FN statement's (infra) makes mockery of both sense and reality. It also demonstrates a distinct lack of understanding of the issues involved - even if it is made in a manner which can be classified as flippant.
In a country like Ireland, even affluent families ( at least until a decade ago) had a 'football team' of children. Affordability was not the pivotal factor. Instead there were three factors which led to these large families (1) Non availability of contraception - Sorry, abstinence did not work ...it rarely does. (2) High infant mortality (3) Lack of entertainment. I agree with the point Mervyn has made. For whatever reason, the countries in the upper Northern hemisphere are (actually) suffering from low birth rates (read low viable pregnancy rates). These are not from - not-wanting, not-trying to have children or not being able to afford children. (Please see adoption attempts - the individual 'not wanting to be pregnant and lose figure or job seniority' situation among career and other women having been noted) Immigration (or having more children) is the only way these countries will survive as the present senior population ....ages further. This explains Canada's immigration policy. It wants young and highly qualified individuals to produce enough to support the ones who have left or will soon leave the work force (read Taxable population) jc 2009/5/12 Frederick [FN] Noronha wrote When outside Canada (or the affluent world), it's easy to afford two or more kids. Once you get to the zone of affluence, one gets too-affluent to afford them! One of the ironies of life! FN 2009/5/12 Mervyn Lobo wrote: work force can grow is by immigration. To all those people who want to have more than two children, I say, "Welcome to Canada."
