Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From the Pocket World Of Figures/The Economist/Expected Fertility Rates 2015-2020:
Hong Kong/Macau/Taiwan: 1.1
Bosnia/Portugal/Singapore/South Korea: 1.3
Germany/Hungary/Japan/Poland/Romania/Slovakia/Serbia/Thailand/Macedonia: 1.4
From what I've read, the ideal for any country for replacement level is between 2.0-2.5.
So what's to become of these countries? What will be the pluses and the minuses? And if they go the route of immigrants, where will they come from?
Africa still has the highest fertility rates in the world, Niger @7.0, Mali @6.9, Somalia @ 6.6, but the question is: how many of these will even survive childhood or infancy?
Latin American fertility rates have all dropped as well, Mexico (2.2), Brazil/Chile (1.8), with Bolivia with the highest fertility rate in South America @ 3.0+.
Yes, I believe the world is shrinking, what do you think, and the long-term effects?
Well the world's population is still growing. 3rd world countries will immigrate to 1st world countries; therefore population in most countries will still grow.
No country should be worried... Or allow immigration or offer families more benefits and longer maternity leave.
No country should be worried... Or allow immigration or offer families more benefits and longer maternity leave.
Of course, of course, very clever (!!!!!)...we are 7 bn and growing, natural resources are being depleted, soon all Africa's elephants will be exterminated, but not enough, "grow and multiply" ! I can't believe some people have still that way of thinking in the 1st world!
From the Pocket World Of Figures/The Economist/Expected Fertility Rates 2015-2020:
Hong Kong/Macau/Taiwan: 1.1
Bosnia/Portugal/Singapore/South Korea: 1.3
Germany/Hungary/Japan/Poland/Romania/Slovakia/Serbia/Thailand/Macedonia: 1.4
Well I'm not surprised that these countries have the lowest birth rate.
When you can't see the future of where you're living in(except for maybe Germany I'd say),you don't want to have a baby.Having a baby would only ruin your own and the babies' lives.
Then there will be no child at all,so the future of these places are even darker,it's like a vicious circulation.
As for immigrants,it might work in Europe,but not in Asia.
fertility is plummeting round the world, even in Africa (places like India and Bangladesh for example are at 2.5 and 2.2 respectively). However the age bulge means there are hundreds of millions of women having 2.5 kids, and those kids will still grow for the next 60 years to be having 2.2 kids themselves, and their children in turn to have 1.8 kids and so on. In short it takes a lifetime for a dip in fertility to translate to an actually falling population (and by that point your population will be massively larger already). Even if everyone today just had the one kid, the population would still be massive, and still grow hugely for the next 20 years. The problem with overpopulation today would not go away for another 40 years.
In other words despite the fall in fertility, the planet will still have the 'hangover' period of rising populations for the next 2-3 generations, by which time we may come close to doubling in this period, and come close to extinction also (not so much too little, but too late).
In places like China, if the one child rule is still enforced the projection is the population will get old before they get rich. In places like Japan, Germany etc that have already reached the falling population stage - a legacy following the economic age bulge that first propelled their countries to First World status, the future is just as uncertain for those with rising populations, but in a completely different direction. They may look to immigration to save them for a generation or two, but dont forget immigrants tend to draw level in fertility with natives once their own children are born and raised as locals. In turn the problem with who-will-support-the-aged is merely postponed, and made larger.
I have friends in France and they are very afraid of the low fertility amongst frenchmen, because the birth rate amongst arabians is larger. Some of them think that France will become as arab-muslim country in the future.
I have friends in France and they are very afraid of the low fertility amongst frenchmen, because the birth rate amongst arabians is larger. Some of them think that France will become as arab-muslim country in the future.
I think that Europe does not "westernize" its immigrants as effectively nor as quickly as America does.
To answer the OPs question, immigration is part of the solution in the short term. However they are not doing a good job of assimilation and westernizing these people and are allowing them to remain too ethnically insular and backward. If they can find a way to correct this weakness they can not only reap the benefits of immigration while minimizing the potential costs but can also create a modernizing flow back into their countries of origin (something the Imams & extremists are keen on not allowing to happen and play their own part in keeping their communities insular and culturally separate for this reason).
They should ask themselves, how the Americans do it so well and how can Europe emulate this. There exist cultural, ethnic and historical differences between the US and Europe that influence this but there are nonetheless things that can be studied and better understood and perhaps emulated to some degree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.