Pericles
Divergence backs up virtually every so-called "assertion" with scientific evidence - more so than anyone else on this forum so don't accuse him/her of making assertions. It's a cheap trick to accuse another of that which you are guilty of yourself.

Popnperish
Many of the most fervent ideologues in the population debate present themselves as taking a scientific approach, and probably sincerely believe this. Paul Ehrlich is a notable example, but there are many others. Their deliberate alarmism, refusal to recognise merit in any worldview but their own, and refusal to change their theories in response to evidence gives the lie to their claims of scientific method.

Divergence’s responses typically find a particular instance of something not consistent with a general trend and attempt to present this as proof that the trend is not there. Yes, real wages in the USA have stagnated, but they have not anywhere else in the developed world, let alone the developing world. Yes, there are still huge problems with poverty and malnutrition in India, but there are no longer the regular famines and death from starvation that occurred a few decades ago. And across the developing world, rates of malnutrition are falling

I'm with popnperish, there are not too many posters who go the trouble of documenting their arguments as well as Divergence.

And speaking as an impartial, mild mannered, yet discerning observer, I find the case she has put here/above very,very convincing.

Cheers

Sorry to hear the Abbott govt has seen fit to axe the Advisory panel of Positive Aging, Everald.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/08/axed-advisory-body-to-seek-crowdfunding?CMP=soc_568

"A government panel on how to deal with the looming issue of Australia’s ageing population will turn to public crowdfunding to finish its report, having been scrapped by the Coalition just months before completing its work.

The Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing is one of 12 non-statutory bodies to be abolished by the government, Tony Abbott stating they had “outlived their original purpose” and did not help meet the Coalition’s goals.

The chairman of the panel, Everald Compton, told Guardian Australia he was “stunned” by the decision, which came just months before it was to hand down a blueprint on how Australia should adapt to the “age tsunami” already facing nations such as Japan."

“I was seeking a meeting with [treasurer] Joe Hockey for some time, but got no response,” Compton said. “Someone in his office called someone in the Treasury who called me to say that I, and the whole panel, were fired.

“I’ve done two and half years work on this plan and I’ve known Joe Hockey for 20 years, so I thought I’d get a phone call at least"

(Apparently panel does not cost $4.7 million -"most is treasury salaries")

Disgraceful behaviour from the govt.

Wish you well with crowd funding.

Thanks for your incisive interjections, popnperish and SPQR.

>>Divergence backs up virtually every so-called "assertion" with scientific evidence - more so than anyone else on this forum so don't accuse him/her of making assertions... I'm with popnperish, there are not too many posters who go the trouble of documenting their arguments as well as Divergence<<

I am reasonably sure that Divergence knows that this is an assertion, not fact, or even evidence...

>>Conditions are better for a lot of us, largely due to technological progress, not more people<<

If there is any evidence to back it up, I'm sure it will be immediately forthcoming.

If Pericles were correct, we would expect the developed countries with the most rapidly growing populations to experience the greatest growth in GDP per capita. I have compared two rapidly growing countries in the OECD, Australia and the United States, with three countries with little or no population growth, Germany, Japan, and Finland. I have averaged annual growth in GDP per capita from 1994 through 2012 for these countries from World Bank figures

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG

Australia 2.06%, Finland 2.40%, Japan 0.73%, Germany 1.44%, US 1.49%

How the wealth is distributed, however, is just as important as how much it is growing. It is of little benefit to the average person if there is growth, but all of the benefits are going to the folk at the top. The US has had a decent rate of economic growth over the past 20 years, but wages for most of the population have stagnated, as Pericles himself admits. The OECD has ranked its member countries from the most equal to the least equal and given the Gini coefficients.

Australia 26 (0.34), Finland 8 (0.26); Japan 24 (0.33); Germany 15 (0.30); United States 31 (0.38).

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/factbook-2013-en/03/02/01/index.html?itemId=/content/chapter/factbook-2013-25-en

Prof. George Borjas (Economics, Harvard) has quantified the effects of mass migration in the US towards depressing wages.

http://www.cis.org/immigration-and-the-american-worker-review-academic-literature

Countries with very rapid population growth by natural increase also tend to be profoundly unequal. The poor countries with the most rapid growth, countries such as Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia, tend to be real economic basket cases.

While people are obviously necessary for technological progress, innovation is not proportional to population. It also depends on having spare wealth and a culture that is conducive to it. Just look at the list of Nobel prize winners by country. Australia has 12 in scientific subjects, while Japan has 16 – with 5 times as many people.