Quote:
Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com
....
Insofar as what is asserted above by Twoller, dude, you're just flat-out wrong.
A reproduction level of 1.0 children per couple would be a disaster for any first world society. To the extent that the nation or area would be unrecognizable and/or gone in a matter of decades.
Reasons: The population would have a much higher average age than most other nations and there would be an imbalance among the age groups. The two biggest problems are that 1) in a relatively short period of time, there wouldn't be enough workers to fill necessary jobs, and 2) the people young enough to work would be drowned in tax burden to support the giant pool of retirees.
1.0 would be a first magnitude catastrophe in any modernized nation. Even Japan is not close to being that low and that country is already undergoing serious hardship resulting from an aging population and low reproduction numbers ... to the extent that the Japanese are going to have to do what most of them consider to be the near unthinkable - allow in a lot of immigrants.
|
Not only is this not true, but it is, in fact, pro-illegal immigration propoganda.
The most important thing overlooked in the myths you cite is not just the lack of need for increased employment, which you ignore. But also, dwindling resources.
Healthy economics is never based on a pyramid scheme of constant population growth. Not at the local level, not at the national level and certainly not at the global level.
If we have to allow immigrants in -- and this would inevitably be illegal immigrants -- to pay for old age, then what are the old people doing in the countries this imported labor is coming from? Does anyone want to be old in a country like Mexico or any of the communities these people are coming from?
No. Population growth always has to stop somewhere in a healthy cycle of a relatively constant number of people that works in some way for everyone within a nation. Else what is a national economy for?
The Russians are also not sustaining population growth. And my sense is that they are not as concerned about it. Putin argues that Russians need to reproduce more, but he himself is a product of Stalin's Soviet baby farming policies. Nothing good came out of that.
If Russia can sustain a low population level into this century, they could wind up with a standard of living better than the Germans before the middle of this century. More resources for fewer people in a free market industrial economy driven by quality labor supported by mechanization and information technology.