Economics

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by faraz_siddiqui, Jan 23, 2005.

Loading...
  1. faraz_siddiqui

    faraz_siddiqui New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Karachi, Pakistan
    Hi,
    would anybody tell me this question?
    "Is population growth good or bad for a country's economic welfare?"

    Waiting for ur replies..
    Always keep ur standards high..and keep a winning attitude..
    and believe in The Best.! b/c if u believe in The Best!, u get Best of the Best..!
    Take good good care of urself..and others 2 near U.
    Allah Hafiz..Cheers..and..finally..Tata
     
  2. JLV

    JLV New Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Industrial Engineer
    Location:
    Holland
    I´ll tell you that question.

    "Is population growth good or bad for a country's economic welfare?"

    :D
     
  3. Jack Tracey

    Jack Tracey New Member

    Messages:
    4,093
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Psychotherapist
    Location:
    Connecticut
    I'm no economist but I'm pretty sure the answer is, "It depends."
    Jack
    (sorry for seeming to be a wiseass but your question is too vague to allow for a better answer (at least from me).
     
  4. Myoptimism

    Myoptimism New Member

    Messages:
    877
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    UT
    Negative population growth is almost always bad.
    Otherwise, as Jack said, "it depends".

    Why do you ask?

    Tony
     
  5. Bill Hurd

    Bill Hurd New Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Okie
    I'm no economist either, but I do teach economics at a small university. That question is so vague that I would only use it to get a discussion going. There certainly is no yes/no or right/wrong answer to the question.

    Bill
     
  6. edowave

    edowave Active Member

    Messages:
    1,766
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NJ
    Depends if you are a Malthusian or not.

    Sounds like somebody is trying to get us to do their homework. :D
     
  7. Orson

    Orson New Member

    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Grad student: hist & env sci/ investor/ env consul
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado, USA
    Indeed.
    From my study of population economics, population is either neutral or only slightly positive in its effect on growth. (Neutral is the safe consensus if you're doing an Excelsior exam.)

    Anti-Mathusian Julian L. simon was quite certain that this is a positive growth factor: places without big or few cities like Mongolia or sub-Saharan Africa are not experiencing much real growth - even negative. Whereas the most populous places - Hong Kong, the Netherlands, classically - now even urban India and China, places like Shanghai - tend to lead in growth.

    Simon's arresting essays on education and growth, or libraries and patents and growth, are collected in
    "Population and Development in Poor Countries" (1992, Princeton). They are worth a stimulating look; he'll shake you out of your prejudices and have you thinking - hard!

    -Orson
     
  8. Orson

    Orson New Member

    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Grad student: hist & env sci/ investor/ env consul
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado, USA
    Indeed.
    From my study of population economics, population is either neutral or only slightly positive in its effect on growth. (Neutral is the safe consensus if you're doing an Excelsior exam.)

    Anti-Mathusian Julian L. simon was quite certain that this is a positive growth factor: places without big or few cities like Mongolia or sub-Saharan Africa are not experiencing much real growth - even negative. Whereas the most populous places - Hong Kong, the Netherlands, classically - now even urban India and China, places like Shanghai - tend to lead in growth.

    Simon's arresting essays on education and growth, or libraries and patents and growth, are collected in
    "Population and Development in Poor Countries" (1992, Princeton). They are worth a stimulating look; he'll shake you out of your prejudices and have you thinking - hard!

    -Orson
     
  9. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,391
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    perpetual grad student; sometime ranch hand; somet
    Location:
    Ottawa County, Ohio
    Well, let's see here. It depends. Every country has certain resources in the form of labor, land, and capital, and hopefully there are some with the entrepreneurial skills to tie all these together. Now, such as it is, naked and helpless we come into this world, and for this cause doth the good Lord give us parental units to be our protectors until such time as we can fend for ourselves. But once we become adults, we should become productive societal units and hopefully find a way to produce more than we consume. However, according to Malthus, population increases geometrically while food supply increases only arithmetically. Thusly do war, famine, pestilence, and moral restraint enter the picture. Or, more to the point, if everybody had enough brains to make only that number of children that they can actually afford to support, then war, famine, and pestilence would be rendered unnecessary as population checks. In other words, if your additional population has good employable skills (or could be taught such) and if there is the necessary land (whether agricultural or mineral lands or lands for factories and office buildings) to put these new additions to the population to work and if there is the necessary financing to get businesses started and/or expanding, then your additional population is a blessing. On the other hand, if your country is too broke to feed itself as things are, you probably don't want an expanding population right now.
     

Share This Page