Why “They Have Too Many Kids” Is a Bad Argument against Third World Poverty

EPGAH writes:

You keep saying the Third World “breeds normally”, but that’s not true, otherwise they wouldn’t outnumber us in our own countries–and for that matter, wouldn’t have TENS OF MILLIONS to dump on us, if they weren’t overbreeding!

Pick a country in Europe, and tell me how many MILLIONS they have to spare to dump on the Third World. Then pick a Third World Hell and tell me how many MILLIONS they have to spare to dump on US! Or just count how many MILLIONS they already HAVE dumped on us!

That will help you count how much they’re overbreeding.
Round to the nearest MILLION if it helps your calculations?

They breed too much because they are poor and have shitty governments. When you give women education, health care, housing and work, and you give families security in sickness and old age, the birth rate crashes. The birth rate has crashed in Kerala in India under Communist rule for the last 25 years. Same thing in Cuba. Same thing everywhere you do this. People have kids for security in old age and to have workers to help on family farms. If you give people pensions, support against illness and no reason to use their kids as labor, they stop having so many kids. The main thing is education of women. The less education women have, the more kids they have.

Bolivia is a classic case where people scream that the Bolivians have too many kids, and the place is overpopulated. Yet Bolivia is one of the least populated states on Earth. If you want to talk overpopulated, look at Singapore or the Netherlands.

Mexico is another case where the overpopulation crowd scream that the country is overpopulated and the people have too many kids. Mexico has never been overpopulated. Mexico has the same population density as California. Furthermore, the Mexican birthrate, while not low, has been crashing since the early 1960’s.

Furthermore, in a number of countries in the developing world, for whatever reason, the birth rate has completely crashed and is now at or below replacement. Of course these same overpopulation theorists still scream that these places are overpopulated as long as they are poor even if the women are not even breeding enough to sustain the population. One wonders at what point exactly a 3rd World country’s population is not “having too many kids.” It seems that as long as they are poor, the people are having too many kids. The 3rd Worlders can’t win. No matter what they do, as long as they are poor, they are always having too many kids.

Saying “they have too many kids” has always been a dodge that rightwingers use to justify poverty that is mostly caused by gross maldistribution of resources and money in backwards rightwing developing countries where the rich steal every nickel in the place and leave everyone else holding the bag.


Filed under Americas, Asia, Caribbean, Conservatism, Cuba, Economics, Education, Europe, Government, Health, India, Latin America, Mexico, Netherlands, Political Science, Regional, SE Asia, Singapore, Social Problems, Sociology, South America, South Asia, Women

82 responses to “Why “They Have Too Many Kids” Is a Bad Argument against Third World Poverty

  1. Jason Y

    This post pretty much destroys the right wing argument. I wonder what they will say now?

    Definitely, there is no excuse for the cruelty of right wing regimes:. Ultimately, a right wing led nation is just a sadistic circus, and the people running it, deep down, know it.

    The right wingers should jump on this one, cause this post seems to nuke everything they believe in.

    • Jason Y

      Note some so called “failed nations”, like South Africa, are black led, but they aren’t communist. A communist nation would not put up with the crime, and also they wouldn’t put up with poverty, something the right wing aparthied regime allowed.

    • Jason Y

      quote by Robert Lindsay

      They breed too much because they are poor and have shitty governments. When you give women education, health care, housing and work, and you give families security in sickness and old age, the birth rate crashes.

      • EPGAH

        How can we give them work if we don’t have enough for our own?
        Or do we just make up jobs? Then where do we get the money to pay for all these featherbedding jobs?

      • EPGAH

        To me, the “bigger question” is that we have FAR more people than we need. We’ve been keeping them alive and even subsidizing their breeding…for what?

        Now automation and MASSIVE illegal immigration and their crime is forcing the issue: If someone can only survive by stealing from their betters, do they deserve to survive?

    • EPGAH

      If they have enough people to dump on the Civilized World, that’s too many people. The amount invading the Civilized World is literally the excess of those countries’ population!

  2. SHI

    The birth rate has crashed in Kerala in India.

    Not just Kerala. Though it’s a bit of a paradox, more than half the Indian states have fertility rates below replacement levels (2.1) which can be compared to Western Europe. This is partly due to better education and greater female empowerment in last few decades. Most Indian women now have a say on whether they want to get pregnant. The use of contraceptives (which was unheard of even 30 years back) has prevented many unwanted pregnancies. People are delaying marriages well until their 30s and in some cases, not getting married at all.


    The states of West Bengal, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka are seeing a steady fall in fertlity levels. Population levels are expected to stabilize in East, South and Western India in a decade or so.

    The reason why it makes no difference is because the overpopulated Northern Hindi belt states of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, known by the acronym BIMARU more than compensate for reduced fertility in other states. As seen in the map, fertility rates continue to be very high (3.0 and above). These states are religious and backward in every human development index (HDI) parameter and very soon, 1 in 2 Indians will live in these states. This is a real population time bomb.


    West Bengal has in fact, one of the lowest fertility rates at 1.6. People are now smart enough not to have kids in an overpopulated state.

    I wish to have a second kid,” said the 34-year-old communications professional in Kolkata, the mother of a two-year old daughter. “So does my husband, but raising two kids is a huge challenge because of the limited growth opportunities I have at my job.
    Sen says he comes across at least one couple in Kolkata every week who want to terminate the second pregnancy, and at least one couple every month considering not having kids at all.

    In Kolkata, it appears to be a “quality-quantity trade off”, says Ghosh, adding that couples here would much rather have one child and give him or her the best education and facilities they can afford, rather than spread resources thinly between two children or more.

    And unlike many other parts of India, preference for the male child is low among Kolkatans, says Sen—it doesn’t matter much if the first born is a girl.

