Comments by "Farzana 🇺🇸" (@farzana6676) on "GZERO Media" channel.

We need those babies.
2
@m3talHalide-rt2fz Because babies grow up and adults = productivity. They work, start companies, invent things and innovate and create jobs and work for others. They pay taxes which takes care of old people and young children. A shrinking population is a shrinking economy, and a shrinking economy is a dying country.
1
@m3talHalide-rt2fz Thank you for your response. What you're doing is making an 'Appeal to Extremes' fallacy which is a common logical fallacy. No I did not say our population should grow to 1000x its current size or World population should be 10 trillion. At the very least our population should maintain itself (fertility rate of 2.1 babies per women is the replacement rate). Ideally a slowly growing population of 2.4 babies per women is the ideal fertility rate for a long term successful, self sustaining nation. Nations like Korea, Japan, Italy and numerous nations in Western Europe currently have a fertility rate of 1.0 baby per women. Which means, theoretically their population sizes will halve every generation. This looming population collapse represents an unmitigated disaster placing an undue burden on both the the single child, the federal government, and wider society at large. It leads to a collapse of a nation's industrial base, to an erosion of a nations intellectual capital, to a collapse in a nations economy, to a collapse in tax revenues, to a rising social burden, and ultimately to a reduction in a nations economic, geopolitical and military power. To mitigate these disastrous outcomes, countries are then forced to turn to unfettered migration from 3rd World countries who don't necessarily share the same value systems and cultural norms that Western nations hold which leads to a whole range of other problems.
1
@m3talHalide-rt2fz The French 19th century philosopher, Auguste Comte is known for the famous phrase "Demography is destiny". He argued that the size and structure of a population will influence its future success. Whilst there is no ideal population size of a nation, there is a "stable population pyramid". It is when the base of your pyramid represents the bulk of your population and tapers towards the top. An inverted pyramid/top heavy pyramid is what we see in Japan and Italy when the bulk of your population is at the top of the pyramid and it tapers towards the base. Demographers are almost universally unanimous that this is an extremely dangerous population pyramid for nations future success. Multiple research papers have been written about the problems of aging demographics most especially in the West. Not only are there internal challenges that arise but an aging demographic also means you can't fight in wars or defend yourselves, which still require real manpower to this day. You can't have economies of size and influence to defend your ideals, beliefs, and values on the international stage. A shrinking population and a shrinking demographic means you will have a shrinking economy. It means nations with more influence and power will simply impose their will on you. Let me know if you're prepared to live under Sharia Law. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/world/americas/29iht-letter29.html
1
@m3talHalide-rt2fz You're not reading what I'm writing and neither did you read the article I linked. More for the sake of more is not always better, but a stable population pyramid is always better.
1
Cost of hosting is out of control in Democrat states where they've made new construction almost impossible.
1
@jaymacpherson8167 Yes the regional variations are Republican states and cities which don't inhibit housing construction.
1
@jaymacpherson8167 Loool, I can tell you've never moved from San Francisco to Texas. SF approved 6(six) single family home permits last year. Dallas approved 43000 single family homes last year. You are a total ignorant on the subject.
1
You have a lovely name.
1