Page 31 of 44 FirstFirst ... 212829303132333441 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 434
  1. #301

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)


    Quote Originally Posted by Deus
    They GOT those monetary resources my balancing the equilibrium between population and resources.
    Wrong. This equilibrium was not planned if it even actually existed. There is no balancing act required. It is NATURAL for populations to grow and with it to increase in productivity. To begin with, population density is not a factor in causing poverty. It IS, however, a factor in creating economies of scale.

    I'm after no such thing. I'm simply saying populations are limited by their resources. Do you dissagree?
    Wrong person. I was asking nindotkanon, not you.

    Again, I'll ask you, does any first world nation advocate raising their populations to unfeasable levels, or just untill they stabilize their populations/workforce's again?
    First, define unfeasible levels and show me that they are even attainable. You can't.

    Let's stick to reality. Overpopulation is a myth and it's alleged connection to poverty cannot be proven. But population decline is a REALITY in many countries.

  2. #302

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    you know who's a myth? You he he he. Hahay, its really hard talking to people who are closed minded.

  3. #303

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Post moved below...

  4. #304

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Quote Originally Posted by nindotkanon
    you know who's a myth? You he he he. Hahay, its really hard talking to people who are closed minded.
    Is this another one of your intellectual gems?
    It's far harder to have an intelligent discussion with those who refuse to THINK!

  5. #305

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Japan: Infertile ground
    Prosperity can't compensate for population loss
    by Russell Board
    http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/d...e.cfm?id=11472

    Saitama City, Japan — Japan is shrinking. Government figures released in December 2005 indicate that
    the population of Japan decreased: A report compiled by the Health and Welfare Ministry estimates
    1.067 million births in 2005, as compared to 1.077 million deaths. Excluding the war-ravaged year of
    1945, this is the nation's first recorded net population loss since records began to be kept in 1899.

    Experts predicted in 2002 that the nation's population would peak in 2007. Now, according to The
    National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, the decline has arrived earlier than
    expected.

    One factor in the accelerated decline is the high number of deaths among elderly who succumbed to
    an influenza epidemic in early 2005. But all agree that the most significant factor has been the rapid
    fall of the birthrate. The average number of babies born to a Japanese woman during her reproductive
    years dropped to a record low of 1.289 in 2004, continuing a downward trend that started in the early
    1980s.

    Government and business leaders responded to the figures with gloomy remarks about the dire social
    and economic consequences of a declining population, which stands at 128 million. "The declining
    birthrate is becoming more conspicuous," Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told reporters. "I feel we
    need to take measures to stop this trend."

    Opposition leaders were quick to point fingers at Mr. Koizumi, blaming the prime minister's economic
    reforms. "With the fall in income of the child-rearing generations, it became impossible to stop the
    declining birthrate," Democratic Party of Japan leader Seiji Maehara said.

    The fact is, since 1989 the government has implemented a series of plans to combat population decline,
    but to no avail. Most measures have aimed at making it easier for working women to bear and rear
    children, with billions of dollars spent on improving nursery schools and child-care facilities.

    Parents also receive subsidies of 300,000 yen ($2,500) per pregnancy to defray the costs of childbirth.
    Afterward, a monthly allowance ($44-$90 per child) is provided until children reach school age, and most
    medical expenses not covered by insurance are reimbursed during this period as well. Yet in spite of these
    incentives, couples persist in shunning the burdens of parenthood.

    Indeed, marriage continues to be delayed. The average age for first marriages reached new highs in 2004,
    rising to 29.6 for men and 27.8 for women. Young women especially are in no hurry to take wedding vows,
    and choose older, more financially stable partners when they do decide to tie the knot.

    Some women are more interested in the pursuit of a career than marriage, but most are simply reluctant to
    trade a comfortable lifestyle for the hardships of family life. These so-called "parasite singles" often continue
    to live at home well past age 30. While mom takes care of the laundry and housekeeping, they enjoy the
    benefit of free room and board and maintain a high disposable income to spend on leisure travel and designer
    goods.

    Many observers are alarmed at the rapid rise in the number of "freeters" (job-hopping part-time workers) and
    "neets" (those not in education, employment or training). Unable or unwilling to join the corporate world of
    Japan, Inc., these young people have opted for a less structured and demanding lifestyle, at the cost of
    remaining dependent upon their parents and their parents' generation's postwar prosperity.

