-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Firefly premise
- Thread starter Leonardo
- Start date
No I understand the role of relgion and population growth, you don't get how its got nothing to do with it, which is why I cited the famous bible phrase.
US Population growth rate is slowing and will eventually decline:
Population Profile of the United States
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Didn't read you own chart here. It shows the population going up at 2050 still.
IT also mentions exactly what I am talking about in regards to Life expectancy.
from ssi website and history
Social Security OnlineHistory
"Life expectancy is projected in the middle series to increase from 76.0 years in 1993 to 82.6 years in 2050. In 2050, life expectancy in the low assumption would be 75.3 years and in the high assumption would be 87.5 years."
If we look at life expectancy statistics from the 1930s we might come to the conclusion that the Social Security program was designed in such a way that people would work for many years paying in taxes, but would not live long enough to collect benefits. Life expectancy at birth in 1930 was indeed only 58 for men and 62 for women, and the retirement age was 65. But life expectancy at birth in the early decades of the 20th century was low due mainly to high infant mortality, and someone who died as a child would never have worked and paid into Social Security. A more appropriate measure is probably life expectancy after attainment of adulthood.
As Table 1 shows, the majority of Americans who made it to adulthood could expect to live to 65, and those who did live to 65 could look forward to collecting benefits for many years into the future. So we can observe that for men, for example, almost 54% of the them could expect to live to age 65 if they survived to age 21, and men who attained age 65 could expect to collect Social Security benefits for almost 13 years (and the numbers are even higher for women).
As Table 1 shows, the majority of Americans who made it to adulthood could expect to live to 65, and those who did live to 65 could look forward to collecting benefits for many years into the future. So we can observe that for men, for example, almost 54% of the them could expect to live to age 65 if they survived to age 21, and men who attained age 65 could expect to collect Social Security benefits for almost 13 years (and the numbers are even higher for women).
Life Expectancy for Social Security
Exactly what I was telling you about ssi and life expectancy.
Didn't read you own chart here. It shows the population going up at 2050 still.
IT also mentions exactly what I am talking about in regards to Life expectancy.
from ssi website and history
Social Security OnlineHistory
"Life expectancy is projected in the middle series to increase from 76.0 years in 1993 to 82.6 years in 2050. In 2050, life expectancy in the low assumption would be 75.3 years and in the high assumption would be 87.5 years."
If we look at life expectancy statistics from the 1930s we might come to the conclusion that the Social Security program was designed in such a way that people would work for many years paying in taxes, but would not live long enough to collect benefits. Life expectancy at birth in 1930 was indeed only 58 for men and 62 for women, and the retirement age was 65. But life expectancy at birth in the early decades of the 20th century was low due mainly to high infant mortality, and someone who died as a child would never have worked and paid into Social Security. A more appropriate measure is probably life expectancy after attainment of adulthood.
As Table 1 shows, the majority of Americans who made it to adulthood could expect to live to 65, and those who did live to 65 could look forward to collecting benefits for many years into the future. So we can observe that for men, for example, almost 54% of the them could expect to live to age 65 if they survived to age 21, and men who attained age 65 could expect to collect Social Security benefits for almost 13 years (and the numbers are even higher for women).
Life Expectancy for Social Security
Exactly what I was telling you about ssi and life expectancy.
You still aren't getting it...While the life expectancy is going up the birthrates aren't, even U.S. census bureau confirms that. So the population rise in first world Countries is due to the higher life epectancy of single population boom after WWII. Which is what you would expect from a country with more sophisticated technology. But after the baby boomers you're looking at a population contraction! Why? Because there is no dependancy on child labor in those countries and raising children is expensive. This deters how many children couples want, if any at all.
In emerging countries where technology is less sophisticated the population growth rate has exploded well beyond first world nations' growth rates! This contridicts your statement that the more sophisticated the technology the greater the population growth, but it is the exact opposite trend, countries with better technology are experiencing a slower to declining growth rate.
Last edited:
shawn001
Well-Known Member
In emerging countries where technology is less sophisticated the population growth rate has exploded well beyond first world nations' growth rates! This contridicts your statement that the more sophisticated the technology the greater the population growth, but it is the exact opposite trend, countries with better technology are experiencing a slower to declining growth rate.
LOL
Why has "life expectancy" in the US increased?
LOL
Why has "life expectancy" in the US increased?
Can you not read the post you're citing? Cause I clearly acknowledge that technology lenghens life spans but in emerging countries life spans are not longer and brith rates are fevorishly higher than first world nations! Emerging countries are accelerating in popultion faster than first world nations which CONTRADICTS your statement that the more sophisticated technology aligns itself with higher populations. :sarcastic
theirreverentconcubine
Member
Superposition. I'm thinking science fiction is science fiction, but science fact might have a couple of aces up her sleeve. 
shawn001
Well-Known Member
No there are MORE THEN 2 REASONS.
Wait till there technologies and life spans improve.
Some third world countries have higher populations because of religion and because they need more farm and family help and in some countries because they don't use birth control and are told or taught not too.
but you didn't answer this question?
Why has "life expectancy" in the US increased?