4.8 billion Africans by 2100

There won't be 4.8 billion Africans by 2100. First, the population growth assumptions are wrong. Recent improvements in stopping HIV, malaria and other preventable diseases plus a relatively peaceful period compared to the days of Burundi genocide and vicious civil wars in Congo, Angola, etc. have caused rapid population growth. But in almost every region in Africa, the population is just one failed rainy season away from famine. So, long before the population comes near 4.8 billion, there will be massive famine that will keep the population in check.

Of course, the only threat overpopulation in African is to the west is from migration. Africans are still incredibly poor and will not be competing with the west for resource.

The key to African population is family planning and ending the pervasive African patriarchy. In the 1980s, the birth rate was about 7.5 for Ethiopian women. Since then, there has been a substantial women's liberation movement in Ethiopia that has made family planning services available to many women. The birth rate has since dropped to 4.2 births per woman. The same thing has happened in Rawanda where the birthrate was over 8 and is now down to just over 4. It is a challenge in areas that are either heavily Muslim or still have significant influence of conservative Christian missionaries. The more difficult side of that problem is African patriarchy. The size of your family is a big deal for men in Africa. Men expect women to raise the children and see no problem with having 6, 8, or 10 children.

Robo. wrote:

Allen53 wrote:

The racism found here is disturbing.

A better question for consideration is, "Why are wealthy Westerners destroying the planet by using so many resources?"

And:

"Why do these wealthy Westerners (aka "developed countries) feel that they are entitled to steal resources from the so-called Third World."

As for the implicit Malthusian theme in your post it is false to conflate simple population numbers with ecological outcomes. For example the amount of C02 emissions of a well-heeled family of 4 in The Hamptons dwarfs that of an extended family of _______ (you pick the number) in virtually all parts of Africa.

Not racism, greed. You horribly excessive yanks consume so much that the world population could only reach 1.5 billion based on the average resources each of you consume. Let that sink in for a minute.

It's not "greed" per se- it's systemic and institutional.

I certainly don't consume very much nor care to- however I recognize that the system in the US (capitalism) is responsible for the patterns of consumption and fosters a culture that highlights and rewards greed.

But yes it's hard not to be appalled by gluttonous US consumption.

We’re all Africans; humans are from Africa.

Rose wrote:

Podunk U. wrote:

And Africa has been overrun by white Christian and Arab Muslim invaders for a thousand years. Cry me a river, white boy.

And we should continue to live in those barbaric, lawless ways now? I suppose when an Islamic terrorist blows a bunch of white Christians up you just see that as fair game and revenge for the Catholic crusades.

See past your paradigm. I'm obviously not in favor of radical Islam. My comment implied as much, but you were unwilling to think beyond a certain binary.

Instead of just accepting the premise of this projection and arguing about the hypothetical consequences, let’s challenge the premise itself. If you think about the potential economic and educational development that could occur in these countries over the next 80 years, along with the recent historical trend of policy creation to curb overpopulation (China’s birth planning program is the obvious example, but we could also potentially see policies which allow for increased access to contraceptives and abortions), you can make the argument that 4.8 billion is an overestimate that does not carefully consider all of the relevant variables.

nagoya wrote:

quehoares wrote:

I don’t get it - what are the unintended consequences?

Don't be obtuse.

To name a few:

Extreme overpopulation and overcrowding (Lagos, Nigeria is projected to be the largest city in 50 years with a population of 90 million), sanitation issues, education and healthcare issues (how are we going to provide services to 5 billion people in an already undeveloped region?). Africa is far behind the rest of the world in terms of development. More people means their social problems will put enormous pressure on future development (And the rest of the world to get them up to speeD).

How is overpopulation an unintended consequence of Gates work?

Agree, Gates and all that he represents is the lowest of the low- why people idolize this opportunist speaks to how Americans are brainwashed into adoring wealth and largely kept ignorant about the myths of the "great entrepreneur."

People in this country are kept in the dark as to the basics of how capital is social wealth produced by society and then privately appropriated - a very few people are taking the gains produced by everyone else.

Yeah, this is a bunch of nonsense. Nothing I said was racist, implictly or explicitly. Try harder next time.

quehoares wrote:

How is overpopulation an unintended consequence of Gates work?