    Masahiro Yamada of Tokyo Gakugei University, author of the book A Society Lacking in Hope, attributed the
    falling birthrate to a general lack of hope about the future. Polls show a gloomy outlook afflicting all age groups
    in Japan, despite growing prosperity.

    It is deeply ironic that the society with the longest life expectancy in the history of the world lacks the
    courage and desire to give life to the next generation. Awash in material goods, Japan is sorely lacking in basic
    spiritual necessities: hope for the future, appreciation for the gift of life, and an understanding of its meaning
    and purpose.

    Copyright © 2006 WORLD Magazine
    January 28, 2006, Vol. 21, No. 4

  6. #306

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Quote Originally Posted by mannyamador
    Japan: Infertile ground
    Prosperity can't compensate for population loss
    by Russell Board
    http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/d...e.cfm?id=11472

    Saitama City, Japan — Japan is shrinking. Government figures released in December 2005 indicate that
    the population of Japan decreased: A report compiled by the Health and Welfare Ministry estimates
    1.067 million births in 2005, as compared to 1.077 million deaths. Excluding the war-ravaged year of
    1945, this is the nation's first recorded net population loss since records began to be kept in 1899.

    Experts predicted in 2002 that the nation's population would peak in 2007. Now, according to The
    National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, the decline has arrived earlier than
    expected.

    One factor in the accelerated decline is the high number of deaths among elderly who succumbed to
    an influenza epidemic in early 2005. But all agree that the most significant factor has been the rapid
    fall of the birthrate. The average number of babies born to a Japanese woman during her reproductive
    years dropped to a record low of 1.289 in 2004, continuing a downward trend that started in the early
    1980s.

    Government and business leaders responded to the figures with gloomy remarks about the dire social
    and economic consequences of a declining population, which stands at 128 million. "The declining
    birthrate is becoming more conspicuous," Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told reporters. "I feel we
    need to take measures to stop this trend."

    Opposition leaders were quick to point fingers at Mr. Koizumi, blaming the prime minister's economic
    reforms. "With the fall in income of the child-rearing generations, it became impossible to stop the
    declining birthrate," Democratic Party of Japan leader Seiji Maehara said.

    The fact is, since 1989 the government has implemented a series of plans to combat population decline,
    but to no avail. Most measures have aimed at making it easier for working women to bear and rear
    children, with billions of dollars spent on improving nursery schools and child-care facilities.

    Parents also receive subsidies of 300,000 yen ($2,500) per pregnancy to defray the costs of childbirth.
    Afterward, a monthly allowance ($44-$90 per child) is provided until children reach school age, and most
    medical expenses not covered by insurance are reimbursed during this period as well. Yet in spite of these
    incentives, couples persist in shunning the burdens of parenthood.

    Indeed, marriage continues to be delayed. The average age for first marriages reached new highs in 2004,
    rising to 29.6 for men and 27.8 for women. Young women especially are in no hurry to take wedding vows,
    and choose older, more financially stable partners when they do decide to tie the knot.

    Some women are more interested in the pursuit of a career than marriage, but most are simply reluctant to
    trade a comfortable lifestyle for the hardships of family life. These so-called "parasite singles" often continue
    to live at home well past age 30. While mom takes care of the laundry and housekeeping, they enjoy the
    benefit of free room and board and maintain a high disposable income to spend on leisure travel and designer
    goods.

    Many observers are alarmed at the rapid rise in the number of "freeters" (job-hopping part-time workers) and
    "neets" (those not in education, employment or training). Unable or unwilling to join the corporate world of
    Japan, Inc., these young people have opted for a less structured and demanding lifestyle, at the cost of
    remaining dependent upon their parents and their parents' generation's postwar prosperity.

    Masahiro Yamada of Tokyo Gakugei University, author of the book A Society Lacking in Hope, attributed the
    falling birthrate to a general lack of hope about the future. Polls show a gloomy outlook afflicting all age groups
    in Japan, despite growing prosperity.

    It is deeply ironic that the society with the longest life expectancy in the history of the world lacks the
    courage and desire to give life to the next generation. Awash in material goods, Japan is sorely lacking in basic
    spiritual necessities: hope for the future, appreciation for the gift of life, and an understanding of its meaning
    and purpose.

    Copyright © 2006 WORLD Magazine
    January 28, 2006, Vol. 21, No. 4
    Who wrote this is maybe someone related to you. He he. You see an opportunity in every kid born in the Philippines. Be realistic!

