More White Americans Dying Than Being Born

[warsamaale]

Taiwan has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world at ~ 1.256, and Saudi Arabia is hardly affluent or educated -- although Muslim countries generally have to be classified differently, regardless of their development -- due to their pro-natalist norms. Otherwise the whole planet is on steady but sure fertility decline, South America, Asia, Oceania, everywhere even sub-Saharan fertility rates are tapering off. As i said before, this can only be good news for the planet; climate change, habitat loss, extinctions and even the world economy.

[kickz]

For each of their families that has 1.2 kids there is a Somali family having 7-10.

[warsamaale]

But then all those 7 or 10 become gang members and welfare moochers while the single white kid is paid through education and goes on to stable middle class achievement.

[GaraadMon]

Tillamook;965478 wrote:

I disagree. A totally unfounded assumption. There are many affluent countries as different as Taiwan and Saudi Arabia whose populations are still growing. This isn't about wealth, but culture. This is unique to Europe and North America, and to be more precise-- unique to the White race.

Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea have some of the lowest fertility rates in the world. Muslim countries are not immune to this phenomena either as is evident with countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Dubai and Qatar which have fertility rates of 2.61, 2.09, 2.4 and 2.23 respectively.

 

There has been several decades worth of intensive research on the subject, so to say that it is an unfounded assumption is peculiar.

[ElPunto]

Less white men = less oppression in the world.

[GaraadMon]

ElPunto;965509 wrote:

Less white men = less oppression in the world.

East Asians will fill the vacuum as they have already done so in the form of economic dominance in SE Asia.

[ElPunto]

^That is on an individual level. Chinese migrants going there and becoming successful in business etc. But there isn't a state sponsored and military led offensive to colonize and exploit others. The Chinese like to boast of a 5000 year civilization that didn't colonize and dominate others but just traded with them.

 

BTW - have you read World on Fire by Amy Chua - it's an interesting book exploring ethnic minorities doing unusually well in host countries.

[GaraadMon]

ElPunto;965518 wrote:

^That is on an individual level. Chinese migrants going there and becoming successful in business etc. But there isn't a state sponsored and military led offensive to colonize and exploit others. The Chinese like to boast of a 5000 year civilization that didn't colonize and dominate others but just traded with them.

 

BTW - have you read World on Fire by Amy Chua - it's an interesting book exploring ethnic minorities doing unusually well in host countries.

The lack of Chinese imperialism in the past may be in large part due to the country's size. It's nearly as large as the entirety of Europe. Combine that with the fertile soils, massive glacier-fed rivers, natural barriers formed by the Himalayas, Gobi desert and the steppes and you start to understand why China couldn't be bothered to wage costly wars over resources. There is a greater need today for more resources as the quality of life continues to see increases in China, their large country is no longer capable of solely meeting the demands of the growing middle class. The need for greater sources of commodities is also what fueled the expansion of European powers in the 18th and 19th centuries.

 

Thanks for the book recommendation. I'm surprised that someone as high profile as Amy Chua has written on the subject, I'll be sure to pick it up.

[ElPunto]

^Your theorizing could be right. But what they're doing now in Africa - is what they did in the past. Make deals, do trade. I don't think they want to dominate African countries politically and have stooges that do their bidding like the USA with the Middle East.

[GaraadMon]

ElPunto;965557 wrote:

^Your theorizing could be right. But what they're doing now in Africa - is what they did in the past. Make deals, do trade. I don't think they want to dominate African countries politically and have stooges that do their bidding like the USA with the Middle East.

True. I don't think they'll follow the western model of underhanded tactics, but there are many fledgling states in Africa who'll be even further stunted in terms of economic sovereignty if they aren't wary of the long term implications that come from sole-sourcing so many projects to one nation/organization.

[Alpha Blondy]

ElPunto;965509 wrote:

Less white men = less oppression in the world.

+ 1