Two percent isn't low. I'd say flu's 0.1% is low. — Michael
I sympathise with your sentiment, but it is not that simple. Say some regions do that and their enemies don't then their enemies will overpower them in the future. Also there is the demographic problem of an aging population not being supported by younger people.How about part of the response is not having children?
How about part of the response is not having children? — schopenhauer1
On the plus side a great depression or collapse might contribute towards ameliorating the effects of carbon emissions. — Janus
Yes and it might sober us up a bit, from this drunken populist malaise. — Punshhh
Well, the coronavirus is more of a media pandemic than any kind of actual cataclysmic event. Until the next media fear gets into high gear I suppose.Perhaps...hopefully...but I have no doubt humans have been through cataclysmic events in the past, and also no doubt that once life became more or less comfortable again, dogmatic slumbers were promptly resumed. — Janus
On the plus side a great depression or collapse might contribute towards ameliorating the effects of carbon emissions.
Yes and it might sober us up a bit, from this drunken populist malaise. — Punshhh
I think some kind of managed reduction in population is the way forward. However what is more likely that we will have an unmanaged, unplanned reduction. — Punshhh
However, our politicians want to change that by massively importing high-fertility populations from the 3rd world, in order to reverse that trend. — Nobeernolife
However, our politicians want to change that by massively importing high-fertility populations from the 3rd world, in order to reverse that trend. — Nobeernolife
Are you sure that is the motive? — Monitor
Like TDS? — Monitor
Like population growth is the basic and natural reason for economic growth?There can be other motives of course — Nobeernolife
Not exactly a secret. — Nobeernolife
TDS is not name-calling. If you think the Trump Derangement Syndrome is not a real psychological phonemenon, you are probably caught in it. — Nobeernolife
Well, the coronavirus is more of a media pandemic than any kind of actual cataclysmic event. Until the next media fear gets into high gear I suppose.
And more deadly flu epidemics haven't had an effect on GDP growth: World economy grew at a rate of something like 5% in 1968-69 when the Hong Kong flu killed 1 million people around the World. — ssu
Like population growth is the basic and natural reason for economic growth? — ssu
And this is of course the reason for there to be the media frenzy. The real question is how probable the possibility of a pandemic is.I haven't said it is a cataclysmic event, but it could well be thought of as one if it becomes established as a seasonal virus with both an infection and a mortality rate much higher than the seasonal flu and when the likely economic effects which will manifest if it becomes so are taken into account. — Janus
I think that many times these things are used as simple scapegoats to hide normal economic fluctuations. But if huge quarantines are imposed, the economic consequences are obvious.Also past economic effects at times of genuine economic growth are not reliable guides to probable future economic effects when the fact that there is no real economic growth today, but merely the semblance of growth created by burgeoning credit, is taken into account. — Janus
A bit off the topic, but I'll try to answer. The answer is no.Only if seen from the very narrow viewpoint of manufacturers looking for a growing market. Not for the country as a whole. Otherwise, please explain why the places with the highest population growth are typically proverbial sh1tholes, while the population the most developed countries is shrinking. — Nobeernolife
A bit off the topic, but I'll try to answer. The answer is no.
Firstly, the simple and historically quite proven fact is that with growing prosperity fertility rates plunge. In the poorest countries having a lot of children is the basic (hopeful) guarantee that at least somebody is going to take care of you when you are old and cannot work, hence you don't have to become a beggar. Not so in more prosperous countries. Hence high fertility rates show actually how poor the countries are.
Secondly, it's not just the manufacturers, it's the governments themselves. Decrease in the population is not only a genuine cause for low economic growth, but also it makes a huge problem for the present welfare system. — ssu
Firstly, the simple and historically quite proven fact is that with growing prosperity fertility rates plunge. In the poorest countries having a lot of children is the basic (hopeful) guarantee that at least somebody is going to take care of you when you are old and cannot work, hence you don't have to become a beggar. Not so in more prosperous countries. Hence high fertility rates show actually how poor the countries are. — ssu
Secondly, it's not just the manufacturers, it's the governments themselves. Decrease in the population is not only a genuine cause for low economic growth, but also it makes a huge problem for the present welfare system. — ssu
What government aims for massively growing population I'd ask? The last example was Ceausescu's Romania, and not only did that policy fail, but that dictatorship has long past gone.Yes, the population imbalance created by a shrinking population is a problem. But what governments should aim at is a stable population (birthrate about 2) and not an massively growing population.
Clearer? — Nobeernolife
Firstly, Ebola is far more deadlier. Fatality rate is about 50%. It was the thing, before the West African Ebola outbreak of 2013-2016, that many virologists worried about. Well, that amounted to 28 600 infections and 11 000 deaths.I actually think you're downplaying the risk of covid-19 a bit too much. The comparison with ebola isn't warranted because the incubation time of ebola is much shorter, so it's easier to contain than covid. And that's the main problem here that we're looking at a situation where enough people get infected: the disease turns endemic and we have a seasonal, highly contagious disease with an average mortality rate between 1% or 2%. Like regular flu it cannot be contained like the plague either. — Benkei
Simple containment procedures and people washing their hands works also, actually. And a global epidemic is called a pandemic. Our interconnected World makes influenza epidemics quite easily pandemics. The lethality of these pandemics has gone down a lot.I can't see anyway to avoid it becoming globally endemic. The only way we are to avoid this is through effective vaccination, which will take over a year and to administer it widely will take a long time. — Punshhh
Swine flu killed a little below 20 000 people with 6 million infected. — ssu
the mortality rate for Corona is about 2%, while that for normal influence is about 0.1%. Ergo, the Chinese Corona is about 20 more deadly. NOT the same. — Nobeernolife
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.