  7. #307

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Quote Originally Posted by nindotkanon
    Who wrote this is maybe someone related to you. He he.
    Try reading this line at the beginning of the article:
    by Russell Board

    It's bad enough that you show you can't think, must you demonstrate that you can't read as well?

  8. #308

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Japan: Infertile ground
    Prosperity can't compensate for population loss
    by Russell Board
    http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/d...e.cfm?id=11472

    Saitama City, Japan — Japan is shrinking. Government figures released in December 2005 indicate that
    the population of Japan decreased: A report compiled by the Health and Welfare Ministry estimates
    1.067 million births in 2005, as compared to 1.077 million deaths. Excluding the war-ravaged year of
    1945, this is the nation's first recorded net population loss since records began to be kept in 1899.

    Experts predicted in 2002 that the nation's population would peak in 2007. Now, according to The
    National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, the decline has arrived earlier than
    expected.

    One factor in the accelerated decline is the high number of deaths among elderly who succumbed to
    an influenza epidemic in early 2005. But all agree that the most significant factor has been the rapid
    fall of the birthrate. The average number of babies born to a Japanese woman during her reproductive
    years dropped to a record low of 1.289 in 2004, continuing a downward trend that started in the early
    1980s.

    Government and business leaders responded to the figures with gloomy remarks about the dire social
    and economic consequences of a declining population, which stands at 128 million. "The declining
    birthrate is becoming more conspicuous," Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told reporters. "I feel we
    need to take measures to stop this trend."

    Opposition leaders were quick to point fingers at Mr. Koizumi, blaming the prime minister's economic
    reforms. "With the fall in income of the child-rearing generations, it became impossible to stop the
    declining birthrate," Democratic Party of Japan leader Seiji Maehara said.

    The fact is, since 1989 the government has implemented a series of plans to combat population decline,
    but to no avail. Most measures have aimed at making it easier for working women to bear and rear
    children, with billions of dollars spent on improving nursery schools and child-care facilities.

    Parents also receive subsidies of 300,000 yen ($2,500) per pregnancy to defray the costs of childbirth.
    Afterward, a monthly allowance ($44-$90 per child) is provided until children reach school age, and most
    medical expenses not covered by insurance are reimbursed during this period as well. Yet in spite of these
    incentives, couples persist in shunning the burdens of parenthood.

    Indeed, marriage continues to be delayed. The average age for first marriages reached new highs in 2004,
    rising to 29.6 for men and 27.8 for women. Young women especially are in no hurry to take wedding vows,
    and choose older, more financially stable partners when they do decide to tie the knot.

    Some women are more interested in the pursuit of a career than marriage, but most are simply reluctant to
    trade a comfortable lifestyle for the hardships of family life. These so-called "parasite singles" often continue
    to live at home well past age 30. While mom takes care of the laundry and housekeeping, they enjoy the
    benefit of free room and board and maintain a high disposable income to spend on leisure travel and designer
    goods.

    Many observers are alarmed at the rapid rise in the number of "freeters" (job-hopping part-time workers) and
    "neets" (those not in education, employment or training). Unable or unwilling to join the corporate world of
    Japan, Inc., these young people have opted for a less structured and demanding lifestyle, at the cost of
    remaining dependent upon their parents and their parents' generation's postwar prosperity.

    Masahiro Yamada of Tokyo Gakugei University, author of the book A Society Lacking in Hope, attributed the
    falling birthrate to a general lack of hope about the future. Polls show a gloomy outlook afflicting all age groups
    in Japan, despite growing prosperity.

    It is deeply ironic that the society with the longest life expectancy in the history of the world lacks the
    courage and desire to give life to the next generation. Awash in material goods, Japan is sorely lacking in basic
    spiritual necessities: hope for the future, appreciation for the gift of life, and an understanding of its meaning
    and purpose.

    Copyright © 2006 WORLD Magazine
    January 28, 2006, Vol. 21, No. 4

  9. #309

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    Wrong. This equilibrium was not planned if it even actually existed. There is no balancing act required. It is NATURAL for populations to grow and with it to increase in productivity. To begin with, population density is not a factor in causing poverty. It IS, however, a factor in creating economies of scale.
    The fact that it was unplanned is irrelevant. The rise in monetary resources exeeds the rise in population. Again I will ask, will it be good for a population to grow beyond it's resource capacity? Or alternatively, will it be good to cram people into every square foot of the earth?

    Wrong person. I was asking nindotkanon, not you.
    So, you won't answer it then?