It's pretty obvious - the Gates foundation has been the number one catalyst for driving healthcare improvements agricultural development in the region. Specifically, post-natal care and AIDS. Infant mortality rates are waaay down but the culture of having 6-7 kids remains. So BAM! From 1 billion to 5 billion people in 2 generations.

nagoya wrote:

quehoares wrote:

How is overpopulation an unintended consequence of Gates work?

It's pretty obvious - the Gates foundation has been the number one catalyst for driving healthcare improvements agricultural development in the region. Specifically, post-natal care and AIDS. Infant mortality rates are waaay down but the culture of having 6-7 kids remains. So BAM! From 1 billion to 5 billion people in 2 generations.

That's what they want us to think. The goal of Gates is depopulation, like he has said many times.

nagoya wrote:

quehoares wrote:

How is overpopulation an unintended consequence of Gates work?

It's pretty obvious - the Gates foundation has been the number one catalyst for driving healthcare improvements agricultural development in the region. Specifically, post-natal care and AIDS. Infant mortality rates are waaay down but the culture of having 6-7 kids remains. So BAM! From 1 billion to 5 billion people in 2 generations.

Sounds very much like an intended consequence, then.

that's what they want us to think wrote:

nagoya wrote:

It's pretty obvious - the Gates foundation has been the number one catalyst for driving healthcare improvements agricultural development in the region. Specifically, post-natal care and AIDS. Infant mortality rates are waaay down but the culture of having 6-7 kids remains. So BAM! From 1 billion to 5 billion people in 2 generations.

That's what they want us to think. The goal of Gates is depopulation, like he has said many times.

"In his deconstruction of Bill Gates’ charitable agenda, F. William Engdahl writes, “Vaccinating a child who then goes to drink feces-polluted river water is hardly healthy in any respect. But of course cleaning up the water and sewage systems of Africa would revolutionize the health conditions of the Continent.”[9] Far more effective would be the Foundation donating its billions to improve sanitation and hygiene, and provide nutrition to the 2.6 billion people who have none, for increasing clean water sources so 900 million global residents can have access to drinkable water (now at 1 in 3 Africans). Instead, the Foundation could be funding thousands of health clinics focusing on the chronic illnesses these populations suffer from most.[10] This is simply common sense. “Bad water,” says the Stockholm International Water Institute’s director, Anders Bentell, “kills more people than HIV, malaria and war together.” Spending billions of dollars to develop new vaccines and launch monumental efforts to vaccinate African children plagued with diverse infectious illnesses promises to be a fruitless enterprise while these populations continue to live in squalor …"

"As a keynote speaker at the TED 2010 conference, Gates laid out his rationale for an international effort towards global depopulation. He said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [projected to 9 billion people by 2050] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.“ New vaccines for depopulation? …

"An early anti-fertility trial using human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a hormone essential for pregnancy, in vaccines was completed in 1988 in India through a Rockefeller collaboration with India’s National Institute of Immunology. The Rockefeller annual report declared success. Yet according to Betsy Hartman, Director of Hampshire College’s Population and Development Program, “although one vaccine has been tested on only 180 women in India, it is being billed there as safe, devoid of any side effects and completely reversible.” …

"Perhaps the most thorough documented investigation into the covert use of anti-fertility vaccines is a 1995 report, “Are New Vaccines Laced with Birth Control Drugs,” compiled by J.A. Miller, a correspondent for the pro-life missionary movement Human Life International. In the early 1990s, the WHO, supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, the World Bank, the UN Development Programme, and the US’s National Institutes of Health undertook stealth anti-fertility initiatives under the disguise of tetanus vaccination programs. These vaccines were administered to unsuspecting and poor communities in Mexico, Nicaragua and the Philippines …"

"So what are the lessons to be learned from this? The wealthiest elite on the planet are rarely questioned about the correctness of their actions and schemes. As long as one of these individuals say they are giving huge sums of money to a cause to end disease and suffering, we are not suppose to probe further. Rather, in the case of mainstream media, such people are to be worshiped as saviors. The oligarchic elite are so well interconnected on multiple boards of directors, clubs for the rich and powerful, think tanks, and among the high ranks of elected legislators and politicians that it is difficult to have an open and honest debate on the merits of their actions and spending. When a Ted Turner says we should reduce the world’s population by more than half, and Bill Gates suggests a 15 percent reduction, do we really understand they are following a form of eugenic genocide?’"