    The only disadvantage of falling fertility rates is a decrease in working age population and more senior citizens. However, most old people in India never had pensions or social security to look forward to anyway, and are really at the mercy of their sons and daughters who might or might not pay for their needs. Many Indian youngsters (30 years and over) are really selfish and don’t look after their parents.

    And what does the Indian government do? It never cared about old people anyway. It’d rather they die, in fact many of them are left to die in decaying, understaffed, rotten cesspits passing for hospitals.

    • Jason Y

      Considering the birth rate is so low, even outside of Communist areas, then what are right wingers complaining about? Just shows the far right isn’t very educated, mostly circulating fairy tales.

      • EPGAH

        Americans can’t afford extra kids as long as we’re subsidizing the mega-breeding of Third Worlders, both inside AND outside our borders!

        • Jason Y

          quote by ep-gah

          Americans can’t afford extra kids as long as we’re subsidizing the mega-breeding of Third Worlders, both inside AND outside our borders!

          I doubt of that’s really true. Just more exxagerations by the right and far right. Truth be told, with more vocational or academic education most people can land jobs where affording children is a piece of cake.

        • EPGAH

          Once again, you hold up education as some kind of magic bullet. You drop a pile of money on education and you’re not GUARANTEED a job, let alone one to pay off your college and give you the Magic Better Life that idiots pushing college inherently or explicitly promise!

          Please remember our Census:
          75%–¾–of American STEM grads DO NOT GET STEM JOBS!
          You have never managed to refute this. Are you going to try, or are you going to change the subject?

          Don’t get me wrong, I WISH what you’re pushing was true, but that doesn’t MAKE it true. Otherwise, we’d all be Angelina Jolie rich and have our own kids, PLUS adopting a litter from the Third World and seeing if we could pay their way to acting civilized!

        • EPGAH

          Just take SHI’s article up there, especially the bolded parts, and scratch out “Indian” and put in “American”. The concepts hold true, especially the “quantity-quality trade-off” one.

          Remember when I told you that having fewer children concentrates wealth and parental attention? SHI said the same thing, but better!

  3. Kerkko T

    It is a totally different story when you have a culture/religion telling you not educate women (=total obedience to males, father/husband) and not to use birth control (or even free will when it comes to having sex).

    First, women need full civil/human rights, then education. That is also the reason why I personally protest against any aid given to these countries. It is insane to try and help educate girls when they are forced to marry at very young age (most western countries would consider this pedoephilia). And even if you are not married, you are still not allowed to work.

    It is those sick cultures/religions that keep those people poor. Unless they are willing to change themselves, I see no reason to help.

    Another words, you are basically right, but education is akey out of poverty but it does not help when you are a slave (=property of your father/husband/society).

    • EPGAH

      Thank you, we need to fix (As in overwrite) their bad cultures before anything we do with them would be considered help. All the money we’re giving them is only ENABLING, not HELP!

      HOWEVER, I disagree that education will help, unless you want them to be another outsourcing destination, another source of H1B Indentured Servants?

  4. Tulio

    Too much education and career for women though means that birth rates fall below replacement level. That’s what you have going on in the West. Then this means you have to import people from the 3rd world to keep the ponzi scheme going.

    • Jason Y

      However, a lot of that could be an excuse. So many poor whites won’t get a vocational or academic education, therefore they wallow in poverty and hence, resent Mexicans taking their jobs. If these whites had good jobs and whatnot, they wouldn’t really care about America becoming Mexican.

      If whites really applied themselves academically, I doubt if Mexican workers would threaten blue collar jobs etc..

      • Tulio

        “If these whites had good jobs and whatnot, they wouldn’t really care about America becoming Mexican.”

        I’m not so sure about that. Who welcomes being culturally and ethnically displaced by foreigners?

        • Vid

          Women are not baby making machines. and too much education? What is too much education?

        • Jason Y

          Nobody does, but still, the scapegoating of Latinos is often an excuse for laziness on the part of blacks, whites etc.. in regards to getting an educaiton or more job training.

          Of course some white or black guy working at McDonalds is going to resent illegal or maybe even legal Latinos.

        • EPGAH

          You’d have to be completely BLIND not to see that “Latinos” are the #1 Third World group dumping on America. A gut of potential “workers” makes labor worth less (or just worthless?) and we have to pay for our competition, up to and including college subsidies!

          Stop making us pay for our own replacements, we’ll resent them less.
          Start respecting America and NOT dumping unwanted competition on us, wait in line like everyone else, and we’d resent them less yet.
          Also, their behavior on THIS side of the border needs quite a bit of improvement, from drug-dealing to raping American children.

          But they DON’T respect America, from crime, to breaking our border at THEIR will, not OURS, and even the Mexican President calling America “The Other Mexico”. How would any country feel if we dumped 50 MILLION people on them illegally and started calling them “The Other America”?

      • EPGAH

        Why would we want America to become Mexico? America’s a better place, otherwise Mexicans–or anyone else–wouldn’t WANT to invade!

        That IS one way to “limit immigration”, but it’s a Pyrrhic victory–if a victory at all–so it’s far better to keep the riffraff out. Enjoy lower crime, cleaner streets, walls that aren’t covered in gang signs, etc.

    • Jason Y

      Tulio’s idea is barbaric and chauvanist. You can’t limit the education of women. Also a massive unneeded increase in children puts chains on women, unless they can hire a babysitter, where they can’t do anything else.

      Is Tulio going to tell, say the woman I knew at college studying to be an electrical engineer, that she should shut up and go in the kitchen. I’m sure that would get some applause and laughs from some far right commentators on here though.

      Also, you cna be rest assured, her grades are very good, even though she does seem to be one of the “man hating” in the closet lesbians.