    First, define unfeasible levels and show me that they are even attainable. You can't.
    I defined it by positing that the Netherlands support a billion people. The fact that people grow and reproduce show that we can. Also, should you want concrete, real-world examples, I'll point you to the natives of easter island (who cut down all the tree's in their small island, killing all the food and leading to their eventual extinction) as well as ancient Egypt (which grew to massive proportions, then subsequently shriveled as the farmland dissapeared when the Nile shrank). Food, money, farmland - it's all the same: resources.

    But population decline is a REALITY in many countries.
    And overpopulation is a REALITY in many countries as well. Showing examples of depopulation in first world countries doesn't disprove that fact, just as showing examples of overpopulation in third world countries doesn't disprove depopulation. Something can exist in one place and not exist somewhere else. You don't treat every illness with the same cure, do you? Cause that would be just stupid.

    BTW, Japan, America, Eurupe. You keep stating these as examples when it's quite obvious they aren't similar. Continuing to do so would be at best ignorant, and at worst, blatantly dishonest.

  10. #310

    Default Re: What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (Online Petition added!)

    RESOURCES? Not true! Philippines is rich in resources naturally. We have plenty of beaches, land for farming (specifically Mindanao and Baguio), etc etc.

    Why Singapore and Hongkong are rich? Because they accepted western ideas which Thailand is being practice now. Japan, they were defeated in the WW2, they accepted western ideas. Thats how those countries become rich. China is now practising 1 child per couple. They finally realised this thing after all. Way back to Singapore and Hongkong, both countries are not rich in resources. Philippines, we have plenty.

    Filipinos practice western ideas when they go to west but they become filipinos (ideas) again when they come home. Like pee on the wall, spit eveywhere, garbage everywhere, jay walking, traffic violations, mañana habit etc etc.

    Thanks.
    Sorry, but no. They just tell us that in social studies to increase national pride (like Juan Luna actually winning a prize worth winning for "Spolarium", or being the first asian nation to launch a successful revolution via Lapu Lapu). It's a crock. Beaches aren't a resource, no matter how beautiful they are. Tourism is - but ours is mediocre at best. We currently import our rice (land resources are irrelevant if you don't have the monetary resources to develop). We've got nickel and some copper, and that's about it. What we do have is a resource in common with Singapore and Hong Kong: social capital, a competent and educated workforce. THAT is how Singapore and Hong Kong got rich. Invest in it's people. Successful people make successful companies, which MAKE money for the country.

    Unfortunately unlike the two, we seem to be going by quantity over quality. We take care of all our people, but in doing so we spend less on each one. So we produce an educated populace which is nonetheless inferior to the educated populations of Singapore and Hong Kong. Since social capital is competetive (and not being in a closed system, we can look outside the country for jobs) these better educated Singaporeans will be favored by companies for better jobs, better pay, and better opportunities to invest that money in, or apply their newfound skills back in their own country. We on the other hand, are educated just enough for manning cash registers, flipping burgers and taking care of babies as OFW's.

    Now surely, a high population's got it's benefits? Sure! We can sell our work cheap and outbid those Singaporeans! Cheap labor attracts foreign investment too! Now, assuming we don't mind basing our economy on a model that has to us no chance of skills advancement or exponential growth (cheap labor only producing money now, instead of skilled people producing more money later), we're still not beating China, which has the resources to have both huge numbers of unskilled, extremely cheap labor and a sizable educated population.

    The model's simple, and really is the only way those countries remain afloat.

  11.    Advertisement

Page 31 of 44 FirstFirst ... 212829303132333441 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

 
  1. What's wrong with a networking business?
    By Vertical Horizon in forum Business, Finance & Economics Discussions
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 12-24-2008, 05:52 PM
  2. what's wrong with malambing?
    By rcadism in forum "Love is..."
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 02-12-2007, 09:14 AM
  3. what's wrong with PLDT's DSL?
    By P-Chan in forum Networking & Internet
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 07-27-2006, 03:40 PM
  4. What's wrong with my writer???
    By mcpturbo in forum Computer Hardware
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-26-2006, 05:40 PM
  5. MOVED: what's wrong with PLDT's DSL?
    By vern in forum Websites & Multimedia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-05-2005, 08:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
about us
We are the first Cebu Online Media.

iSTORYA.NET is Cebu's Biggest, Southern Philippines' Most Active, and the Philippines' Strongest Online Community!
follow us
#top