Skip to comments.Vatican: Population Growth is a Means of Overcoming Poverty, Not a Cause of It
Posted on 02/09/2010 3:54:56 PM PST by wagglebee
NEW YORK, February 9, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As nations around the world are beginning to feel the effects of plummeting birth rates, the Vaticans representative to the United Nations has stressed that population growth is the key to overcoming poverty. Speaking before the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, Archbishop Celestino Migliore said, too often population growth is viewed as the cause of poverty whereas it is a means of overcoming it, for only within the work force can the solution for poverty be found.
The archbishop explained: where economic growth rates have declined, the answers lie not in trying to close society to others and pushing for population decline but rather in creating a society which is open to and encourages life. He added, Promoting life and the family and finding ways to integrate the contribution of all people will allow societies to realize their full potential and achieve development.
While population control was pushed at the Copenhagen summit on climate change and is still funded in the billions by the worlds elite, population control measures have largely been discredited as a valid means of reducing poverty.
University of Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan recently spoke of the now discredited theory that poverty in the Third World is based on overpopulation, in comments to the National Post. I dont think any serious scholar believes that anymore, he added.
The Vatican push against population control measures was raised by the pope last year. In his World Day of Peace message for January 1, 2009, Pope Benedict XVI deplored the "international campaigns afoot to reduce birth-rates, sometimes using methods that respect neither the dignity of the woman, nor the right of parents to choose responsibly how many children to have; graver still, these methods often fail to respect even the right to life."
Smashing any appeal to undertake population control in the name of alleviating poverty, the pope added: "The extermination of millions of unborn children, in the name of the fight against poverty, actually constitutes the destruction of the poorest of all human beings."
In his message, the Pope brought demographic evidence to defend his views. "Nor must it be forgotten that, since the end of the Second World War, the world's population has grown by four billion, largely because of certain countries that have recently emerged on the international scene as new economic powers, and have experienced rapid development specifically because of the large number of their inhabitants. Moreover, among the most developed nations, those with higher birth-rates enjoy better opportunities for development.
"In other words, population is proving to be an asset, not a factor that contributes to poverty," the pope concluded.
Ping for your lists.
Some folks heads will explode on this one LOL. But wealth is built through the velocity of money. The more often a single dollar (or whatever currency) becomes income and spending the greater the wealth.
Very, very true. Declining birthrate = no workers, no productivity, no customers, no nothing.
I thought these clowns said that having humans caused global warming.....now they say they actually like humans.......what phonies....like Prince Charles.....who follows these frauds? Not me.....
Well, you thought wrong. The Catholic Church NEVER suggested that human life was the cause of ANYTHING and NEVER supported any form of population control.
What clowns are you talking about? The Catholic Church has never said that humans cause global warming, and in fact the Pope’s last statement on this said that human beings are the pinnacle of creation and that any “ecology” must bear this in mind.
Prince Charles is not a Catholic, and in fact, I’m not even sure he’s sane...
obviously he hasn’t seen the effects of a high population in Ca :( bad schools,bad roads hey just like Mexico,el salvador,Africa etc...
What clowns? Are you referring to the Vatican?
He was challenged by drugstore paperback amateurs like Paul Ehrlich, but they failed to make a dent. Reality is tougher than liberal spin.
Tell me a society where the birth rate is allot higher than the replacement rate and that society IS already, or IS becoming wealthier? There are none.
The only two nations with extremely huge populations, India and China have both increased their gross, and per-capita wealth, from very great rates of poverty at the same time they have trimmed the rate of population growth.
It is one thing to acknowledge that a very low birth rate is not helpful to sustained economic growth in the long run.
That does not translate, morally or economically into the opposite - that a very high birth rate is naturally positive, all the time in all cases.
I am not offering these insights as promotion of any nation’s social methodology regarding contraception and certainly not to render any support for abortion.
But there is some distance between the categorical image presented by the Vatican - that population growth is inherently and always a good (it in fact depends on the context), and the realistic morality of reasonable methods of contraception, outside of abortion, when a family’s three existing children are already starving.
...like booze is the key to overcoming alcoholism.
Haiti and Bangladesh certainly support this contention.
for only within the work force can the solution for poverty be found
Wrongthink pope, the government creates all employment. The private economy is built on greed.
Population density has NOTHING to do with a country’s wealth or poverty, but don’t let that stop you from pushing your agenda.
Yes, I’m well aware you agree with the whole Malthusian death agenda, now you have a president who agrees.
Hear hear, the Vatican got it right with this one.
People are overall an ASSET, not a DEFICIT.
“the effects of a high population in Ca :(”
The problems of California are not due to its population. They are due to its socialism.
In nevada they are having a water shortage as well as Ca its due to overpopulation
Haiti and Bangladesh show the evils of corruption and socialism.
If that were so, highly populated nations would be poor, low population nations would be wealthy.
Most populous nations:
List of wealthies nations:
If higher populations = poverty, why are five countries on BOTH lists????
No,, the water shortage in CA is due to poor planning and environmental naziism.
what about nevada? they dont have enviro nazis there
Also please see my list of the most populous vs. the wealthiest nations. Why are the five of the wealthiest nations also the most populous if population = poverty?
