Truly an unfortunate and saddening set of tragedies for Malaysia and the global community. Have you guys heard the intercepted Ukrainian telecom conversation? If not here's the video.

<cite> @ElPunto said:</cite> There has been a lot of social progress in China particularly for women coupled with the economic boom of the 20+ years. Political progress is overrated. When you have a vibrant democracy like Nigeria unable to alleviate extreme poverty and China with its totalitarian government removing tens of millions from poverty - I'm pretty sure the average person will take the latter. I couldn't agree more about the African land grabbing. When they've sold off everything - they're selling the very land underneath their citizens' feet. There is a fascinating piece in the National Geographic magazine in July about it. I will post a topic with the full article but here are snippets: Nigeria isn't an example of a vibrant democracy, it is highly corrupt and unstable. However it's economy can be likened to China, as it is the largest in Africa. At best, Nigeria illustrates a large economy doesn't necessarily alleviate poverty. China uplifted the population it thrust into poverty after the colossal failure of the great leap. I would regard that as an achievement as far as neutralizing the effects of a bad policy. The one child policy prevented 200 million births, we will never know how many of those were forced abortions and infanticide. To say women experienced social progress under those circumstances is naive, or worse apathetic. Great piece! I'll check out your thread.

<cite> @ElPunto said:</cite> I would like to point out - China's one child rule - is a way to bring down family size through enforcement and did not hinge on the education and status of women. Additionally - most of India has a lower fertility rate than Africa - but education and status of women is marginally better than other more fertile African countries. Ultimately aside from personal considerations - African governments must be cognizant of the need to plan for and take advantage of the increasing population - only then can they turn this potential into success. But if things continue as is - you will have legions of young, hopeless Africans flooding into Europe and other developed countries seeking a fulfilling life. Great example of a seemingly successful contraception campaign. Did China successfully reduce its population? Yes, but at a great cost and with little to show for in social and political progress. I personally value the latter more. Also, the Chinese pop will likely bounce back once the one child policy is relaxed. Speaking of African potential, African land grabbing may be the greatest environmental, social and political threat to the continent.

<cite> @xabad said:</cite> Actually the mortality has come down significantly but the fertility rate has not. this has caused an explosion of population causing all sorts of problems environmental, social, security and so on. stop believing in conspiracy theories there is no western agenda for population control in africa. You're referring to the epidemiological transition which scholars believe has skipped sub-saharan Africa. "Given the prevalence and trends in HIV/AIDS, the interaction between infectious and noncommunicable diseases is likely to be prolonged in sub-Saharan Africa for decades. This will transpire at the same time that sub-Saharan Africa will see significant population aging, and these trends pose major challenges to economic and social development which the region's health and social systems are—at least for now—unable to address." In about 30-50 years most African countries will lose their middle age population to diseases, one of which is HIV. Coupled with already high infant mortality, this will devastate the African pop. Reference: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK114529/ "The Epidemiological Transition in Africa: Are there Lessons From Asia?" The infant mortality rate in Somalia is 101.91 deaths per 1000 births, and that's within the first year. The second year mortality, if I remember correctly, is 1:5. Most African countries continue to have high child mortality while diseases are disproportionately killing the middle age and aging population. The WHO claims infant mortality has decreased 20% in urbanized areas of Africa and Asia (why lump Africa and Asia?), 20% in urban areas is minute. Lastly, children are an economic asset in this area of the world, so having more children is quite logical. Africans were never given a chance to exploit their environment, as it is already being done for them. neo-Marxist theorists argue that an increasing population is conducive to social progress.

Extreme weather, aka climate change.

<cite>@xabad said:</cite> first of all stop using foul language, i don’t know if your being flippant or just trolling but equating colonialism with birth control is stupid. self discipline and planning your family is a good thing for all people black or white just like education is. just look at the report on this poor nigeri woman if you doubt the necessity of contraception. A 37-year-old woman, weary and wailing with labor pains, was trying to give birth to her 13th child in Niger, a country with one of the highest birth rates in the world but where millions are now facing food shortages due to drought. “I am exhausted, my uterus too,” said Zeinabou, as she struggled through labor at a birthing center in Maradi in southern Niger. http://reliefweb.int/report/niger/nigers-high-birth-rate-caused-religion-poverty Instead of foul you may have been aiming for sensational or lurid, which are fair accusations. I likened contraception to colonialism to highlight the injustices present in fertility control policies that are endorsed by the first world and pressured on the third. To borrow from Kuumba, "The neo-colonial relationship hinges on the exploitation of men's productive forces, but rests on the control of both the productive and reproductive forces of oppressed women. The current population policies and strategies of fertility control as promoted and orchestrated by an international population establishment are part and parcel of the colonial legacy that haunts "Third World" or neo-colonized women" (Perpetuating Neo-Colonialism Through Population Control, 1993). Population control is inherently colonialist because third world bodies are used to further a first world agenda. Hitherto my comments examined the population paradigm and fertility policy in respect to environment issues and Malthusian theory. It seems you are approaching the subject as a regional, or person to person, issue. Even so, the number one determinant of family size is not contraception availability but the education and status of women, followed by economic security and infant and child mortality. Contraception became an issue in the developed world once women had a reason to wait, i.e education. The social and cultural evolution that preceded contraception is paramount to decreasing family size permanently. The developed world, however, has propelled the idea that contraception can take the place of social progression when evidence points to the contrary. I don't view contraception as wrong or sinful in anyway. The use of contraception makes life easier for both women and men but I also understand it cannot take the place of social and cultural progress. Neither do I believe that increasing population is a problem. I stand firm by my initial statement claiming affluence and consumption are far more problematic than increasing population.

