I know why. People in third world countries have less economic opportunities, unemployment is soaring, and men tend to be at a loss as to what to do from day to day. They have a lot of time on their hands, and they usually spend a LOT more time in the sack, making love with their women. If they hd more viable occupations, to occupy their minds, they would not be constantly churning out more and more populations.
Yes, Obe, and you don’t deny the statistics of fertility and mortality.
And please don’t forget: They live according to their tradition; they don’t know and don’t want (!) the typical white, typical Western reasons: “Individualism” and so on. So they live and decide to have children because of their tradition, just as they have always done - that’s all.
When the Western culture was brought to them they at first partly adopted and partly negatetd it, but then they negated it more and more because they noticed the negative side of Western culture. One of their reasons to change their opinion about the Occident was their growing self-confidence. So they didn’t and don’t want to change the fertility.
The economical reasons, you mentioned, are not the only reasons. Behaviour doesn’t have merely economical reasons. Contrariwise the economical reasons should not be underestimated. Nevertheless: economical reasons are not always the only reasons for having children.
1.) Firstly one has to see it from the layer of the evolution because we human beings are involved in evolution.
2-) Secondly we have to see it from the layer of the history because we human beings have been having history since 6000 years.
So we human beings have a (1) evolutionary and a (2) historical development which means that we e.g. have a (1) oral / verbal and a (2) written / recorded cultural tradition.
Economical and - last but not least - techn(olog)ical reasons are important when it comes to explain why human beings have children, but they are not the only reasons; other important reasons are biological and - of course - cultural ones.
…and they can’t figure out that a condom is cheaper than another mouth to feed and if they can’t afford condoms how can they afford “family increases”? Consequences for the creature being born is not even considered, the biggest crime of all. Also, the poor and uneducated in those places are the most prone to believe in religious directives which as a whole negates the use of condoms. The impact of this goes far beyond borders.
Take the trouble to what the links i posted.
If you prefer to stay in ignorance and just respond with your childish prejudices then keep your eyes shut.
That is an uncharacteristically poor post.
Most men in the third world do not own a sack, but are forced to share a pallet with the rest of the family.
If you also followed the links to find out what is really happening you would not make such silly statements.
The reason, why decadent people always think the reasons for having children are always and exclusively economical ones, is the fact that they themselves always think (decadently) the reason for having children would be always and exclusively economical ones.
True up to a point but a river which overflows its banks floods the countryside meaning borders can and are being overrun into other jurisdictions made more vulnerable when there is only a political instead of a geographical dividing line.
Just like an individual vis-a-vis those adjacent, a neighboring country usually does not want to be affected by problems it is not responsible for. But it happens all the time.
You are childish! Very much! You have no idea, especially no idea of fertliity, of mortality, in short: of demographics - as well as of economics and ecology!
You’re right! Poverty definitely does not mean stupid. In fact it often functions as a catalyst to enhance intelligence. One can take the converse and acknowledge how many “educated idiots” have been produced in so-called advanced countries. We didn’t screw up so badly because of 3rd world countries. This however does not change the nature of the problem as described.
Actually it changes it completely, as you were trying to suggest that …“and they can’t figure out that a condom is cheaper than another mouth to feed”.
They know full well what a condom can do, but they have children nonetheless for the reasons I said above; reasons well known to those that study the problem.
The way to reduce the rate of fertility is to make poor people richer.
I do not expect you to accept that, but if you follow the links I gave above you will have greater persons that myself to argue with.
The population is thought to stop rising at 10 billion and be steady by before the end of the century as third world countries coming out of dirt poverty are reducing their fertility rate to 2 per family.
You do not have to take my word for it. Take a look at the links