      • Jason Y

        Tulio wants to put the blame on women, like BeastGannon (who was banned) did in the past for the problems of many groups. However, ultimately, it is badly planned welfare programs, not feminism, causing one parent homes etc.. That’s not saying though that left wing programs cannot be well planned.

        I don’t see any connection between feminism and the situation of one parent homes at all. None. Looking at it in another way, you can see that feminism on the white side, sure has reduced the white population, but it hasn’t produced poor “gangster” infested neighborhoods of white people.

        Tulio doesn’t like far right racism as it obviously and rightly so insults his people, so he turns to feminism to explain problems, but it’s not that easy.

      • Jason Y

        Not only do women seek higher educaiton, and that’s great, but many are not trying be like men or lesbian. That would be another bonehead homophobic stereotype.

      • EPGAH

        A massive “unneeded” increase in children? How much is “unneeded”?
        Weren’t you the one that was complaining when I called Mexico’s dumping of population on America “unneeded”?

  5. Santoculto

    Generally human beings are subconscious about your own faults and the less self intellectually motivated were the individual more dependent from others he will be. Ignorance is analogous with blindness where ignorant people will be very dependent from others to internalize via repetitive enforcement rational attitudes.

    To someone who define themselves as extreme environmentalist less “poor” people in the earth surface is a good thing specially when they are absorbed by complex-urban-industrial environments, impulsive consumers and with virtually no environmental awareness. Generally ecologically conscious people are rare in all classes but still will be more uncommon among “poor” (as well among rich people). Poor and rich have a lot of common things, like greater materialism, abundance of alpha types as well psychopathy spectrum.

    Poverty in all kind of environments is a direct result of negligence or to think long term with the Malthusian ratio (balance between food and people) but at individual level. Why many people have a number of kids that they will not able to sustain?? I see this sociological problem all the time. Generally the very poor people will have their sons in the end of adolescence to early adulthood. Think abstractly is not just make math account or “philosophy” but also or fundamentally think in non direct events, simulate cause and effect, strategically.

    I’m very impulsive sometimes and I tell you that many this people with less self control and lower cognitive capacity will be predominantly dragged by their impulses. Just put in the place of this people. All of us have impulsive moments, they are dragged most part of time by instinct like a non human animal. When the clock of fertility aware they will have sex without protection specially if they have a fixed partner.

    • Santoculto

      The fact that first world population had increased a lot in The recent past is not excuse to leave third world population increase, remember, nature, earth planet. It’s was a big mistake.

      Singapore and Netherlands are not demographically balanced, they are in spiral of demographic death. And in the case of Netherlands which is not a tropical shopping for rich people like Singapore, is aggravated because import people will mean the colonization of these low land and obviously the genocide of autochthonous people.

      • Johnny

        There’s not much to be done other than development ultimately. We can’t really control how the developing world deals with its problems other than lament regarding its potential impact on us and the environment.

        It’s doubtful that Singapore and Holland will simply vanish with regards to their dominant populations. While they have some immigration taking place, really many developed countries will likely follow the Scandinavian example and pay people to have children. Thus, state intervention is the only recourse IF you want natural birthrate increase.

        On an international front, the use contraceptives (meaning sending them to be used in developing countries) would go a long way, but requires local govt cooperation, which is often indifferent.

        • Santoculto

          Scandinavian, british and french examples of, what seems is happening, non-natives having more kids and not a new native baby boom.

          Today, 12% of japanese people have 0-15 years old while 25% of them have 65 years or more. What it’s mean**

          Age pyramid is clear, japanese people is dying out, seems very likely 100 years from now.

          Below reproduction is not stable but progressive.

          Singapore still have enormous chinese reservoir but the case of Western Europe is one of many of tragedies sweetly caused by ”our” so-admired ”elites”.

        • Jason Y

          Japanese seem pretty horny, considering all the porn they put out. LOL Why would they have a hard time making babies?

        • Jason Y

          Generally people will do things for money. Paying them would do the trick. I mean these welfare states pay for everything else, education, disability etc.., not saying doing those things are bad though.

        • EPGAH

          Thing is, we don’t NEED extra people, especially with the advent of automation. This gets rid of a lot of low-echelon jobs, and makes a FEW higher-echelon jobs building, programming, and repairing the machines.

          PLUS that means we can be more choosy about who we let in and fewer of them. In a high-tech, high-education society, we could lock out the ill-mannered, ill-educated Third World in favor of highly-educated, WELL-BEHAVED people!

        • EPGAH

          Having a lot of porn does NOT equal more babies.
          Having a lot of SEX doesn’t even have to equal more babies.
          There’s birth-control, sterilization, etc.

          And of course, porn might be consumed by single Men (or women), AKA masterbation!

        • EPGAH

          The State is already interfering, but problem is, it’s subsidizing the breeding of the invaders, not our own populations!

      • Johnny

        Yeah, but the “non-Natives” aren’t big enough to really make the impact that many people believe. Between 85 to 90% are European and then there’s a growing “mixed” population (in the UK it’s 2%) that shows the process of assimilation. Some of the immigrants are also white or Europoid/near Europoid in terms of phenotype and sometimes genotype so the overall superficial impact isn’t likely to be substantial. Even the cultural impact isn’t likely to be that staggering.

        What happens is that many cities become centers of immigrants and the anecdotal perception becomes “there are too many immigrants and non-whites” etc. Now mind you I don’t care as I think what is far more important is what future people will be intellectually rather than racially and I don’t think the two are tied together. On this we may differ, but I’m just saying that assimilation is the real problem that is being dealt with to some extent. However, it does take a few generations for absorption as well. There are numerous “French” people of mixed origin such as Isabelle Adjani who are perceived as pretty French and then there are people like Zidane and Benzama who are both of Algerian Kabylie origin who aren’t really divergent in a racial sense (from a superficial standpoint).

