Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 427 posts

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#141

Post by jobu »

arkj wrote: post #104

> But religion is a small factor in fertility today, Muttreja says. “Hindus in Uttar Pradesh, for example, have a much higher fertility than Muslims in Kerala. There is no Hindu fertility or Muslim fertility.” This is really strange he could have compared fertility rate of Muslims vs Hindus in Utter Pradeep and the same in Kerala. Instead he compares Muslims in Kerala vs Hindus in Utter Pranesh. Kerala is the least p…

According to the article, education (particularly for women) seems to be the biggest factor:

> The strikingly different fertility rates in different regions of India reflect the role of education, says EM Sreejit of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in South Asia. Kerala in the south, which has the country’s highest literacy rate, achieved replacement fertility back in 1988. Bihar in the east, with the lowest literacy rate, won’t get there until 2039

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#142

Post by netizen-936824 »

netizen-936824 wrote: post #5
Callmenorm wrote: post #2

Isn't this going to create another problem. Where the country gets old before it gets rich?

Why is the goal to get rich? That seems lame and shortsighted

For all the people down voting: I urge you to consider a different perspective where the hoarding of resources is a bad thing for humanity and life at large. The US, along with other countries, have done this for too long. We should have "having lots of money and resources" as a primary goal. Resources are tools to accomplish other things, not an end in itself. This is why I say its lame and shortsighted.

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#144

Post by pradn »

bhouston wrote: post #66
gizmo686 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a need to a sustainable population rate? There are about 8 billion humans on the planet. We can sustain a sub replacement birthrate for generations. There is a good chance we can sustain it for long enough to solve aging; or at least significantly push back the ~100 year limit to human life. Once we do that, we will need generations of sub replacement fertility just to compensate for having more generations…

> Is there a need to a sustainable population rate? At some point yes we do. > There are about 8 billion humans on the planet. We can sustain a sub replacement birthrate for generations. For sure. But at some point there won't be enough humans to run an advanced society. > here is a good chance we can sustain it for long enough to solve aging; or at least significantly push back the ~100 year limit to human life. Onc…

If more people are able to have healthier lives and be productive in their chosen niche (if they choose to), there might be other benefits, too. For example, many fields benefit from long expertise, like mathematics.

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#145

Post by _haoa »

Taking this as an opportunity to plug the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT). Pay no attention to the tongue-in-cheek name, it has nothing to do with mass suicide or genocide, and merely advocates for us to stop breeding.

From https://www.vhemt.org/:

> Phasing out the human species by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#147

Post by rcoveson »

bhouston wrote: post #91
rcoveson wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For sure. But at some point there won't be enough humans to run an advanced society. How can we acknowledge that we need a lot of people to run the sort of society we ended up with today without also reasoning that the more advanced society we might achieve in 100 years might need a lot more people? There's nothing special about 10 billion people. People have been throwing out numbers as "overpopulation tipping poi…

Humans are resources in a general sense. More humans means more resources which you can throw at various challenges, problems. So you are right. More humans has benefits. But unfettered growth isn't sustainable, this has been proved again and again. So what we need is controlled growth or at least sustainable levels. Right now we are switching into a decrease which will be very jarring and not sustainable. We've neve…

> But unfettered growth isn't sustainable, this has been proved again and again.

This is vague, and assumes the conclusion. All we've ever known is unfettered growth, and it's been accompanied by people "proving" that it's "not sustainable" for a long time. So far we have not only sustained it, but thrived while sustaining it. More importantly, we have come to rely on it: We're pretty sure we couldn't have a society like this one without hundreds of millions of people.

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#148

Post by LinuxBender »

nynx wrote: post #125
ElectronShak wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much trust in mortals.....nah, I'll pass

I'm not sure what else you could trust in. Even if a christian god exists, the bible was written by humans, copied over and over by humans, and translated by humans.

Adding to this that many of the scriptures were censored from the Christian Bible. Emperor Constantine and his council left out some notable scriptures such as the Book of Enoch. That is a fairly significant redaction in my opinion. I would suggest reading up on it if anyone has the time.

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#149

Post by carapace »

pilom wrote: post #52

I wish the US had some of the options for male sterilization/contraception that are available in India. I've asked my doctor for years about some of the options available in other countries and am always given a blank stare of ignorance.

I feel more people should know about "heat-based contraception" for men. Literally, taking very hot baths can cause temporary reversible sterility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat-based_contraception

Re: India defuses its population bomb: fertility falls to two children per woman

#150

Post by lr4444lr »

zpeti wrote: post #48

Global population will basically top out at 9-10bn. I look forward to the problems we will face then, and the apocalyptic narratives the media will invent about this new problem. Here's my shot at a few: - Even with better quality of life its going to be hard to make people who are over 70 work productively. But without children less and less people will need to take care of this large old age group. And they will ne…

The transition will be hard for the possible reasons toy give, but long term we should again return to a normal age/population pyramid. The tricky part is managing the shift.
Post reply on HN