|
Any guesses? Also, look at puny Europe compared to mighty America:   SeekOtherCandidate posted:europe, a subcontinental region defined by two plants, neither of which are native to it Yet another way that South America owns dumb eurofags
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Rah! posted:Any guesses? Population in the red area is equal to the blue?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
DuckHuntDog posted:Population in the red area is equal to the blue? Yep, I guess that was a pretty easy one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Rah! posted:Also, look at puny Europe compared to mighty America: Let's compare!        
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
I guess the politically loaded part is not dividing the US up by counties.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:Let's compare! Man everytime i see the sunshine comparison and think about how much Germany put into solar, I laugh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Sunlight map legend is garbage. So is population distribution by age. Also, what is HSR in last map?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
kalstrams posted:Also, what is HSR in last map? High Speed Rail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Man everytime i see the sunshine comparison and think about how much Germany put into solar, I laugh. I like to call this one "why the movie industry started in California".png
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Vorpal Cat posted:I like to call this one "why the movie industry started in California".png Well, it started in New York but then Edison chased them away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Well, it started in New York but then Edison chased them away. Not so much "Edison" as "the legal system and patent infringement lawsuits."
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:Let's compare! Get outta here Lithuania and Louisiana (what is it with L?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Get outta here Lithuania and Louisiana (what is it with L?) Louisiana in 2006 wasn't exactly the best place for obvious reasons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Louisiana in 2006 wasn't exactly the best place for obvious reasons. Wikipedia tells me that Louisana's homicide rate was still above 10 per 100,000 in 2013 and was 13 in 2003. Article looking at some of the problems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Can Europeans not afford to reproduce anymore?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
Jaramin posted:Can Europeans not afford to reproduce anymore? France has a high population growth because it subsidizes motherhood very heavily, so this may be more true than you think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Jaramin posted:Can Europeans not afford to reproduce anymore?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
easier way would be to stop sex ed and make abortions illegal
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:easier way would be to stop sex ed and make abortions illegal
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
You die young in Wallonia .
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:You die young in Wallonia . So it's not all bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Florida, the Egypt of America
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
"Moscow-St.Petersburg has a high speed rail so let's color whole Russia blue"
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
kikkelivelho posted:Florida, the Egypt of America lol looks about right
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 11:24
|
|
|
kikkelivelho posted:Florida, the Egypt of America Jesus gently caress. I hate (half of) my ancestors. Who was the loving tribesman that thought this north would be just a great spot to set down roots? gently caress you!
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Yeah, I'm pretty sure less sucky economic policies could at the very least make all the yellow countries on the map have a fertility rate just above the replacement rate, even without any changes that are specifically natalist. They really don't need that much of a bump (Scandinavia in particular) to do so, so it'd largely be about creating an environment where young people feel more economically secure and thus capable of providing for any children earlier. You'd probably need that AND some massive natalist policies in most of the rest of Europe though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 11:48
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That assumes that additional people is a desirable thing and that natalism is moral in any kind of way. Guavanaut posted:I'm all for less sucky economic policies, but we shouldn't be trying to corral people into breeding when they don't want to. If anything we need more public airtime given to antinatalist policies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 12:20
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Jesus gently caress. Unless you're Canadian, in which case I can't help you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That assumes that additional people is a desirable thing and that natalism is moral in any kind of way. Which I guess it is if you're one of the rich and want additional wage-slaves/consumers, or you're a nationalist and want additional Correct Type of Whites. I'm all for less sucky economic policies, but we shouldn't be trying to corral people into breeding when they don't want to. If anything we need more public airtime given to antinatalist policies. How in the hell is it simultaneously wrong to encourage people to start families, yet morally imperative to discourage them? Just let them decide on their own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:You die young in Wallonia . I love how all these regions with "purer air" etc... and yet they have lower life expectancy than the Parisian region  kikkelivelho posted:Florida, the Egypt of America Detroit beneath the waves
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
It's not a big deal, most developed countries are accepting lots of young immigrants to maintain their population. One big exception is Japan, they have a very low birth rate and take in few immigrants, and they are already feeling the demographic effects. The world has enough people, there is no reason to increase birth rate for the sake of increasing birth rate. Nations should have social programs to support parents and children because it improves society as a whole, not to encourage people to have kids.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:How in the hell is it simultaneously wrong to encourage people to start families, yet morally imperative to discourage them? Just let them decide on their own. It's entirely consistent to say Thing A is immoral, Anti-Thing A is moral. Guavanaut is just working from the postulate there are too many people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:How in the hell is it simultaneously wrong to encourage people to start families, yet morally imperative to discourage them? Just let them decide on their own. And sure, we could let people just decide on their own, but people take their cues from society and from the things that they have access to (both economically and legally). I don't believe in using economic coercion for antinatal policies, like British Chancellor George Osborne wanting to cap child benefits to two children and abolish free school meals, because firstly it's harmful to existing children and secondly it doesn't work. If anything it's the more economically developed countries that have reduced their birthrates the most, placing families in poverty doesn't stop them having kids, and I believe that all existing children should be well cared for. That leaves us with the social encouragement factor. People are bombarded with pro-natalist material all the time from the media, to the point where it becomes the default baseline. That's not just letting people decide on their own, but that can be changed without coercing individual families. Then there's legal and economical factors, for instance, here's a politically loaded map:  We can reduce birth rates across the board by increasing global women's rights, access to sex-ed, and access to contraceptive methods. That sounds like a win-win to me. (And then prevent public officials coming out with stupid nationalist poo poo like "one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country" from coming anywhere near a microphone.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Jesus gently caress. Are you one of those tedious people who likes warmth? I get tetchy when it goes over 21 C.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Jesus gently caress. The original eastern population were elk hunters and the later western group (the Comb Ceramic culture) hunted seals. They picked Finland because it's a good place for animals to live in.   Gene map
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:It's not a big deal, most developed countries are accepting lots of young immigrants to maintain their population. One big exception is Japan, they have a very low birth rate and take in few immigrants, and they are already feeling the demographic effects. The world has enough people, there is no reason to increase birth rate for the sake of increasing birth rate. Nations should have social programs to support parents and children because it improves society as a whole, not to encourage people to have kids.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
Not to mention the fact that you can't just keep topping off the population forever. Birth rates are leveling off in the third-world as well. It's also pretty lovely to just expect immigrants to show up and work so that you can enjoy your retirement, instead of making the sacrifices to raise kids to carry the torch and support you. Pro-natalist policies don't force anyone to have kids. They help people do something that most of them want to anyway, but often can't for economic reasons. Guavanaut posted:That leaves us with the social encouragement factor. People are bombarded with pro-natalist material all the time from the media, to the point where it becomes the default baseline. That's not just letting people decide on their own, but that can be changed without coercing individual families. Call me a  believer, but self-propagation is a pretty drat innate seeing as we are biological organisms. If anything, people have their natalist tendencies driven out of them because a capitalist, consumer-driven society has taught us that material possessions are more important.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Hopefully America bails us out again 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Man everytime i see the sunshine comparison and think about how much Germany put into solar, I laugh. Why? Solar would be better with more sunshine, but modern solar panels pay for themselves (both in money and in CO2 emitted in their production). If you want to laugh, look at our politicians phasing out nuclear power. And look at that map and think about how little the USA has put into solar, then laugh. Or cry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Torrannor posted:Why? Solar would be better with more sunshine, but modern solar panels pay for themselves (both in money and in CO2 emitted in their production). If you want to laugh, look at our politicians phasing out nuclear power.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 17:12
|
|