<cite> @DoctorKenney said:</cite> My mistake Fermi, I was responding to the entire idea of population control in Africa. It's a very popular concept. I've heard it being advocated everywhere from university circles to actual academic journals and I wanted to respond to it. The idea that a woman's vagina needs to be controlled is disturbing, if not inhumane. It is also reminiscent of colonialism. "The colonization of the brown vagina", if you will.

Where are the funds for this budget coming from? (I.E: World Bank, U.N, individual nations?) Who is funding Somaliland may possibly be influencing how the funds are distributed.

<cite> @DoctorKenney said:</cite> Why in the world would Somalis want to adopt contraception? I mean, if a Somali couple wants to use birth control, then that's up to them. It's their choice. But to adopt population control as a policy, why on Earth would you want that? Somalia is an extremely underpopulated country. We are more than twice the geographic size of Germany, with less than 1/8th the population size. Just look at the population density figures. Somalia's population could increase to 100 million people and we'd still have the room and resources to accommodate more. Don't fall for this B.S. Liberal propaganda. There's enough food, water and resources for everyone in this world. We just need to learn how to utilize our resources and maximize production, while making sure that this has no adverse effects on the natural environment. I was responding to a question posed by Hobbesian. I didn't advocate for, or even raise the subject of, population control. My position on population control methods is quite simple, you cannot enforce the use of contraception without compromising basic human rights, as per China. As for the rest of your comment it's apparent you didn't read my first post, the last comment on page one, as you would have noticed our arguments are on par. Here it is: The idea that a small population is vital to economic prosperity is a Malthusian myth that has been propagated by capitalism. A small population is not conducive to economic progress, contrarily it may deter it in developed countries. If you look at the population pyramid of all first world nations, minus the U.S, you will notice retirement age groups, between 50-75, form a larger part of the population than the working age group, 15-65. This means there aren’t enough workers to support the pensions of retiring/ed workers. Countries such as Japan, Germany and Italy are facing this problem. Natalist policy ebbs and flows according to the specific population needs of a given nation. however, the advent of contraception, urban development, and women’s rights has created a linear trend toward smaller families that is nearly impossible to control/combat. Population has very little to do with resource depletion as a mere 16% of the world uses more than 80% of world resources. This discrepancy tells a clear story of resource mismanagement and injustice. Environmental organizations and governments alike have engaged in a malicious campaign to paint the developing world as a problem population. Their campaign was so successful that population is now, erroneously, synonymous with environmental degradation.

Congratulations, SoL.

<cite> @Hobbesian_Brute said:</cite> So why are relatively well off urban somalis still having large families ? Somalis continue to have large families (though it is worth mentioning family size is decreasing) because of a reluctance to adopt contraception.

The idea that a small population is vital to economic prosperity is a Malthusian myth that has been propagated by capitalism. A small population is not conducive to economic progress, contrarily it may deter it in developed countries. If you look at the population pyramid of all first world nations, minus the U.S, you will notice retirement age groups, between 50-75, form a larger part of the population than the working age group, 15-65. This means there aren't enough workers to support the pensions of retiring/ed workers. Countries such as Japan, Germany and Italy are facing this problem. Natalist policy ebbs and flows according to the specific population needs of a given nation. however, the advent of contraception, urban development, and women's rights has created a linear trend toward smaller families that is nearly impossible to control/combat. Population has very little to do with resource depletion as a mere 16% of the world uses more than 80% of world resources. This discrepancy tells a clear story of resource mismanagement and injustice. Environmental organizations and governments alike have engaged in a malicious campaign to paint the developing world as a problem population. Their campaign was so successful that population is now, erroneously, synonymous with environmental degradation.