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.
I do not know what you mean by the "west" but what we have in the United States is uncontrolledpopulation growth, especially now in 2021.
The result of this growth, totally allowed by the US government without any planning whatsoever, has been stagnant low income wages, adding more than 100 million people to the USA in just 50 years, rising housing and COL costs and spreading urban/suburban sprawl.
Gee, I am glad that the rich are getting richer off the cheap labor but what about the rest of us and what about the quality of life for future generations?
US fertility rate is below the replacement rate of 2.1.
More people, more problems. Especially at this time, the unemployment rate is so high, if the USA or Canada agree to let more immigrants in, the harder people can find a job they want. And if the country (government) encourages people to create more babies, how can people enhance the quality of life when there are not enough jobs for people and more heads to feed?
A simple example is mostly people who have good family plans, and have one, two or three children, have better life and can provide better living conditions and education for their children than people who just have sex and poop (not pop - used the word intentionally) a dozen or more of babies out one year after another. Poor children. And they don't have enough food to eat, clothes to wear, or always have to wear hand-me-down or secondhand clothes, don't have a good house or single room to live. Many of them siblings always fight, fight, fight for food, for toys, or whatever, or maybe they even learn that from their parents.
We need smart and hard-working people who have good family plans for themselves, their children and the country. We don't need to increase population to compete with China. For what? For war? If you want to win wars, you need to have good heads/brains over the number of people. Only if you think it's good that people make lots of babies, like baby machines, and raise them up for the government sent them to wars, but most people don't want to see their children to die in wars.
If you want peace, less people (population) will do.
Again, more people, more problems. More poor families with lots of kids, more welfare the government has to provide, not to mention so many troubles created by those ill-bred parents and children. And nowadays, it's not easy to get welfare also.
Last edited by AnOrdinaryCitizen; 04-04-2021 at 07:07 PM..
I won't be here to see 1 billion Americans but my opinion is that we seem to be having a hard enough time managing what we have. US citizens can't seem to find a consensus on anything from education, the homeless, equality, jobs, infrastructure, commerce and international trade, religious rights, or a dozen other topics. I can't imagine a billion people trying to figure things out.
With a billion people, each member of the House of Representatives would have around 2.3 million constituents instead of around 750,000, if we stay with 435 members. If we decided to keep constituents at 750k per member we would need 1333 members in the House of Representatives. Either way will be nearly impossible to manage or arrive at anything close to "government by the people".
More people, more problems. Especially at this time, the unemployment rate is so high, if the USA or Canada agree to let more immigrants in, the harder people can find a job they want. And if the country (government) encourages people to create more babies, how can people enhance the quality of life when there are not enough jobs for people and more heads to feed?
A simple example is mostly people who have good family plans, and have one, two or three children, have better life and can provide better living conditions and education for their children than people who just have sex and poop (not pop - used the word intentionally) a dozen or more of babies out one year after another. Poor children. And they don't have enough food to eat, clothes to wear, or always have to wear hand-me-down or secondhand clothes, don't have a good house or single room to live. Many of them siblings always fight, fight, fight for food, for toys, or whatever, or maybe they even learn that from their parents.
We need smart and hard-working people who have good family plans for themselves, their children and the country. We don't need to increase population to compete with China. For what? For war? If you want to win wars, you need to have good heads/brains over the number of people. Only if you think it's good that people make lots of babies, like baby machines, and raise them up for the government sent them to wars, but most people don't want to see their children to die in wars.
If you want peace, less people (population) will do.
Again, more people, more problems. More poor families with lots of kids, more welfare the government has to provide, not to mention so many troubles created by those ill-bred parents and children. And nowadays, it's not easy to get welfare also.
1: Has been true since Adam & Eve.
2: Current highest fertility is Niger 6.72.
I get tired pointing out that population density in the US is relatively low, like less than 10% of Belgium or Holland.
So what? Maybe the majority of Americans prefer it that way. After all, the U.S. is a very large country in terms of land area, and there are only a few cities in the nation which could be defined as densely populated, and they tend to be the older cities that were developed before automobiles. In general, people like their space, and their freedom to move about.
We don't need to be forcing, or even encouraging significant population increases. It creates more problems than benefits ... namely: more government spending, pollution, congestion, and draining of existing resources. Let's face the facts: people who breed tend to be the ones who are the least likely to be able to afford raising children on their own means.
Not that impressive compared to Indian subcontinent
Pakistan Population
58.14 million (1970)
216.6 million (2019)
More than 158 million increase in just 50 years.
340,509 sq mi -Pakistan
268,596 sq mi -Texas
India Population
555 million (1970)
1,366 million (2019)
More than 810 million increase in just 50 years.
3,120,426 sq mi -Lower 48 states:
1,269,219 sq mi -India
Add Bangladesh to that, and you have the British Raj, just shy of 1.8B today.
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.
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.