        My conclusion is it’s a non-issue other than the sporadic terrorism events that scare people regardless of what they claim (while statistical we are all more likely to be killed by lightning or a car crash). The barbarians are always viewed as at the gates and as a narrative it’s alarming politically, but the science and statistical aspects don’t indicate to me a real problem.

        What I’m thinking is can these societies sustain aging populations AND foster intellectual curiosity rather than “preserve” groups in terms of their current ethnic or national identities. We all change as groups and societies so the priorities to me need to reorient here. I mean the English were changed by “barbarians” from northern Germany and Denmark and later the Vikings and I doubt they were happy about them at the time. That’s what life is, change. It’s scary and alarming to some people, but it happens regardless. What is crucial then is to seek constructive and realistic change and that goes with, as I said, attitude, education and living standards as well as assimilation.

        • EPGAH

          Third Worlders bring higher crime and worse living standards. I don’t know if it’s intentional or just a function of their invasion.

          Are there or are there not places where French can not go safely because of the invaders?

        • EPGAH

          Most Third Worlders do not even TRY to assimilate anymore, and because of our soft-spoken “There Are No Bad Cultures” (No matter how much that “Not Bad Culture” fucked up its own country), they feel no REASON to assimilate.

          We provide translation at OUR expense for the enemies–even ballots! We give our enemies a say in the future of our country, we should not TRULY be surprised when they choose something beneficial for them and harmful for us, right?

          Mexicans are especially arrogant about “Staying Mexican”–as in NOT assimilating. And the Moslem Cult explicitly says not to obey non-Moslem laws, so little to no hope of assimilation there, right?

          We need to force assimilation again. And start booting those who cannot/will not assimilate. After all, there are enough people who want to come to the Civilized World, we can resume putting conditions on their entry. If an MMO can have Terms&Conditions, and enforce an arbitrary Code of Conduct, so can a COUNTRY, right?

        • EPGAH

          Enough people want to come to the Civilized World that we can filter out those who refuse to obey OUR laws and assimilate to OUR culture!

          And if all of them refuse, we don’t need them anyways, we’ve gotten along very well without them, and they claim their countries are independent, right? Let’s see how “independent” their countries are if they can’t use the Civilized World as a garbage population dump!

          Remember, we’re doing THEM a favor by letting them stay–and stay alive!
          They are NOT doing us any “favors” by invading and trying to change us to their barbaric ways. If they like THAT lifestyle so much, why leave it?

        • Johnny

          I’m not sure it’s that easy to quantify “most” given the sometimes blurry lines that exist. The problem is identity politics as well as the failure of “multiculturalism” in the official govt sense. Multiculturalism assumed a level of maturity most people don’t have. Most people aren’t secure enough to make fun of themselves, question their thinking (or the ways handed down to them by their parents and whatever group they live in) or cultivate intellectual curiosity and critical thinking. Instead everyone relies on a narrative, both personal and macro, usually with themselves at the apex of human development. The state should not foster multiculturalism (unless it’s something like Switzerland and Canada) and instead step back and simply tackle issues from an economic standpoint. Laws exist and should continue to enforce anti-discrimination so there’s no need to promote the concept of “different” cultures since this is subjective anyway. To me Mexicans have a culture that is primarily European derived (language, religion, style of dress and worldview albeit in sometimes a more conservative, rural and archaic form) and so the creation of the term “Hispanic” was, in my view, a mistake. It came following the farmer worker protests that were as much about class as they were about ethnic divisions.

          Here’s the thing, and I’ll give some examples here, SOME Mexicans want to orient themselves in a nationalist manner, but some don’t care. I don’t think Selena Gomez or Tony Romo are particularly that “Mexican” and they aren’t alone. The views of some groups come from a misinterpretation of history that assumes some imperialism as “bad” and others they ignore. Some of it reactive and keep in mind white Americans have a narrative as well that is sometimes not logical as well. Black Americans have decided to connect themselves to Egypt, which is extremely far-fetched while Jamaicans have glamorized Haile Selassie and so on. This stuff is all about nationalism, something that is as counter-productive and often unreasonable in the same way that multiculturalism assumes everyone is okay with being multi-lingual and viewing others as distinct but equal etc. Also, to someone like myself, what’s more important is social development, science and finding solutions to real problems as opposed to wrapping myself in a flag or talking about how my ancestors were oppressed by such and such group and so on.

          We’re not going to kick people out, that’s just not likely. What we can do is shift to an economic and development emphasis and do away with the census and make it a fill in the blank to promote INDIVIDUALITY. Thus if you’re half black and half Chinese you write that in. It allows you to identify with multiple groups and expands your view as a unique individual rather than as part of a political voting bloc or whatever.

          To Islam, all religions are cults to me in a sense, but what you’re referring to is the problems Muslim countries are having with modernity. I would argue that some of the agitation we’re seeing is a sign of its death throes. They’re never going to conquer the world (what few fundies think that way at least) and are losing ground everyday. While fanatics get headlines kids are using social media to also share things like music, views on things that aren’t religiously sanctioned and so on. The lashing out indicates to me fear. And where are they actually making real headway? They’re in a stalemate in Afghanistan, have lost all elections in Pakistan, and even in Saudi Arabia there are signs of growing egalitarianism and social activism. Most Iranian youth despise the ayatollahs and Tunisia has a democracy, albeit a tumultuous one. The immigrants I saw when I lived in Europe vary widely. Some are very assimilated, some are a little assimilated and some are trying to maintain a religious identity fervently. I can’t really generalize. There are large minorities who support radicalism from their couches though, but the figures are relatively low (including 20% who think Western democracy isn’t compatible with Islam in the UK for example) and in the minority and don’t take into account the next generations. People change and often what their parents viewed as correct becomes discarded. Also, most of the Muslims in the US have not become radicalized as yet and are economically on par with median incomes and education. This has to do with white collar workers coming here and largely blue collar types going to Western Europe. Very different mind-sets.

