Loudmouth, I remind you that Singapore and Hong Kong have very
low birthrates. Fact is if you are popping out 5 babies per female,
feeding all the little darlings is one thing, educating them another.

Now you can do all that, if you have money, earned from your higher
intelligence, skills etc. Haiti does not qualify, so less land
per peasant, means more hunger, less education etc.

So name me a country which thrives, which has a high birthrate.

Yabby,
I couldn’t agree more. But don’t you know it’s not their fault -- it’s ours .

See here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3349#79866
“However, much of the increasing African population is a consequence of interference in the underdeveloped world by external religious and cultural influences”. [ apparently it’s our fault for interfering and disrupting the Eden–like balance!]

and then, we have those on the otherside of the fence who want us to interfere more:
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2010/01/23/118051_ntnews.html
Apparently we have an --international obligation –to provide back-up services for those who either haven’t planned for the morrow or, who’ve spent all their funds on more worthwhile things, like … a large standing army, mansions on the Rivera for the upper classes & more children for the underclasses.

Another malignant apology for imperialism. Aristide, the first elected president of Haiti was overthrown by Bush 41 to be replaced by a murderous cocaine military. Clinton allowed Aristide to return after Haiti was opened up to subsidised agribusiness. Most aid, like most aid/loans before and after the dozens of US invasions and occupations were notations in the banks of New York. Haiti had to close its schools to make its first loan payment, just as we in the US are closing schools and libraries to keep banksters to big to fail profitable.

Yabby,

I suppose I could make a comment about the futility of your mum popping you out, along with so many other whelps. But I don't like ad hominem arguments, certainly not of such a contemptible nature. Of course, massive population growth in very poor countries is unsustainable, but there are ways and ways: of course, Haiti needs a phenomenal amount of infrastructure, far better schools and more universities, and as every demographer knows, to educate the women is to ultimately reduce the birth-rate. Of course, Haiti needs to upgrade its economy from scabbling agriculture towards more industry and services, thereby providing jobs at higher levels. Of course, this is going to take a hell of a lot of effort and funds and time. I'm not saying it's easy. But there is a pathway (a very long and difficult one) from Haiti to Hong Kong.

As well, as social planners know, unless a state can provide security for the elderly in the form of pensions or super, young people will keep having many children, to support them if they ever reach old age. Old age pensions = (eventually) fewer children. Higher education for women = fewer children. A move from land-based economy to skills-based economy = fewer children.

But is it possible for all you arm-chair w@nkers, given Haiti's terrible and tragic condition, to get off their backs ?

Joe

Loudmouth, your double-dipping “I could make a comment about the futility of your mum popping you out, along with so many other whelps. But I don't like ad hominem arguments” is in character with your arguments about population pressure.

“Of course, massive population growth in very poor countries is unsustainable.” Then you align yourself with religious and other fundamentalists who lobby against the efforts of caring people who have spent time amongst those deprived communities in attempting to provide opportunity to their women to access the means to elevate their desperate position. Referring to these dedicated people as armchair w@nkers is at the sewer-end of “ad hominem arguments”

Colinsett,

Thanks but you have misunderstood what I wrote completely: please read it again carefully. I have been an atheist all my life and will remain so. I have complete sympathy and respect for the people you rightly praise: my reference to w@nkers was to those contemptible people who seek to blame Haiti (and so often, African countries as well) for their tragedies, and who make callous and even racist suggestions off the tops of their heads.

People are precious, every one (to paraphrase Fred Hollows) is a person, a person with a brain and potential to contribute to the betterment of humanity. Well, except for those w@nkers. The beautiful people of Haiti deserve far better than the hand they have been dealt and I have nothing but admiration for anybody who seeks to improve that situation.

Joe Lane