…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.
Only because those “beyond their borders” insist on getting involved.
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.
How can so much ignorance exist. It’s almost as if you prefer to spread the myths of the third world rather than learn what is going on.
Poverty does not mean stupid. Poor people are as smart as you.
If one only looks for economical reasons for having children, then one will only find a [size=124]¼[/size]-solution.
There are 4 main reasons:
1.) biological reasons;
2.) cultural reasons;
3.) economical reasons;
4.) techn(olog)ical reasons.
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.
I know I am wasting my time - but you would all do well to spend some time on “GAPMINDER”
THe stats on the site are remarkable, and the data is painstakingly gathered. This stuff will blow you away.
All you guys seem to want to do is wank each other off by sharing your misconceptions.
Maybe one or two of you might like to back up your posts with EVIDENCE??
Evidence?
Civility, ladies and gentlemen, please.
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.
Says the one with this avatar or passport foto:
How old are you? 14 years? And without puberty?
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!
That is the second personal attack you have directed at me.
Insults are not allowed on this Forum.
1 biological reason exist for all.
2 Economic reasons are also culturally defined.
3 As I said.
4. Er what?
Ah …! You want this thread to “move” into the Rant House. I see …
…
You insulted me long time before I did. You do not remember your childish words?
So please stop insulting me!
boo hoo
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
Economical reasons are not the only reasons for having children. If the currently white population don’t know much about that fact, then that is one proof more for their decadence. They always measure anything and everything with money.
Do you really not know anybody who has children because of other reasons than economical ones?
If that is the case, then I ask you: Why do you live? And: For what? For money like (1.) communists and (2.) capitalists?
Having just requested civility, these earn a warning.
So the fertility of the white population shows - without any doubt - they are (1.) culturally decadent, (2.) economically under terror of consumption and debt, thus: bankrupt, insolvent, (3.) techn(olog)ically endangered because of the replacement by machines.