          At any rate, I’d start with changing the census and identity politics (on both sides of the political spectrum in the US and that means no demonizing entire groups of people based on what some do) and stepping back from multiculturalism, especially since people don’t need official decrees telling them who to orient with and so on. Other than that, I’d say economic development is the key to making things better and reducing other negative indicators.

        • Santoculto

          ”Changes” are good just when it improve a already good path. Islamo-africanization of Europe IS A WRONG THING to do, the right path would universal REAL eugenics, on enphasis in moral capacity.

          The question here is not debate about the intrinsical and inevitable nature of changes, what indeed always happen. What is happening in west is far to be a good macro-change.

          No there assimilation (foreigners become culturally adjusted or culturally native) just cultural miscigenation that express what happen generally, on average, biologically, with individuals, the noble and already relatively rare behavioral traits are supressed by dominant behavioral robustness, basically, behave more similar with ”animals” than ”post-animal”, ”the philosopher”, self aware, harmonizer, sober-minded.

          ”Education” is a full of nonsense, is not just predominantly wrong but opressive because in truly words, is not concerned with the individual human being but to cooperate with the system.

          Some people just can’t think fairly as a conservative ones and this post-modern cultural memes increase this disposition like a mental myopia. ”Education” is PART of this matrix.

          Europeans of different countries are frankly more culturally adjustable one each other than people with different geographical localities. Most of ”barbaric” northern european peoples in the roman times, weren’t literally ”barbarics”, many were even more civilized than romans. Roman empire was a true barbaric big and multicultural kingdom. Personality differences are very marked among human populations and in my opinion, is one of the most important ”traits” for friendship. Caucasians are more diverse in this aspect than other groups.

          Education for a lot of people (but not for types like the creative) works to improve CONTEXTUALLY (via chrystallized intelligence) and RELATIVELY the ”quality and number of technical and intellectual internalizations”. Internalized is not the same than learned. learn is always FOR understand better the reality, is essentially criterious. We internalize most of time personally biased reality, learn is just when we internalize a original reality and not just a version.

  6. Vid

    I think the population is more in societies where there are too many sections and sub-sections like religious/cultural/language differences. Many times you cannot marry somebody out of your community, so the best solution to keep the community population thriving is to have more kids.

    • Johnny

      Not sure it’s that conscious. Most people simply view more offspring as a source of income for the extended family. People in many developing countries view children as their future care-takers as well and thus have them as a kind of assistance when they are old. I have rarely encountered people who have espoused more offspring to preserve their group.

      The view is counter-intuitive in the modern age though. More and more people are realizing that the costs of raising large families exceeds whatever benefits they might have received in the past (such as having their children assist on farms and other manual labor). That along with urbanization and state family planning should go a long way towards alleviating the issue of “over-population” which really misses the bigger point that birth-rates are dropping in most places in the world. The Malthusian perspective didn’t take into account modernity (rather than morality) and grossly overestimates population explosion as a sustained event.

      • EPGAH

        If the breeding rates of the Third World are indeed falling, how do they still have MILLIONS to dump on the Civilized World?

        I don’t think any except the rare eco-nut who isn’t a complete hypocrite, would care if the Third World bred LEGIONS, as long as those LEGIONS stayed in THEIR country, not ours!

        Of course, when those legions start using polluting tech like cars, it would affect the global environment…But it would mostly be THEIR problem, and they might even stop using Civilized World tech to preserve the environment. Or they might poison themselves out of existence?

        If they can’t keep it in their pants, at least keep it in their borders!

        • Johnny

          Well, keep in mind, most came as guest workers following WW2 and were asked to come (such as Turkish-Kurdish immigrants to Germany). I would disagree that developing countries polluting the environment is their problem! Global warming is a problem for all of us.

        • EPGAH

          Yes, but they were “asked to come” with an obviously mistaken idea that they were ONLY there to work, and if they wanted anything better, they would assimilate. How long have the Turks been in Germany, and have they made ANY steps toward assimilating? Or are they in the “We Will Not Comply”/”You Will Adapt To US!” mindset that Mexicans plague Americans with?

          As to the Third World polluting, OK, let’s say it is a problem. Are you going to neuter the Third World parasites? Confiscate their cars? Shut down their filthy industries? What could you do that wouldn’t inspire MORE violence, and MORE whining “WAH! You get this and we don’t! UNFAIR!”, because they can’t see that WE use it responsibly with LIMITS, and THEY don’t?

        • Johnny

          The Turks/Kurds aren’t that different in a racial sense (more Mediterranean, but many with Nordic looks that blend into the local population), just a cultural cleavage that has persisted among some segments of the population. Very little terrorism though, just an average income disparity. Part of the mistake was multiculturalism which Angela Merkel declared was a failure. The reality is that they are all learning as they go and many Turks are quite assimilated as well.

          Yeah I mean you can’t ask for workers and then expect them to not have any connection to the place they are living. Their children and grandchildren often feel more German than Turkish etc. I also encountered a number of half Turkish Germans who are sometimes Muslim and sometimes not so I’d say it’s a work in progress that is moving in the right direction especially if the new policy is to abandon multiculturalism and leave that to people as they see fit to socialize or whatever.

          I believe international cooperation and raising awareness of global warming and the effects of pollution have had an impact actually yes. The Paris Conference has been very promising for example: http://www.cop21paris.org/about/cop21

          Everybody has something to lose and keep in mind multinational corporations benefit from overseas factories. We don’t have to do much other than lead by example and export green energy alternatives which would really help the economy here in North America. The Chinese sure seem to think so and have made inroads in Europe and other places with solar.

