I was thinking of ways to put it into a spreadsheet. It looked like they would not be able to make the death rate catch up with the birth rate. But I started thinking of making different scenarios, like how many people had to have one or zero kids to make the population decrease, and things like that. However, it's not really worth the time - it was one of those idle thoughts that turned out to be more complicated than I wanted it to be. So, never mind.
I think part of the idea came from reading that a large part of the population increase came from people having a longer life expectancy, and that they were actually having fewer children than they used to have in the past.
I'm in caffeine withdrawal today - I really needed it. I don't have the enthusiasm to write a hundred-page blog today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Even with the one-child policy in place, China still has one million more births than deaths every five weeks as of study done in 2002
1 childrule started in late 1970s
Rural people ( and i am sure the very wealthy/connected get around it) are exempted from the rule but restricted in number
I think I read somewhere the average death rate in 1900 was 50yrs and that was in the already industrial USA
the average lifespan in Angola right now-2011 is 39yrs
so different nations = different factors
antibiotics/vaccines alone have swayed tables
I myself would like to have more than one child, but I haven't been able to get my life together, and I don't feel ready to try meeting people and having kids... but I'm 36 and if I wait too much longer, I will only be able to have one child anyway. It's frustrating. I'm just glad that they haven't set up the one child rule here yet.
I was thinking about this for the past couple days, and I was thinking, the population probably will grow very, very huge, and what will happen is that some groups of people will prosper, while other groups of people suffer. Some people will get the best of it, and some will get the worst.
Post a Comment