Not being too aware of Nevada’s politics, I can’t reply. I won’t pretend to know why they have a water problem EXCEPT
that it is mostly desert? And so there is not enough water there for everybody.
SO if they want a bunch of people there they need to compensate for that and I guess they have not?
Here is the bio sketch of the author of the piece:
Susan J. Marks is an award-winning journalist with more that 30 years experience. Her new book, Aqua Shock, sounds the alarm for states throughout the U.S., warning that water is a shrinking resource and is threatened by contaminants, overdevelopment, water overuse, rising population, climate change, antiquated infrastructure and outdated water-treatment plants.
Here are some of the other stories that AlterNet treats as "news":
Im sorry but Ive been to mexico to see the ugly consequences of overpopulation
Overpopulation: Reasons and Consequences
The Effects of Overpopulation
What are consequences of over population in india?
Some users have taken stories from alternet I honestly dont remember but who but I have seen it on FR! Sorry for the first link I admit I made a mistake
Population has NOTHING to do with economic repression troll.
Again, you are posting links to climate change wackos. You are a TROLL.
It’s not population or population growth that is what causes poverty, it’s culture and religion.
Societies which value human life and have moral standards and integrity in their work ethic and treatment of others, will produce wealth.
The nations which have the highest standard of living, the best education and health care system, and the most innovation and progress are by and large predominantly Christian nations.
If you don’t believe this move to the mid-west and see how the economy is in negative growth areas.
I believe that following the various Plagues which reduced Europe's population, also increased the living standards for the survivors?
Population growth is a means of overcoming poverty...PROVIDED THE ECONOMY PROVIDES AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES. And provided natural resources are plentiful.
An atrophied economy coupled with a robust population growth rate is not a good combination. In such a situation where human lives are the most plentiful resource, human lives will necessarily become the lowest value commodity.
Drug cartels are destroying life in Mexico. To blame overpopulation is nonsense. Blame the drug cartels for wrecking Mexico. (this is for the troll).
“Societies which value human life and have moral standards and integrity in their work ethic and treatment of others, will produce wealth.”
All very true, and in all that truth it does not support the proposition that “Population Growth [per se] is a Means of Overcoming Poverty, Not a Cause of It”. A proposition NOT supported by world economic history. If it were true, Mexico would be a whole lot more better off, in terms of poverty, than the United States.
And what is it in the culture of Mexico that helps produce both the drug cartels and the corruption of legal authority meant to prevent and stop them?
No, it’s not the drug cartels that create poverty in Mexico, but something(s) in the strongest elements of Mexican culture does produce poverty, drug cartels and the corruption of legal authority to stop them.
Meanwhile, in the face of pre-existent poverty, to have a fourth child when your first three are already starving is not a good moral position. No, I am not suggesting approval of abortion. But, when poverty already exists, it is not a moral position to claim, in such a situation, that a large increase in population will bring prosperity. It won’t.
It really shows your maturity by name-calling and not backing up any evidence!
The average Mexican family now has 2.4 children, down from 6.2 in the mid-1960s, and the birthrate continues to fall. Bad example of “overpopulation.”
Again, the birthrate in Mexico has declined rapidly (from 6.2 children to 2.4 children per family over a 40 year period).
You are looking at both lists on the basis of “size” - size of population and size of total GDP.
But total GDP is no measure of wealth, because that GDP is shared (split) by the total population. Wealth - what people have - is measured by GDP per-capita.
From the “most populous” list, only the U.S. and Japan rank in the top ten nations in terms of GDP on a per-capita basis. The other 8 most populous nations do not rank in the top 10 on a per-capita basis, on some are far down the list.
Even as well as China is doing, with her population she only delivers wealth (GDP) on a per-capita basis at about 13% of what little South Korea does.
Among your list of ten wealthiest nations, the U.K., France, Spain and China are barely holding their present populations size, ranking 170th, 164th, 140th and 156th respectively, in population growth, out 230 nations. Italy’s rate would require 500+ years for the population to double. Japan, Germany and Russia have negative rates of population growth. Which only leaves Brazil and the U.S., among your ten “wealthiest” with actual positive population growth.
Not an inspiring exposition of the premise that population growth produces wealth.
I was not trying to prove population growth produces wealth.
I was trying to show that high population does not create poverty.
Which is what many on this thread are saying.
Obviously, having a high population does not equal poverty, and I am tired of hearing it. It is a stupid argument, easily disproven.
“Again, the birthrate in Mexico has declined rapidly (from 6.2 children to 2.4 children per family over a 40 year period).”
Yes, and with that rate of decline, the per-capita wealth of the people has been improving as well. Unfortunately, the base of poverty from earlier periods leaves a legacy that will take time yet to make up for. In the meantime, telling them to get their rate of population growth back up will not be a recipe for better economic growth.
You are correct, “high population” does NOT, in and of itself produce poverty.
But the opposite is also true - high population, in and of itself, does not produce wealth - which is the premise the Vatican is suggesting (at least in terms of population growth).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.