10 Responses

  1. Andrew Lohr says:

    Sure policymakers should keep an eye on it, but considering the disasters and problems created by government–Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan; huge deficits and debts and unfunded promises; a health-care “reform” based on forcing healthy people to pay sick people to be sick; an absolutely worthless “stimulus;” housing boom and bust; prices edging up…I think it wise to remember Jesus, President of presidents, is rather libertarian, and give people maximum freedom to make their own adjustments, with a minimum of regulations and programs.

  2. Vinnie says:

    Fascinating. One of the very tricky parts is if developed countries like the US and Germany continue to attract immigrants, then those people must be subtracted from some of the other projections. For example, Chinese will undoubtedly continue to move to the US, so the Chinese estimates should reflect emmigration.

  3. anew says:

    If the Europeans were smart, instead of admitting blacks and Muslims to help cushion their demographic decline, they would be aggressively recruiting young whites from the US and the rest of the New World to return to the homeland. This would allow them to avoid the immediate (relatively) economic fall-out resulting from population decline, and 100 years from now, Europe would still be European. Economic stagnation or not, how hard would it for, say, Italy to convince an Argentine that his future, and those of his progeny, might be more prosperous and fulfilling in Italy than in Argentina? Especially if offered the right tax incentives?

    • jide says:

      you are a dirty idiot, you look at things as it is right now, do you think blacks and muslims will still be exactly as they are today is 20 years time??? blacks might be better than any race in the next 20 years, so i wonder if you will make the same statement assuming blacks and muslims were better thanwhat they are today, or do you think christianity is as it is today as it was 30 years ago??? if so as the gays about castration or china about development as it is today??? stupid asshole.

      • Guest says:

        I don’t think you’ve read these projections at all. Most of Africa is going to be overpopulated and is going to lack food and fresh water. They’re also going to have a hard time with employing people for jobs when the population is insanely high. I don’t see Africans nor Muslims doing good in the future I see them doing worse.

  4. Pac0 says:

    Myriad implications, another is lower carbon output than previously expected. Let’s begin to figure that into global warming models.

  5. John L says:

    The #1 implication should be adopted immediately. Retiring at 60-65 is unsustainable right now. Bump it to 70 asap, with built in plans to tie it to average life expectancy so that it can keep going up if people keep living longer.

  6. bloke in france says:

    South Africa has exactly the same population projections by both the DB and UN? Coincidence, laziness or SA is uniquely predictable?

    More seriously, the crash may be earlier and more severe than anyone thinks.

    We are moving from a peasant world where children are an insurance for old age to a cash world where children drain cash. Further education, labour mobility, etc means that children won’t be around to help out and savings or taxes will have to pick up the slack. Medical advances mean parents focus on quality not quantity. Urbanisation just adds to these forces.

  7. Richard Gadsden says:

    DB figures are UN figures with a bunch of assumptions changed. The assumptions that DB disputes only affect some countries, so – naturally – any country where none of the disputed assumptions apply gets identical projections.

    The assumptions where there is disagreement are, IIRC, that very low TFRs will revert to the mean (UN); that urbanising countries will have falling fertility (DB); that big sex differences in the population will have no effect (UN); that very high TFRs are unsustainable (DB).

  8. Bayan says:

    Just my two cents,

    but doesn’t anyone else find it extremely worrying that even at low variant projections, nigeria will have 500 million people in a relatively tiny area? is that even ecologically possible in any way? it’s just scary to think about

Leave a Reply

Mobile Theme | Switch To Regular Theme