|
|
|
|
|
by Danihan
3305 days ago
|
|
> would presumably want that some of them wouldn't exist. I simply don't want to pay to enable them even more. When the proper social constraints aren't in place, money = energy = more babies. It's poor policy to continually reward countries that are chronically overcrowded and polluted, it just makes the issues worse long-term. >The US is basically eating its own seed corn. It's hilarious to me that you believe this when ~85% of the rivers in China are qualified as "very polluted" or "extremely polluted." |
|
Funny, it is actually money = better healthcare = less infant mortality + higher cost of raising child = less fertility rate = less babies.
Rich countries don't have more babies than poor ones, its the opposite.