration stance, may be the issue that precludes a similar fate here.
For those who do not appreciate the politicians weak kneed response, there is a video making the rounds right now of what amounts to a small riot in Dearborn, MI. The tolerance of civil disobedience on the part of the local Muslim community is staggering, and would be national news if the roles were reversed. But then their is the short term vote……….
That may be part of the picture but it’s not the entirety. The birth rate here is higher than it is in Mexico.
Drew,
The Muslim community in the US is pretty small and much more secular than average. Frankly with all the hostility directed at them, I’m surprised there isn’t more civil disobedience.
Yes, Dave, but you understand the point being made, right?
Andy
Have you seen the video? There is no exculpatory evidence.
Drew,
I haven’t seen the video, but I doubt you can extrapolate to an entire community from it. I do think your point is valid to a certain extent, though, and would agree that people don’t want to be seen as criticizing Muslims for fear of being called bigots. That was certainly the case with Maj. Hasan Nidal, the Ft. Hood shooter.
The birthrate in Brazil, close to replacement rate, is about the same as in America. Furthermore, Brazil, the largest Roman Catholic country in the world, passes out condoms to 11-yr-olds. It is only nominally Catholic, with atheists and holy rollers gaining every day.
When we come to the need to focus on the task of fixing our broken world, the last thing we need is more babies. Who in his right mind would climb Everest or raft the River of Doubt with babies or young kids in tow? When it comes to seniors, they would be able to take care of themselves in old age if their wealth hadn’t been lifelong stolen for SS, Medicare and education of the breeders’ brood.
There are lots of us who are childfree by desire, thus voting against the “future” that all the breeders envision, and we certainly don’t want our endeavors polluted by breeders, and we don’t want to support their mania for breeding with our taxes. There is almost no world problem that couldn’t be solved by putting universal birth-control in the water.