but yeah ol gates is really out there trying to help them ol brownies....dudes a rich racist. but dont think too highly of yourselves whitey.....gates is all about monsanto and GMO's, and here in the US we eat the sh*t out of that stuff

looks like his (and the other bilderberg members) is to depopulate by

- SJW white guilt, become sterilized by eating the monsanto GMO foods, that also cause cancer

- "vaccinations" of brown/black 3 world countries making them sterile

thus in 1 generation of super low birth rates from 3rd world countries, and in the west where its 1 child basically anyways, no child....and dying of cancer from toxic food grown by monsanto and boom

but but but he said he is trying to save the planet...by killing BILLIONS

nagoya wrote:

quehoares wrote:

How is overpopulation an unintended consequence of Gates work?

It's pretty obvious - the Gates foundation has been the number one catalyst for driving healthcare improvements agricultural development in the region. Specifically, post-natal care and AIDS. Infant mortality rates are waaay down but the culture of having 6-7 kids remains. So BAM! From 1 billion to 5 billion people in 2 generations.

Ah the great white colonist- entrepreneur/philanthropist coming to save the day for those poor oversexed black folk in the Sub-Saharan murk- gee where have I heard this before?

Yes, of course Gates is improving agriculture in the cradle of civilization where much of agricultural originated. Hard to imagine how anyone survived pre-colonization- doh.

Gates and his agricultural mercenaries are operating on the principle of self-enrichment through monopolization of food production for needy Africans- needy due to the legacy of colonialism. Gates is a major stock holder in the companies pimping GMO's- cui bono? And plenty of the money his foundation spends generates more wealth for him. He is also a huge supporter of the Eugenics movement.

But of course, you're not a racist.

nagoya wrote:

That's the official projection. Is the world prepared for this? Bill Gates has been a huge factor in the explosive growth in Africa, but the law of unintended consequence might apply here. Meanwhile, developed countries will see population declines.

What does that mean for the world as a whole?

There is your racism right there. You imply that Gates Foundation's attempts to vaccinate and provide medications for the world's poorest (and darkest skinned) people is some sort of mistake.

What you fail to understand is that ALL countries have gone through periods of explosive population growth AND miserable living conditions as they transitioned from a pre industrial to post industrial state. Check out the demographic transition model for national populations. It's only AFTER a country has industrialized and brought down mortality rates that birth rates begin to fall.

So, by bringing down mortality rates, Gates foundation is actually accelerating the move toward cesation of population growth in the developing world. Check out this excellent TED talk.

+1

nagoya wrote:

That's the official projection. Is the world prepared for this? Bill Gates has been a huge factor in the explosive growth in Africa, but the law of unintended consequence might apply here. Meanwhile, developed countries will see population declines.

What does that mean for the world as a whole?

Bill Gates? Try all the right wing Christians who have tried to block every attempt at family planning in Africa (and elsewhere).

Banana Bread wrote:

nagoya wrote:

That's the official projection. Is the world prepared for this? Bill Gates has been a huge factor in the explosive growth in Africa, but the law of unintended consequence might apply here. Meanwhile, developed countries will see population declines.

What does that mean for the world as a whole?

Coevette is going to go crazy.

I haven't looked at this thread until now.

It's true though that the average person really doesn't understand the global demographic predictions for this century, nor does he likely understand what they mean (and if he does he can't express them for fear of being slandered a racist).

The population of just Kenya and Ethiopia combined will likely be at least ten times the entire population of Europe by the end of this century, maybe sooner. If it wasn't for (African immigration), the population of Germany would halve every 30 years or so. It's even worse for Italy and Spain.

Personally, I don't give a $hit. This is because, just as most people are too dumb to understand future demographic realities, they're also too dumb to understand the inevitability that transhumanism will render the concept of race completely devoid of meaning within a few decades.

Exactly - everyone just f*ck to beige.

Coevett wrote:

Banana Bread wrote:

Coevette is going to go crazy.

The population of just Kenya and Ethiopia combined will likely be at least ten times the entire population of Europe by the end of this century, maybe sooner. If it wasn't for (African immigration), the population of Germany would halve every 30 years or so. It's even worse for Italy and Spain.

Another blatant lie by a vile Brit, even though I wish Kenyans would have more kids because we’ll need that human resource to propel ourselves to the next level. But if, indeed, Kenya’s population were to double, what is it to you? I must have missed the boatloads of Kenyan refugees currently flooding Europe and your declining self-immolating country.