|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> demographics /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1351802448 Message started by WebsterMark on 11/01/12 at 13:40:47 |
|
Title: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/01/12 at 13:40:47 from the CDC website: Among all women in the United States (including those as young as 10 and as old as 54), the birth rate declined from 64.1 per 100,000 in 2010 to 63.2 per 100,000 in 2011. Among women 10 to 14 years old, it held steady at 0.4 per 100,000. Among women 15-19 years old, it declined from 34.2 to 31.3. Among women 20-24 years old, it declined from 90.0 to 85.3. Among women 25-29, it declined from 108.3 to 107.2. And among women 30-34 years old, it held steady at 96.5. However, among women 35-39 years old, it increased from 45.9 per 100,000 to 47.2. Among women 40-44, it increased from 10.2 to 10.3. And among women from 45-54, it held steady at 0.7 per 100,000. In 2011, the birth rate for women aged 20–24 years was 85.3 births per 1,000 women, the lowest rate ever recorded for the United States, 5 percent lower than in 2010 this is interesting stuff. why would birth rates decline so much for women 20-24 to the lowest rate ever? I have my ideas, but so we can have a break from presidential politics and because i'm stuck in an iowa hotel room, any one else have ideas to share? |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by srinath on 11/01/12 at 13:55:27 Career options ... I also believe in this time frame girls out numbered boys in graduation rates. Medical advances - women think they can freeze the eggs or think there is super duper fertility stuff. College debt ... I have of late heard a lot of stories with women running up college debt at an alarming rate. My theory on that is that women tend to not make up their minds for a lot longer than men, and in college that costs you. My theories/observations. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Starlifter on 11/01/12 at 15:24:18 Women are much more educated today earning degrees in science, business, math, engineering, and so pursuing other careers formally open only to males. The days of that old "keep em' barefoot & pregnant" meme are over. Ms.Starlifter and I elected not to have children as she was working on her master's degree and later pursuing her career goals. Parenting is a choice. A vocation for people who wish to pursue that lifestyle, find it rewarding, and have the aptitude and skills to do it well. ...and then there is always the over-population issue to consider. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Serowbot on 11/01/12 at 16:43:06 I blame cell phones... ...then again,.. I blame cell phones for everything... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/02/12 at 06:08:19 I think the answers lies somewhere in the direct correlation between religion and birthrate and to a smaller degree, economics and birthrate. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by srinath on 11/02/12 at 06:21:05 I would blame sky rocketing college costs ... accompanied with the garbage "I'm going to college" ads. Seriously, everyone is going to have a college degree ... and I'll make $100 an hour being a motorcycle mechanic. Its supply and demand ... if everyone had a college degree, college degrees would be worthless ... (I am not talking about stuff like engineering or math or physics degrees where you actually research or do design and production etc etc ... those subjects are difficult, and sadly except to the select handful will always be. Most of the "But I'm going to college" crowd is going to study english or history or social service or other easy subjects - like art appreciation or the ever famous CSI" ... and if you notice, that ad is squarely targeted @ women/girls. Honestly I know someone who makes $14 an hour 10 years after getting a degree in social work and still has 35k outstanding debt. He's a dude, but I know of a a few women racking up good big bills in debt studying nearly useless subjects. Seriously ... college debt is skyrocketing and women are the largest and fastest growing group. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/02/12 at 07:36:32 When the goobs got in the business of financing college education, costs started up.& Booy they took Off. I went on the GI Bill for a year, The prices were pretty reasonable still. Not any more. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by srinath on 11/02/12 at 07:42:13 Not just the govt. Its the whole loan system ... free $$$ if you go to college ... your college experience means you will have dorms like a 5 star hotel, have new football stadiums ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/03/12 at 06:03:50 Fact is no one can work their way thru college anymore. My daughter got a crap load of scholarships for Kansas and it's still painful. At least, the cost of books is starting to come down. that was pouring fuel on the fire. absolute gouging by college professors.... but, does cost of college explain the drop off in birth rates? Maybe part of it. I'm going with the increase of secularism as the #1 reason, economics including college as #2. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Starlifter on 11/03/12 at 13:03:52 Secularism eh? <snip> Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. In one sense, secularism may assert the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and the right to freedom from governmental imposition of religion upon the people within a state that is neutral on matters of belief. Oh Yeah, lets replace democracy with a theocracy...like oh say Iran, that'll get those women to pop out babies to get the stats up. ;D Yes, and college too. lets Keep em dumb and pregnant. ::) |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/03/12 at 14:52:11 Oh Yeah, lets replace democracy with a theocracy who said anything about a theocracy? I didn't. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Starlifter on 11/03/12 at 19:20:09 Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions. Ergo if secularism (separation of church and state) is a problem, it suggests the alternative which is a theocratic system of government. Presumable a Christian one. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/03/12 at 20:19:15 No that doesn't follow completely. I'm just saying as religion has less influence over the culture, there are ramifications. One of those is a lower birthrate. