It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: lordcomac
There must be a reason why Africa doesnt have a 1st world country....i just cant put my finger on it.
originally posted by: dantanna
japan, is not making enough people. i mean this 100% objective, but i do not know why the lower income peoples of the world have so many kids.
i made a decision a long time ago NOT to have children. i made this choice in junior high school. but one trick was, if i became a multi-millionaire i would adopt kids, just so they could grow up filthy rich.
i know alcholics with kids who never take care of them.
personally, and personally only, i think you should be financially AND emotionally mature if you want to have kid. if not, skip them spend the money on yourself. thats my theory.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: dantanna
It's because of the way things are.
In the lower income areas of the world, the countries are not yet at first world status, so you have cultures where a family needs to have larger numbers of children both to have extra hands to work often subsistence level farming/ranching style operations and to simply ensure that a few of them reach adulthood.
Generally at third world or lower status, this is closer to replacement level.
As a county starts to elevate itself technologically with better infrastructure and medical care and diversification so that families may look to live above subsistence, the high number of children is no longer required, but culture lags behind modernization, so you see a population explosion, and you will see massive poverty as many will have families beyond their means to support and older occupations are replaced by newer ones some don't have the skills for.
Look at early Industrial Era nations to see the same phenomena.
Nations like Japan and many on Europe and the US even in certain segments of the population have reached final stage where the population that is used to living at first world status seems to be living/breeding at first world level which is right now below replacement.
Whether or not that will ever correct? Who can say.
originally posted by: dubiousatworst
a reply to: ufoorbhunter
The Bantu didn't move south in to South Africa until after colonization was well underway. The bush people or coloreds (Khoikhoi) as they are called were the only natives there at the time of European colonization, and at that were sparely populated pasturalists.