        • EPGAH

          I expect people who move into a country to live by their new hosts’ rules, or leave and make room for those who will.

          As to the Paris Conference, China pointedly did not attend.
          As to lead by example, that’s a HORRIBLE idea. Cripple our own economy and HOPE that the rest of the world cripples theirs to match?

          As to green energy alternatives, that HURTS OUR economy. Even if you ignore Solyndra and the other Green moneypits, the measures taken so far hurt us, especially our poor, and if you’re Liberal that should be of special interest to you, right?

          Solar and Wind only “work” with MASSIVE subsidies and they kill birds. Not to mention the toxic byproducts of solar cell manufacture. Most of the windmills and solar panels are made in China, who don’t care about pollution, but that’s still money OUT of our economy.

          Taxes on energy raise the price of gas and heating, which hurts everyone, especially the poor. But it hurts consumers an EXTRA time with everything they buy, costing a little extra. Businesses never pay any extra tax or cost, they COLLECT it and pass it on.

          Biofuels–Forcing us to put 50% of our food crops to “biofuels” raises the cost of food, AND forced a lot of cattle ranchers to slaughter their cattle early. Guess what the majority of cattle feed is? CORN!
          That means a short-term lowering of beef, and Global Warming people can say “See? We’re HELPING!” but then the prices will go up even higher than before. Smaller herds=less supply, and they can’t afford to keep bigger ones anymore.
          Plus, gasohol is about 25% less efficient and damages the motor, but those are long-term concerns, right?

          Substituting wood for coal in power plants DOES make less pollution–but it chops down the trees that wood (Pun) absorb the pollution!

          Even weirder, though, Global Warming is BENEFICIAL for the next 70 years or so!
          The chief benefits of Global Warming include: fewer winter deaths; lower energy costs; better agricultural yields; probably fewer droughts; maybe richer biodiversity.
          It is a little-known fact that winter deaths exceed summer deaths. People freeze more than they boil, despite all the complaining at both ends of the spectrum.
          But a bigger benefit is the CO2 itself. It is not pollution, but the raw material from which plants make carbohydrates and thereafter proteins and fats. As it is an extremely rare trace gas in the air — less than 0.04 per cent of the air on average — plants struggle to absorb enough of it!

          Even polar bears are thriving so far. It’s worth noting that the three years with the lowest polar bear cub survival in the western Hudson Bay (1974, 1984 and 1992) were the years when the sea ice was too thick for ringed seals to appear in good numbers in spring. Bears need broken ice. Big ice islands are for cartoons and Coca-Cola commercials!

          And the weirdest part of all is, it hasn’t moved in about a decade. So even if Global Warming is REAL, it has stopped “magically” even when pollution is going up, thanks to China!
          So why cripple ourselves and hurt our economy for something that is either beneficial or might not even be happening?

        • EPGAH

          As to CHINA is making inroads, that’s more bad news, that’s what I was telling you about, CHINA stealing our solar and windmill tech, selling it back to us, and they pollute while they manufacture it, but it still affects the whole world, especially Colorado…And it’s still money OUT of the Civilized World’s economy!

          Look up all the countries that subsidize wind and solar farms…and which ones are getting ready to quit the subsidies!

        • Johnny

          Wait, what do you mean China didn’t attend? Are you sure because I understand that they were there: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/30/europe/france-paris-cop21-climate-change-conference/

          Solyndra received subsidies from the Bush admin too because it’s a promising field. China took their tech and began exporting it to China so really helping them was a good idea. I’d say giving billions to the fossil fuel industry is also something of a money pit: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/12/us-taxpayers-subsidising-worlds-biggest-fossil-fuel-companies

          Also, those are all talking points put out by the oil industry to confuse people into continuing support for them even though they cause massive damage every year in terms of pollution, environmental damage and so on. Add to this fracking being linked to earthquakes and we see that this is a dead end in many ways. Biofuel from sugar would actually be quite beneficial. Sugar has no health value and could be quite useful as biofuel actually. The other forms are more debatable.

          Those other points are all false. That site is another oil industry plant. Frankly, I’d rather listen to the people who took us to the moon: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

          Not to mention numerous rightwing thinktanks have been putting out misinformation in order to muddy the waters. Such as birds being killed by wind turbines (of all the things that kill birds we’d be better off trying to do something about feral cats frankly), another false meme. Oh man, where to begin here? Again, I’m going to have to defer to organizations like this: http://www.usgs.gov/faq/taxonomy/term/9772


          Sorry man, I mean if you want to believe that it’s not happening, that’s on you, but I believe to the contrary that global warming/climate change (a term created by Republicans in order to sound better than global warming ironically) is a danger. As for polar bears here’s another point of view there: http://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Threats-to-Wildlife/Global-Warming/Effects-on-Wildlife-and-Habitat/Polar-Bears.aspx

          What’s more I am going by the aggregate of peer reviewed academic research conducted by universities like Harvard, Berkeley, Oxford and globally acknowledged by Russia, China and the EU. Only people saying it’s not happening don’t seem to have much other than trying to use what sounds logical (such as why we have colder winters). In reality, global warming causes more moisture to rise and this leads to more drastic weather patterns including severe yet shorter winters and longer and hotter summers. In fact every it has been getting hotter: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/weather/2015-will-be-warmest-year-records-were-first-kept-135-n487356

          Yeah I just can’t believe a political group clearly linked to the fossil fuel industry when scientists clearly have taken a different stance.

          What’s more the exporting of solar panels is a growing industry in China so we’re just hurting ourselves. It’s about supply and demand really. Europeans believe in global warming and want to change and will buy anything that shifts them towards renewables. To me it’s not hurting ourselves, but pushing our economy forward AND keeping the planet livable.

