Palestinian birth rates higher than ever

[DanS]

"Isn't that the problem Dan? The Palestinians don't have a working economy"

Yes, that's the problem, although it is a temporary problem brought on by the current troubles, non-working borders, etc.

The high birth rate has nothing to do with it, and will actually help them over the long run. So I hate to spoil your fun, but Zorba is correct in his original assertion.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by DanS
The high birth rate has nothing to do with it, and will actually help them over the long run.

A high birth rate means that families, in general, have less resources (food, education, and so forth) to spend per child. In other words, new generations won't be any better off than previous ones. This is why, for instance, poverty among blacks and hispanics in the US is so prevalent and the situation isn't changing very rapidly.

[DanS]

Since when did you start quoting Ramo as an authority?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by DanS
Since when did you start quoting Ramo as an authority?

I'll quote anyone when I agree with them. I even quote che in my sig.

[Sava]

Well, duh, that's what happens in an undeveloped society that has no social programs or government. I am just curious about how much of the birthrate is due to the conditions or the desire to wage a holy-war.

[DanS]

Let's recapitulate.

You asked Paiktis for some backup, which apparently he was unwilling or unable to give.

I stepped into the breach and gave you a reasoned explanation, thwarting your unjustified attack on him.

Some others came in to the discussion, giving their opinions unsubstantiated, and all of the sudden they're right?

You're wrong. Lefty's wrong. Ramo's wrong. Just goes to show you that it's not the things that you know that hurts you. Rather, it's the things that you know that just aren't so.

Might as well apologize to Paiktis.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Because I find it very hard to believe even for a brainwashed american to be a child killer supporter with such placidity as you...

There goes Paikitis again... Isn't he always so objective when he examines both sides?

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm always unwilling to give explanations for things that are self-explanatory.
I'm not willing to waste time on ignorant lollypops. If faced with them I just troll. And I troll 90% of the time.

[Dinner]

At least we can agree on one thing my friend.

[Az]

great links gsmoove. Very informative, and most importantly, impartial.

[Ben Kenobi]

"It takes time for labor and capital to equilibrate; "
- Ramo

Of course, but what happens when they do equilibrate?
Your argument assumes that labour will always remain ahead of capital, producing unemployment etc.

I argue the opposite- that labour and capital will equilibrate at a higher rate of exchange than was happening earlier, due to the increase in both labour and capital.

The opposite is true as well- if population is declining, then labour will be behind capital, causing capital to shrink in order to equilibrate, and lowering the overall rate of exchange.

Population decline is not a nice thing for economies.

[St Leo]

The more people you have, the greater demand becomes for food. More people are likely to invest in cultivation where there is a decent return, so with increasing demand, profit will be made though use of marginal lands, or increasing the intensity of agriculture, that would not otherwise have been profitable.

There is a finite amount of marginal lands. Europe is just taking the rational way out of the Malthusian problem.

Another function of increased population will be increased population density. So long as the population density can be supported by city infrastructure, the more people you cluster will increase the productivity of each individual person, as well as allowing greater specialisation. This increase in productivity not only meets the demand from greater production, but exceeds demand, allowing products to be exported.

This is why US will collapse sooner rather than later. By permitting the tax-destroying and infrastructure-multiplying abomination that is suburbia, it is pounding nails into its own coffin.

[Ramo]

Your argument assumes that labour will always remain ahead of capital, producing unemployment etc.

I argue the opposite- that labour and capital will equilibrate at a higher rate of exchange than was happening earlier, due to the increase in both labour and capital.

I'd like to see some statistics on that. For instance, Haiti's (most dense country in the Western hemisphere) population has been steadily increasing this past decade, while its GNP/capita has been decreasing. Same thing with Bangladesh (most dense country in the world), although the trend is not as great. Also, keep in mind that it's likely the people who have less children (richer people) are those who attract foreign capital which is what much of the growth is due to.

Of course, I'd basically agree if trade and immigration were perfectly free between states. But they are not. On the whole, trade barriers keep capital out of, and immigration barriers keep labor in, developing states that are exploding in population.

Population decline is not a nice thing for economies.

Not necessarily. It depends entirely on the situation. The Bubonic Plague of the 14th century, for instance, ended up becoming huge boon to European economies. I'd like to also add that decreased population means greater bargaining power for the working class, and growth of a middle class.

Of course it's true that population decline isn't particularly good in the Europe, Japan, etc.

You're wrong. Lefty's wrong. Ramo's wrong. Just goes to show you that it's not the things that you know that hurts you. Rather, it's the things that you know that just aren't so.

Care to justify that?

[GePap]

Individuals have made a deciion to have many children: if there ever was a fundamental right its the one to procreate; it is aftre all, our basic biological imperative. If Israel is so worried about High Palestinian biorth rates, let them make a convincing argument to the Palestinian people about it.


I find the "Arafat" hang-up amazing. It is really incredible, how such an Uberman as him (and he must be an Uberman, just look at all he does, every day, directing dozens of terrorist organizations, masterminding evry dime of money, bet you he cloned Osama bin Laden from himself those many years back and programmed him as well! He must have learned well from his great dark lord, Adolf Sidious) has not yet won. I mean, he says, and the Palestinian people do, since we all know Palestinians are weak minded fools, unaccustomed to disagreeing with their leaders, waiting on their every word to do their bidding for them. Such a weak and mindless people (just look how they breed) could never have a mind of its own, a will of its own. I mean, 3 million Palestinians in the territories and 3 million more outside just hang on each of Arafat's words: they have a tiny chip implanted at birth that is! Yes, that it! Palestinians were enrapture with how the peace with israelk was going: how their lives were getting better: how the restrictions on thoer movement, or land ownership, or the use of their own property were falling by the wayside when BAM, Arafat said: attack, and they did!

[gsmoove23]

Originally posted by Azazel
great links gsmoove. Very informative, and most importantly, impartial.

...and CMIP is? Impartiality is an impossibility here. In the absence of that you listen to both sides. I clearly said they were a response, so I hope you were at least being honest about the informative part if only to know thine enemy.