War and population: Baby boom usually follows war

[aubunique]

Expert On Population Issues To Speak at UA
The Morning News
FAYETTEVILLE — Werner Fornos, president of the Washington-based Population Institute, will speak at 12:30 p.m. Friday in the Science and Engineering Auditorium at the University of Arkansas.
Fornos, an internationally recognized expert on population growth around the world, will give a lecture titled “Gaining People, Losing Ground.”
Fornos says failure to make population issues a priority in international affairs may result in the ultimate global blunder. Population growth must be slowed through education and responsible reproductive behavior to avoid social disintegration and poverty, he says.
The Population Institute is an independent, nonprofit organization with a stated goal of achieving a more equitable balance among the world’s population, environment and resources.
The presentation is free and open to the public.

[Dwayne From Minden]

There wasn't a population "boom" after Vietnam -

[aubunique]

This suggests some analysis of why certain wars create a boom in births and some don't.
Any ideas?

[Dwayne From Minden]

Name me one war outside of WII where there was a significant "baby boom" - but also remember that it has been estimated that 6,000,000 people lost thier lives in that war and dependent birth control was not exactly available at that time (outside of rubbers of course)

The past 25 years or so the US and Europe from the most part have been experiencing a "baby bust"...

I see nothing that would cause this to change -

Population explosion is a concern in 3rd world nations - especially in Asia and Africa -

[Champ967]

And NW Arkansas. :P :P :P

[aubunique]

Women Must Have Access To Birth Control To Avoid Disaster, Expert Says
Population Expert Says Education, Choices Crucial to Stabilize Population

FAYETTEVILLE — Women throughout the world must be provided education about and access to birth control to prevent overpopulation from destroying the global environment, a population expert said Friday.
Werner Fornos, president of the Population Institute, based in Washington, D.C., said there are 6.3 billion people on the planet today. That number is expected to grow by 1 billion people every 12 years. Almost all of the population growth is expected to take place in developing nations, where resources are often already inadequate to serve the existing population.
The existing world population is consuming resources at a rate that cannot be sustained, he said. Environmental problems such as global warming and topsoil reduction are shrinking those resources even as the population grows.
“One of the things that will help us cope ... is slowing down the stork and balancing the world’s population,” he said.
“I’m not interested in population control. I’m interested in just fulfilling the basic aspirations of people; and, if we can do that, we can stabilize the world’s population,” he said.
Fornos made the remarks to students at the University of Arkansas, where he spoke to students and guests in a sociology class.
Fornos is an internationally recognized expert on global population issues. His institute is an independent, nonprofit organization with the stated purpose of achieving a more equitable balance between the world’s population and resources.
He described a grim possible future in which an exploding population is squeezed by one environmental disaster after another: rising oceans, spreading deserts and shortages of water and food, among other things.
The populations of industrialized nations have already been stabilized, he said, with births occurring at about the same rate as deaths. In these nations women have access to education and employment, and couples choose from several methods to control fertility, he said.
It is not the place of governments to decide for couples how to control fertility, he said, merely to make methods accessible.
Family planning is about preventing unwanted pregnancies, he said, and abortion is not a method of family planning because it happens post-pregnancy.
Men must be made to take their share of responsibility in slowing population growth, he said. Too many men around the world still feel no responsibility for the consequences of their sexual activity, he said.
The United Nations has estimated that the population will stabilize at about 9.3 billion people, he said.
Fornos said he believes it could be stabilized at 8 billion, through the following methods:
w Irradication of female illiteracy. (A woman with an 8th-grade education, Fornos said, will produce half the children of a similar woman with no education, on average.)
w Opportunity for full employment with full pay for all women.
w Reduction of infant mortality (Parents will have fewer children when they expect all of their children to survive to adulthood, Fornos said.).
w Universal access to knowledge and means of birth control.
For the first time in history, he said, there are 1 billion people between the ages of 15 and 24. It is up to the members of this group to be responsible parents and produce only those children they can adequately provide for, he said, in order to prevent a global environmental disaster.
“Slowing down population growth is a requirement that all of us have to address, because there are no acceptable humanitarian alternatives,” he said.

[dawg80]

Which is why we need a really good war. Not this picnic thingy going on in Iraq. No, I mean a down and dirty war. And to be fair, everyone needs to be involved. Like a good food fight when everyone in the cafeteria joins in, we need a true World War! I want to see millions, even billions, killed in it too!

Then afterwards, all of us that survive can go about repopulating....but only under strict guidelines as laid out by a certain someone in NW Arkansas.

[Dwayne From Minden]

Better than that -

Let's just cut off all foreign economic/humanitarian aid to 3rd world countries -

Thereby ensuring an astronomically high infant mortality rate and almost guaranteeing the decimation of those countries population by AIDS -

And we can have a clear conscious because we didn't fire a sing shot...

[aubunique]

I post an article quoting an authoritative speaker and you guys give me sarcastic commentary.
Do you disagree with that speaker?
In what specific ways?
Do you actually not understand that wars historically are fought over land and resources and led by people who want to reproduce their own race and spread their own religion?
Do you not understand that destroying through war and overpopulation and pollution the very resources on which all life depends is SELF destruction?
Do you not understand that BIRTH CONTROL is the message most needed on earth? That humanitarian aid is in our own self-interest?
Did you read Molly Ivins' national column today?

[dawg80]

Who was being sarcastic?

[aubunique]

If you are serious, then explain who would win? No nuclear devices can be used without major health consequences to people worldwide. There would be NO winner in a nuclear war. And we do not have any other way of subduing very many nations at one time.
You know that; therefore, you wrote sarcastically.

OK, who do we support in the women's Final Four? Tennessee because that is the only team there that beat the Techsters this season?