Panama Forum - View Single Post

Advanced · 06-02-2008

The trend of allmost all populations (humans, animals, bacterias) is to grow and expand as large as possible. If there are no external factors (predators, limited space, food shortage, disease) the population will grow exponentially and forever. But it doesn't happen as there are external limits. The limits come when people have a reason not to expand so quickly and have less children or the children can't survive.

In the first world civilization of today the rich people have less children because they choose to work or study instead. That's because "society" teaches them it is the "right" thing to do. Another reason is that they have to work more to maintain their living standard, therefore they have less time to have children. The poor people in these same countries have more children because they have less education (= more time), get money from the government (= less work), and know that their children will support them one day so the more they have the better.

But the above situation is an anomaly. In my theory I was not talking about rich countries who are about 15% of the world's population, or poor people who live in these countries and are supported by governments (= by rich peoples taxes).

More than 80% of the world population is really poor and within that population (as well as animals, plants, bacterias, .....) my description is accurate. Within that population, the less food a population or even a family has, the slower they can expand and multiply. It was like that in ancient history and is still so in the animal kingdom, undisputed. But it upsets some people if you make the same observation with humans.

As long as there is a growing population and competition for limited resources some people will always be poor. Look at the world today and you see evidence everywhere (except first world countries) that my theory is true. If you disagree, do not label my opinion as "arrogant idiocy" but describe a way how you would eliminate poverty.

Regarding the "anomaly" where the richer people become, the less children they have, it is not going to last. It is a temporary phenomenon that is only a few years old. Sooner or later the rich people and civilizations will practically die out because they don't have enough children. Then the poor people will compete over what is left (resources), and then my theory starts to apply to first world countries too.

06-02-2008	#14 (permalink)
Advanced Junior Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 10 Rep Power: 0	The trend of allmost all populations (humans, animals, bacterias) is to grow and expand as large as possible. If there are no external factors (predators, limited space, food shortage, disease) the population will grow exponentially and forever. But it doesn't happen as there are external limits. The limits come when people have a reason not to expand so quickly and have less children or the children can't survive. In the first world civilization of today the rich people have less children because they choose to work or study instead. That's because "society" teaches them it is the "right" thing to do. Another reason is that they have to work more to maintain their living standard, therefore they have less time to have children. The poor people in these same countries have more children because they have less education (= more time), get money from the government (= less work), and know that their children will support them one day so the more they have the better. But the above situation is an anomaly. In my theory I was not talking about rich countries who are about 15% of the world's population, or poor people who live in these countries and are supported by governments (= by rich peoples taxes). More than 80% of the world population is really poor and within that population (as well as animals, plants, bacterias, .....) my description is accurate. Within that population, the less food a population or even a family has, the slower they can expand and multiply. It was like that in ancient history and is still so in the animal kingdom, undisputed. But it upsets some people if you make the same observation with humans. As long as there is a growing population and competition for limited resources some people will always be poor. Look at the world today and you see evidence everywhere (except first world countries) that my theory is true. If you disagree, do not label my opinion as "arrogant idiocy" but describe a way how you would eliminate poverty. Regarding the "anomaly" where the richer people become, the less children they have, it is not going to last. It is a temporary phenomenon that is only a few years old. Sooner or later the rich people and civilizations will practically die out because they don't have enough children. Then the poor people will compete over what is left (resources), and then my theory starts to apply to first world countries too.