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Starlifter on 11/03/12 at 21:38:09 I don't follow this line of reasoning. How does religion or the lack thereof influence the birthrate? |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/04/12 at 05:15:13 There’s a simple answer and complex answer. The simple answer is many religions seriously preach the ‘go forth and multiply’ concept and reject birth control/abortion. See Roman Catholics, Islam and many others. The traditional view of marriage is still strong particularly in many rural areas of this country for example. Look at a county map of the election Tuesday and you’ll see the vast, vast majority of counties will be Republican. These are the same counties where religious influence is strong. Their birthrates don’t always match urban rates because of the rates of inner cities. The more complex answer is the opposite of love is not hate, but rather selfishness. Atheism at its heart is based in selfishness which goes against the sacrifices required for child rearing. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by srinath on 11/05/12 at 08:11:46 Sadly I doubt much of this webster. I have noticed that aethists are just about the most ethical people who I meet. I actually think they want to propogate little aethists as much as catholics and others. The Most devout are just about the least ethical. I rob you in the name of god is what they do a lot of times. However they are required by their religion to have little unethical religiously devout ones. I am however thinking a lot of the younger generation is realising the world is over populated though and hence wont add to that global burden. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/05/12 at 09:04:52 That atheist have a lower birthrate is not in dispute. The cause of that fact is like all demographics; even the simplest explanation has complicated reasons behind it. I happen to believe the selfishness inherent in atheism manifest itself in lower birthrates. I'm sure there are other reasons such as higher education and perhaps an emphasis on career. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Serowbot on 11/05/12 at 09:56:58 Atheists know, that this life will be the only one they get... they make their lifestyle choices based on this,.. and choose marriage and children based on the life they want to live, rather than what any religion tells them... They don't have children by accident,.. and they don't have children they can't afford or care for... and they don't create a burden on society by not planning their families... Webster,... why must you find the most negative term to label any choice that isn't yours?... Selfish?... I think you are selfish... You don't allow for any choices other than yours... All people should marry,... be heterosexual,.. have children,.. be Christian,.. be conservative,.. I suppose we should all look like you and dress like you, and listen to the same music as you... And women should not be able to choose based on their own beliefs,... they should be forced to follow yours... ... and only people that conform to your beliefs should be allowed to marry... Get over yourself... you're not my god... and neither is your God... I will selfishly live my own life,.. and you can selfishly live yours... All decisions are selfish... If I choose to give a bum $5.00 or donate to St. Judes... it is selfish.. because I will do it to make my world better... If I choose to pick up garbage people have dropped in the park,.. I do it because I will feel better about the park being cleaner... If I choose to help an old person carry groceries,.. it's because I'm making the world I'd like to live in... So, all acts are selfish... There is no such thing as an unselfish act... But,...there are good acts, and bad ones... A good act will benefit others... a bad act, will hurt someone... Do you ever consider this?... I don't see evidence of it in your posts... Maybe you should consult your god and see what he says about it... |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by WebsterMark on 11/05/12 at 10:26:57 I will selfishly live my own life,.. and you can selfishly live yours... i'm not asking you to do otherwise, i was just pointing something out. I think you are selfish... You don't allow for any choices other than yours... and i'm not making choices for anyone. And women should not be able to choose based on their own beliefs never said that. you are putting words in my mouth. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Starlifter on 11/05/12 at 19:02:15 Formal Logic/Sentential Logic/Validity <snip> Validity for arguments, or logical consequence, is the central notion driving the intuitions on which we build a logic. We want to know whether our arguments are good arguments, that is, whether they represent good reasoning. We want to know whether the premises of an argument constitute good reason to believe the conclusion. Validity is one essential feature of a good argument. It is not the only essential feature. A valid argument with at least one false premise is useless. Validity is the truth-preserving feature. It does not tell us that the conclusion is true, only that the logical features of the argument are such that, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is. A valid argument with true premises is sound. There are other less formal features that a good argument needs. Just because the premises are true does not mean that they are believed, that we have any reason to believe them, or that we could collect evidence for them. It should also be noted that validity only applies to certain types of arguments, particularly deductive arguments. Deductive arguments are intended to be valid. The archetypical example for a deductive argument is a mathematical proof. Inductive arguments, of which scientific arguments provide the archetypical example, are not intended to be valid. The truth of the premises are not intended to guarantee that the conclusion is true. Rather, the truth of the premises are intended to make the truth of the conclusion highly probably or likely. In science, we do not intend to offer mathematical proofs. Rather, we gather evidence. |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by LostArtist on 11/05/12 at 21:10:22 2F2E35323D28345C0 wrote:
dorms like a 5 star hotel?? yeah, that'll never happen, the stadium thing is true though ;) |
|
Title: Re: demographics Post by Serowbot on 11/05/12 at 23:53:32 0E2D31360330362B3136420 wrote:
Sports is god in college... I stole a now famous basketball star's girlfriend in college... Pretty scary romance,... visions of David and Goliath.... :-?... I lost an opportunity at a good job over that one... (touring as sports videographer)... Worth it though... ;D... |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |