All y'all need to make more babies

pxdf9i5cmoavkz

What's the story, Ireland? Is it because the Italian and Spanish girls are more attractive? :pac:

An ethnic minority is doing trojan work in that department.

biko

Is there a competition?
Must we have more than 5 million people?

Deebles McBeebles

Ireland is a tiny part of the earth. Population of the earth has dramatically increased. Bigger picture, fair play Ireland.

MarkR

We can't manage what we have. Mo' babies. Mo' problems.

Wanderer78

MarkR wrote:

We can't manage what we have. Mo' babies. Mo' problems.

But it would help the economy grow, and a growing economy is good for us, isn't it?

Dakota Dan

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Ireland is a tiny part of the earth. Population of the earth has dramatically increased. Bigger picture, fair play Ireland.

The population of Europe is dropping and aging. It’s only the poorer countries are increasing population. You’re spending too much time listening to the fear mongers.

Deebles McBeebles

Dakota Dan wrote: »

The population of Europe is dropping and aging. It’s only the poorer countries are increasing population.

Europe might have a bit of cop on then. Unfortunately the earth is bigger than Europe.

200 years ago there were less than one billion humans living on earth. Today, according to UN calculations there are over 7 billion of us.1

Between 1900 and 2000, the increase in world population was three times greater than during the entire previous history of humanity—an increase from 1.5 to 6.1 billion in just 100 years.

VinLieger

Its too late we should have been having more babies 10-20 years ago, now weve a massive gap in how were gonna support the baby boomers in their dying years that its virtually impossible to plug unless we allow much more immigration as thats the only way we can mitigate the last 20 years of people finding it too expensive to have more kids

RobbieTheRobber

Deleted User wrote: »

An ethnic minority is doing trojan work in that department.

Sure shoehorn it in there into any old dicsussion.

Dakota Dan

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Europe might have a bit of cop on then. Unfortunately the earth is bigger than Europe.

200 years ago there were less than one billion humans living on earth. Today, according to UN calculations there are over 7 billion of us.1

Between 1900 and 2000, the increase in world population was three times greater than during the entire previous history of humanity—an increase from 1.5 to 6.1 billion in just 100 years.

Advances in medication people living longer and all that. Still the entire population of the world could fit in the state of Texas with 10 square meters each. The bigger problem is consumerism not the increased population.

Wanderer78

Dakota Dan wrote:

Advances in medication people living longer and all that. Still the entire population of the world could fit in the state of Texas with 10 square meters each. The bigger problem is consumerism not the increased population.

And wealth distribution, amongst other things

28064212

Why do people feel compelled to just make **** up? No OP, Spain and Italy never had a period where they lost close to 40% of their population. That's utter nonsense.

Deebles McBeebles

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Still the entire population of the world could fit in the state of Texas with 10 square meters each.

We should totally try that.

facehugger99

28064212 wrote: »

Why do people feel compelled to just make **** up?

I've checked the rest of the internet and thankfully it appears to be an isolated incidence.

wakka12

Theres no need for the population to be that big, whats the point?
Anyway it was 8 million on the island of ireland not just the republic. In which case the population is now over 6.5 m when you combine present day populations of rep ire and N.Ire

Yes people in developing countries have a lot more babies than we do and our population is stagnating but a very important distinction to keep in mind is that the average indian person or african person will use but a fraction of the resources the average westerner will consume in their lifetime

AllForIt

I've counted the spuds and we don't have enough for 8M souls.

blinding

Get Humping and Pumping !

whisky_galore

8 million, many living in squalor in mud hovels. What a golden age. Yeah let's get it back to 8 million with people living in cardboard boxes because we are not inclined to build.

paulbok

Lachlan Jealous Self-respect wrote: »

What's the story, Ireland? Is it because the Italian and Spanish girls are more attractive? :pac:

4.8m or so in the Republic, 1.8m in the North so over 6.6m on the island currently.
Projected to be around 8m+ by 2050, so I think we are alright.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

The recession and the housing crisis will affect these stats a lot.

There are numerous 30-somethings still living in their parents' homes who will never be able to afford mortgages and families of their own. The 2016 census found over 30,000 working people aged 30 to 34 still living at home -- that's a 26 percent increase over the 2011 figure.

Sky King

Lachlan Jealous Self-respect wrote: »

I'm not sure about the location of some of those mountains...

Kilkenny is looking like the alps in that image and [looks out the window] it's not like that.

jiltloop

Sky King wrote: »

I'm not sure about the location of some of those mountains...

Kilkenny is looking like the alps in that image and [looks out the window] it's not like that.

I'm not sure about some of the "facts" in that image either tbh.

rossie1977

Ireland has seen one of the fastest population growths in the western world since the 1990s.

There was 3.6 million in the Republic in 1994 and 4.8 million today

For reference Scotland's population has only increased by 200,000 in same time period, Germany by less than a million, Sweden by 1 million.

New Zealands population growth has been identical to Ireland 3.6 to roughly 4.8 million. Furthest country on Earth from Ireland and copying us, or is it us copying them?

lalababa

AllForIt wrote: »

I've counted the spuds and we don't have enough for 8M souls.

Yea spud productivity was poor this year with the varied weather conditions.

DEFTLEFTHAND

It's because widescale emigration continued for another 150 yrs after the famine.

Church on Tuesday

28064212 wrote: »

Why do people feel compelled to just make **** up? No OP, Spain and Italy never had a period where they lost close to 40% of their population. That's utter nonsense.

It's Cracked.com, so ****e like this is to be expected.

_Kaiser_

The problem with this idea is that having kids isn't cheap - from nappies, to clothes, to childcare, healthcare etc. It's a significant roadblock considering the very high cost of living generally in this country.

Then there's the small matter of where all these extra people are to live, given that we can't house all we have, and in lots of cases people are living month to month because of high rents and the aforementioned other high costs.

Then there's the point that many working people are delaying starting families because of the points above, but also because of wanting/needing to focus on work (to pay those bills and because being a stay-at-home parent has been devalued in our society).
This means that many people have smaller families or none at all.

The end result of this is that those who are most able to have these larger families that we DO need (the aging population IS a serious concern) are those on welfare, and it could be argued that such people are statistically more likely to produce offspring who will only represent a further drain on society rather than a benefit. The current notion in Europe (and here) that we'll "import" what we need has already been shown to be fundamentally flawed as several threads on AH alone will evidence.

Of course, all the virtue-signalling liberal, feminist, and "I'm not paying for that!" types will have a fit, but the reality is that we need to be encouraging educated, hard-working people to start families earlier and provide social, tax and structural measures to support it. Otherwise we will very possibly end up in a situation where the welfare state is even more prevalent than it already is, and the standard of living, and quality of life generally will be significantly lower than it is now

Bigbagofcans

Contraception, man. Which the 'works at full time mad b*stard' and 'full time Mommy' brigade have an aversion to.

Gimme A Pound

Lachlan Jealous Self-respect wrote: »

What's the story, Ireland?

/wonders why the OP cares enough to start a thread and put stock in spurious figures...

Lachlan Jealous Self-respect wrote:

Is it because the Italian and Spanish girls are more attractive? :pac:

Aaah... bingo!

4068ac1elhodqr

Sounds like some EU pushed policy to assist with expected future migration trends.
In past decades, population growth was seen as essential to a growing economy.

However, this next 4th industrial reveloution will feature:
automation, digitisation & robotics, to make many humans redundant assets.

It's already been widely reported that circa 35-50% of current roles won't exist by 2030.
There are plenty of (inconclusive) trials and preperations (of UBI) to deal with this future event.

Another new report this week: https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/1207/1015723-digital-technology/
...found that one in three jobs in Ireland, is at high risk of being affected by digitalisation over the next five years.

So rather than trying to get as many crammed in (yes, some skilled but also many unskilled economic migration with low-literacy/education),
focus instead on the education and re-training of what we already have.

The upskilling for this new gig-economy won't be a quick conversion course of sorts,
instead it will be 'constant' education and dynamic re-skilling within a global economy.

Deebles McBeebles

A silly thread with a silly message. I like it!

Hammer89

I touched on this in another thread which I can't be bothered to find, but the decline is birth rate is relevant to the increase in obese males. I don't know how much of it is attriubutable to the rise in obesity, but it's absolutely a factor.

When you put on a lot of weight, you see an increase in mass in the pubic area, which subsequently engulfs your penis. The extent depends on weight and genetics, but if you're morbidly obese in a big way then there's just no way that your knob won't be affected.

Not only can obesity deprive you of libido and the want to have sex, but mentally it's a tough thing for a man to effectively lose his identity as a man if half of his penis is no longer accessible. This has a ripple effect. It's going to affect your desire to start relationships, and one-night stands are a no-go anymore, so less babies. I guess obesity affects a woman's chances of conception as well, so that's also something to consider.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

28064212 wrote: »

Why do people feel compelled to just make **** up? No OP, Spain and Italy never had a period where they lost close to 40% of their population. That's utter nonsense.

It said regions. Given the mass emigration from Southern Italy, I wouldn't be surprised if that were true.

oceanman

Hammer89 wrote: »

I touched on this in another thread which I can't be bothered to find, but the decline is birth rate is relevant to the increase in obese males. I don't know how much of it is attriubutable to the rise in obesity, but it's absolutely a factor.

When you put on a lot of weight, you see an increase in mass in the pubic area, which subsequently engulfs your penis. The extent depends on weight and genetics, but if you're morbidly obese in a big way then there's just no way that your knob won't be affected.

Not only can obesity deprive you of libido and the want to have sex, but mentally it's a tough thing for a man to effectively lose his identity as a man if half of his penis is no longer accessible. This has a ripple effect. It's going to affect your desire to start relationships, and one-night stands are a no-go anymore, so less babies. I guess obesity affects a woman's chances of conception as well, so that's also something to consider.

jesus ive heard it all now...

Hammer89

oceanman wrote: »

jesus ive heard it all now...

Which part do you disagree with?

WMP

The last thing the world needs is more babies. There are way too many of us already. Bill Burr sums it up very well. '7 billion people taking a sh1t every day that ends up in a river.' It's mass sterilization, if anything, that we need.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EytFPaPM8fw

oceanman

Hammer89 wrote: »

Which part do you disagree with?

most of it...I know plenty of obese people both male and female, they don't seem to have any problems producing children..

biko

Wanderer78 wrote: »

But it would help the economy grow, and a growing economy is good for us, isn't it?

Sounds like a pyramid scheme disregarding more mouths to feed, etc

However, we do need more babies to handle the ageing population.

BattleCorp

VinLieger wrote: »

Its too late we should have been having more babies 10-20 years ago, now weve a massive gap in how were gonna support the baby boomers in their dying years

There'll be no supporting people in their dying years. They'll be given a glass of whiskey and a pistol and told to do the decent thing.

And when they are no more, off into the recycling machine with them.

riffmongous