      • Vid

        ya true and the preference for a son. Often women don’t have a say in pregnancy, even in the rich and educated families. I know countless stories where women were tortured to have a son or had too many daughters and finally a son.

    • Jason Y

      quote by vid

      I think the population is more in societies where there are too many sections and sub-sections like religious/cultural/language differences. Many times you cannot marry somebody out of your community, so the best solution to keep the community population thriving is to have more kids.

      That would also contribute to incest which DOES ruin gene pools, unlike the “fantasy” illusion of race mixing that white nationalists bring up so much.

      • Jason Y

        How does it do that? if there is less genetic variation then the likelihood of birth defects including retardation massively increase.

        • EPGAH

          Not really, as Ben Steigmann pointed out, it just concentrates the genes you already have, by providing doubles. It only doubles bad things if there are bad things in the genepool. In populations with good genes, it concentrates THOSE instead!

      • Vid

        Well intermixing is prohibited in many societies and marriage is compulasory whether you are ugly or gay. And if the society is already divided into thousands of sub-sections then population will definitely increase. And the quality of population will decrease due to low interbreeding.

  7. Lin

    Seems you’ve never read this hindu manifesto on demography:
    (4 children per hindu woman?Not enough..?,5 kids then?Still not enough?How about 10kids/family?)
    “We should have 10 children. One child each for for Agriculture, IAS, Military, Internal security and social work and give the rest of them to us, we will teach them and will make them Sadhus like us.”


    • Johnny

      Interesting, and I am aware of numerous far right manifestos of this sort actually, but I’m talking about everyday people and practices. Lots of groups espouse things that they want to have happen, but at a personal level I don’t know how many people are even aware of this literature and are even willing to reproduce because a political party wants them to. It’s the difference between the practical vs idealism. In practice the projections seem to indicate worldwide decline: http://www.businessinsider.com/un-fertility-rate-projections-2015-8

      Now given the rise of the BJP in India, maybe this will all change and they’ll manage to convince millions of people to just churn out children, but I kind of doubt it given current indicators.

      • EPGAH

        There is the Quiverfull Movement in America, aimed at whites trying to maintain our meager 60% “majority” in our own country. BUT it defeats itself by saying “Only breed when you can afford it”.

        Blacks are a lot less responsible, and a number of “Black Power” programs have a tenet that their members should breed as MUCH as possible. “Whether you can afford it or not, FIND a way to have more babies!” Ironically, these demagogues have Blacks convinced they’re going “extinct”, when whites are far closer to extinction on a global scale!

        Conservative estimates put whites at 10% of the world population.
        Liberal estimates put whites at 8% of the world population.

        • Johnny

          African American birthrates are way down actually: http://www.unomaha.edu/news/2015/01/fertility.php

          To be frank, I think blacks will vanish into the larger population, just as it happened in Argentina. It’s inevitable given that they’re only 12% of the population with at least 2% being of “mixed” background in that group (usually half or more white).

          Depends who you count as white. If you’re talking Europeans alone, then you have to include the millions in Latin America. If you include border groups like Armenians and Lebanese it goes up and it goes further still if it’s anthropological and not “purist” as in within Europe. And then do you discount the Roma and Jews? What of the Eurasian groups found in Central Asia? Given where humanity is headed no “race” is safe in the future and it’s not simply due to mixing. The world is changing and with the human genome cracked what people will become is very much an open-ended question.

      • Vid

        Well fertility rates are falling in Indis not because of ‘gender equality’ or ‘education’. But due to poor quality of food materials, genetically manipulated food items, hormonal problems experienced by women due to low nutrition and increasing stress which is becoming quite common in urban India, price rise e.g., private school fees has increased by almost 10-15 times than it used to be two decades ago. It is becoming very expensive to raise kids. On top of it, highly skewed gender ratio which in future will result in low birth rate.

  8. Jason Y

    quote by santo-culto

    ”Changes” are good just when it improve a already good path. Islamo-africanization of Europe IS A WRONG THING to do, the right path would universal REAL eugenics, on enphasis in moral capacity.

    HA, Ted Bundy and most serial killers are geniuses. Seems like most “moral capacity”, as I had stated before, comes from parental upbringing.

  9. Jason Y

    quote by Johnny

    To be frank, I think blacks will vanish into the larger population, just as it happened in Argentina. It’s inevitable given that they’re only 12% of the population with at least 2% being of “mixed” background in that group (usually half or more white).

    That could happen in the USA and most blacks, at least the males could care less, not saying if that’s good or bad. However, in Africa such a thing isn’t happening by a long shot, and Africa’s population is rapidly increasing.

    • EPGAH

      “In Africa such a thing isn’t happening by a long shot, and Africa’s population is rapidly increasing.”
      How do we fix that other than Santoculto’s eugenics suggestion?

      Even cutting off shipments of Civilized World food, money, and meds to stop enabling their mega-breeding IS Eugenics, just a passive form of it.

    • Johnny

      True, sub-Saharan Africa has a high birthrate, but also a high death rate (infant mortality is particularly high at tragic levels). With that said, some places that are seeing development such as Gabon and Namibia also have low birthrates though. Overall, I think this region is changing rapidly in ways that might surprise people given the prejudice aimed at the region. War and strange borders that don’t correspond to ethnic or language groups have helped fuel conflict as well as religious fundamentalism and so on. Europe took quite some time and war to stabilize so I’d say given time the sub-Saharan population projections will likely decline. Also, a number of studies I’ve read show that Catholics have been far better in terms of promoting safe sex as opposed to Protestant born again wackos who go there and babble incessantly about abstinence. American evangelicals, feeling like they’re losing here in the US, have gone to places like Uganda to promote their stupid ideas to people who are semi-literate and the results have been very negative. Still, I think the future of most places is declining birthrates given sex education and contraception.

