Replies

Having the same size families as American pioneers in the 19th century isn't "multiplying like rabbits"

If this information on the number of children that the American pioneers had is correct, you still have a problem when you compare it to the bases of the populations at issue. The pioneers in America numbered far, far fewer than the multitudes currently in India, so applying that ratio is not a valid comparison, IMHO. The analogy to "multiplying like rabbits" still makes sense to me.

Not to worry. Given their practice of sex-selection abortion, in a couple of generations there will be too few women for population growth, and the healthiest women will be employed as rental-wombs by Western homosexuals.

Just as in the similar case in China, it will be interesting (from a safe distance) to see how this works out for them.

The pioneers in America numbered far, far fewer than the multitudes currently in India, so applying that ratio is not a valid comparison, IMHO.

We can compare them to the European immigrants in New York City in the early 20th century, then, as NYC was already quite populated. Having a large family is not "multiplying like rabbits", because human beings are not rabbits. In our church, the "H" family has 12 children, the "S" family has 11 children, the other "S" family has 12 children (they cheated, triplets were thrown in), the "B" family has 12 children, and numerous other families have 8 or 9 children. They come from working to professional class, and I would dare you to tell them they are "breeding like rabbits."

For a poor family, children may be the only precious treasure they have. The people defecating in the streets in India aren't doing it because it is crowded, or because they have large families. In fact, the Netherlands are more crowded than India is. Paul Ehrlich, and all the lefties, were so wrong about India and the causes of the poverty there.

Yes and no. India's population density (981/sq mile) isn't all that different from Japan (870/sq mile). When coupled with the fact that 75% of Japan's land area is mountain and forest and India has more arable land that the continental United States (with the added advantage that even more of it being suitable for double or even triple cropping), you see that it is less of a population problem than a standards problem.

Japan makes wise use of their land, doesn't allow livestock to roam the streets and would be appalled by the standards (or lack thereof) of sanitation in India.

A boss of mine (Japanese) from a former life told me that when he did business in India, he'd venture outside of the hotel only long enough to get to and from the place of business. He felt more comfortable exploring Indonesia which, while densely populated, also had basic standards of sanitation.