Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "An answer ...":
Sorry Ben, while you are the demographic expert on a lot of things, you are just totally wrong when it comes to this argument.
The UN population figures are irrelevant to this argument, as well.Let's take the World Resources Institute's breakdown of per-capita energy usage across the different regions of the world. The Developing Countries, which all have higher fertility rates and are poorer than the West, have a per-capita energy usage rate of 216.1 kilograms of oil per person. The Developed Countries, which all have lower fertility rates and are rich, have a per-capita energy usage rate of 666.9 kg oil per person.That means that the developed world uses TRIPLE the amount of energy than the developing countries use.
And the fertility rates of the developing countries, while they continue to decline, are a fraction of that of the developed nations. It just so happens that the richer nations in Africa have the lowest fertility rates.
South Africa has a rate of 18.87 births per 1,000, and Botswana has a rate of 25.5 per 1000. Egypt is at 24.36, and Tunisia has a rate of 16.53. These are all relatively wealthy African nations. The poorest of African nations are a different story. Burkina Faso has a rate of 44.78, and Chad is at 47.06.
Almost every place that fertility rates decline, per capita wealth increases. The entire industrialized world is a prime example of this, with few exceptions. As nations become industrialized, they begin to use A LOT more energy. WAY more than the developing nations.
True, the developing nations burn things like "cow chips," but that is a low-tech, low-energy form of fuel.
The bottom line is, in the undeveloping world, subsistence farming is the number one economic activity. And it is a simple fact that a poor subsistence farmer with eight kids in Namibia uses less energy in a year than a suburban soccer mom with 3 kids in Florida uses in a month. This is a consequence of our prosperity, and I think it is a good thing.
Obviously, our energy needs will change, we will move away from one fuel or towards another, be it nuclear, or whatever. But where we get our energy from will not matter as long as we continue to have a high demand for energy.
And as long as we have high expectations, like the freedom to drive across the country in a station wagon, or to air condition our suburban homes, we're going to use more energy, on both an absolute and per-capita basis, than the undeveloped world.
Ben's Response:
Pls take a look at the stunning decline in black teen-age birth and fertility rates since about 1990. Incredible!
BTW Sub-Saharan African birth and fertility rates have been sinking like a stone! Probably the fastest plunge in human history. (And that doesn't count periodic genocide, famine, and HIV.)
There may be suburban soccer Moms in Florida with three kids, but the national TFR has been below replacement (range of about 1.8 to 2.0) since 1972!
Ben
Sorry Ben, while you are the demographic expert on a lot of things, you are just totally wrong when it comes to this argument.
The UN population figures are irrelevant to this argument, as well.Let's take the World Resources Institute's breakdown of per-capita energy usage across the different regions of the world. The Developing Countries, which all have higher fertility rates and are poorer than the West, have a per-capita energy usage rate of 216.1 kilograms of oil per person. The Developed Countries, which all have lower fertility rates and are rich, have a per-capita energy usage rate of 666.9 kg oil per person.That means that the developed world uses TRIPLE the amount of energy than the developing countries use.
And the fertility rates of the developing countries, while they continue to decline, are a fraction of that of the developed nations. It just so happens that the richer nations in Africa have the lowest fertility rates.
South Africa has a rate of 18.87 births per 1,000, and Botswana has a rate of 25.5 per 1000. Egypt is at 24.36, and Tunisia has a rate of 16.53. These are all relatively wealthy African nations. The poorest of African nations are a different story. Burkina Faso has a rate of 44.78, and Chad is at 47.06.
Almost every place that fertility rates decline, per capita wealth increases. The entire industrialized world is a prime example of this, with few exceptions. As nations become industrialized, they begin to use A LOT more energy. WAY more than the developing nations.
True, the developing nations burn things like "cow chips," but that is a low-tech, low-energy form of fuel.
The bottom line is, in the undeveloping world, subsistence farming is the number one economic activity. And it is a simple fact that a poor subsistence farmer with eight kids in Namibia uses less energy in a year than a suburban soccer mom with 3 kids in Florida uses in a month. This is a consequence of our prosperity, and I think it is a good thing.
Obviously, our energy needs will change, we will move away from one fuel or towards another, be it nuclear, or whatever. But where we get our energy from will not matter as long as we continue to have a high demand for energy.
And as long as we have high expectations, like the freedom to drive across the country in a station wagon, or to air condition our suburban homes, we're going to use more energy, on both an absolute and per-capita basis, than the undeveloped world.
Ben's Response:
Pls take a look at the stunning decline in black teen-age birth and fertility rates since about 1990. Incredible!
BTW Sub-Saharan African birth and fertility rates have been sinking like a stone! Probably the fastest plunge in human history. (And that doesn't count periodic genocide, famine, and HIV.)
There may be suburban soccer Moms in Florida with three kids, but the national TFR has been below replacement (range of about 1.8 to 2.0) since 1972!
Ben
posted by Ben Wattenberg at 5:56 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home