      • EPGAH

        But it doesn’t have a high death rate. Our meds and food have lowered it down to where births>deaths. Look up “Demographic Transition” in your choice of info engine.

        If their populations are being claimed by Lord Darwin, who are we sending mass quantities of food to?
        If the savages are dying off, why haven’t whites taken back their countries like South Africa and Rhodesia?

        Europe DID have “quite some time and wars” to stabilize, BUT Africa already had the wars to stabilize, then Russia gave the savages guns&bombs to undo the stabilization.

        Zaire, South Africa, Rhodesia, used to be nice places to live. What do they call Zaire now?

        • Johnny

          They account for roughly 38% of the world’s infant mortality rates, which is way too high: http://healthintelligence.drupalgardens.com/content/infant-mortality-rate-world-magnitude-inequities-and-trends

          I’m not sure name-calling helps here (savages). Some African countries are developing as well (Botswana, Gabon and Namibia for example) and that means falling fertility rates. Also, and this is important here, the EU subsidizes its agriculture industry and thus sub-Saharan African exports in this area can’t be exploited. Honestly, other than having a somewhat higher proportion of the world’s population than they do now I don’t see how they pose a threat to anyone except, at times, themselves.

          As for whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, well for one thing they aren’t in the majority and in South Africa they do live there as part of the country. Zimbabwe made a mistake with regards to their agriculture industry by not simply working with the white farmers rather than demonizing them. Their expertise would be useful, but then Mogabe is a demagogue. I’m sorry but I can’t agree to racialist white minority rule in these places. You live there, you should live in some sort of harmony with the locals. Or try to uplift the place rather than segregate the locals (although I would argue that whites who live there are locals too given their lengthy stay there going back many generations).

          I’m not sure South Africa is such a horrible place to live actually. It may not be a white privileged state anyway, but that doesn’t mean it’s a hellhole either. It’s consistently ranked high in terms of economic development and millions of whites continue to live there so compared to other former colonial states it’s done a better job in integrating its disparate parts. Zaire sank into civil war because it was drawn up on a map without regards to its ethnic diversity and once kept together through colonial force. Like Yugoslavia this was clearly not meant to last.

  10. Jason Y

    You’d have to be completely BLIND not to see that “Latinos” are the #1 Third World group dumping on America. A gut of potential “workers” makes labor worth less (or just worthless?) and we have to pay for our competition, up to and including college subsidies!

    Stop making us pay for our own replacements, we’ll resent them less.
    Start respecting America and NOT dumping unwanted competition on us, wait in line like everyone else, and we’d resent them less yet.
    Also, their behavior on THIS side of the border needs quite a bit of improvement, from drug-dealing to raping American children.

    But they DON’T respect America, from crime, to breaking our border at THEIR will, not OURS, and even the Mexican President calling America “The Other Mexico”. How would any country feel if we dumped 50 MILLION people on them illegally and started calling them “The Other America”?

    Perhaps crime and “displacement of the culture and people” would be a problem. However, white people can easily get “better jobs” than illegal or legal Latinos by simply pursuing more academic or vocational education, or perhaps be willing to do things like drive a truck, for instance.

    • Jason Y

      Note the above quoted comment was from ep-gah.

    • Jason Y

      Also note Latinos have a major handicap being unable to speak English, and even a lot of blacks don’t speak English well. That puts native born white Americans with a huge advantage in the job market, even without pursing more education.

      • EPGAH

        ONLY if our job market DEMANDED learning English. Another poster pointed out that there’s discrimination in OUR job market against those who refuse to learn the parasites’ language!

        Also you forget the effects of forced diversity and Affirmative Action.

        Your fantasies are how I WISH it were, but it isn’t.

    • EPGAH

      You keep saying the illegals will free us up for better jobs. This is a lie that started in the 80s, it was why we swallowed the illegals and their “Only Here To Work” bullshit in the first place.

      BUT those better jobs, while extant, are not for Americans, they’re for H1B Indentured Servants. PLUS, illegals are demanding and getting “Tuition Assistance” from America–we’re paying for the invaders to compete with us for those “better jobs”! Once again, ¾ of the Americans with STEM education–your Magic Bullet–DO NOT HAVE STEM JOBS!

      This is from the Government itself, not some right-wing “exaggeration” as you put it.

      Is there some secret law that ONLY YOU know about that makes illegals “Only Here To Work”? If so, when are we going to start enforcing it?

  11. Jason Y

    quote by ep-gah (in reference ot my comment on Japan’s love of porn vs their own low birth rate)

    Having a lot of porn does NOT equal more babies.
    Having a lot of SEX doesn’t even have to equal more babies.
    There’s birth-control, sterilization, etc.

    And of course, porn might be consumed by single Men (or women), AKA masterbation!

    I was joking.

  12. Jason Y

    quote by ep-gah

    If the breeding rates of the Third World are indeed falling, how do they still have MILLIONS to dump on the Civilized World?

    Perhaps the Latinos are just moving to the USA, even though there is no massive birthrate in their home nations.

    • EPGAH

      Yes, but they’re moving ILLEGALLY to America, AKA INVADING!

      Again, as long as they have MILLIONS to dump on us, their country is breeding too much.

      Otherwise, their country would be blank land by now, and we could do the national version of “House Swap”. Mexicans come in here, ruin everything, we go to Mexico, make it a good country–then they try to invade US again, because OUR COUNTRY IS BETTER, no matter which one that physically happens to be!

      Once again, compare the number of Americans in Mexico with the number of Mexicans HERE, PLUS illegals!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s