Russian population increasing

[renard_ruse]

Despite perceptions in the west that Russia is dying demographically, in fact, the past five years have seen dramatic improvements to the point that Russia's population is now increasing...

In 2013 Russia’s basic demographic indicators have modestly improved over 2012, which was itself the best year since the early 1990′s. In June-July 2013 the number of births was just a little smaller than the analogous period in 2012, but mortality decreased by an even larger amount. We should be wary of extrapolating too much from limited amount of data, but if the changes in the first half of 2013 hold, Russia will experience a small natural population increase (roughly 0.04 per 1,000 people). As you can see from the following chart, while this is rather modest in comparison to other countries, compared to Russia’s recent past it represents an enormous improvement. You only need to go back to 2006 or 2007 to find a time when Russia’s population was naturally decreasing by almost a million people a year...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markado...n-track-for-modest-natural-population-growth/

 

[renard_ruse]

President Putin has saved Russia from economic, military, and demographic ruin.

Russia is here to stay.

 

[dolf]

Somebody has a crush...

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

One need not look any further than Russian porn.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

One need look no further than Russian porn.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Better.

 

[doctor_insanus]

Somebody has a crush...

Vlad makes him all quivery.

 

[badbabysitter]

President Putin has saved Russia from economic, military, and demographic ruin.

Russia is here to stay.

No, the massive stocks of oil Russia has is saving Russia

just because you don't know something, doesnt mean its not true

 

[neci]

china needs brides.

 

[JudasIscariot]

What a shit thread

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Is that "white" Russia, or Islamic Russia boosting those numbers?

Data released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show the country had 3.96 million births in 2012, an increase of less than 1% from the prior year, according to Bloomberg News. Still, that's the first growth since the depths of the recession in December 2007.

Economists have known for decades that people bring fewer children into the world when they're concerned about their economic future. Of course, the opposite is true, and plenty of evidence makes the case that times are getting better.

We're almost at two per couple.

http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=c7734abc-10f3-4740-bcaf-61dd615886b9

 

[fgarvb1]

Despite perceptions in the west that Russia is dying demographically, in fact, the past five years have seen dramatic improvements to the point that Russia's population is now increasing...

Humph.

They always were a bunch of fuckers.

 

[Ishmael]

Is that "white" Russia, or Islamic Russia boosting those numbers?






We're almost at two per couple.

http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=c7734abc-10f3-4740-bcaf-61dd615886b9

I wonder where the author went to school, or more to the point where these so called 'economists' went to school?

Economists have known for decades that people bring fewer children into the world when they're concerned about their economic future. Of course, the opposite is true, and plenty of evidence makes the case that times are getting better.

It has long been known by anyone that pays any attention to demographics that quite the opposite is true. The most impoverished and war torn nations on the face of the planet have the highest fertility rates. Conversely those nations that have relatively high standards of income show decreasing fertility rates to the point that negative population growth is the norm.

As an example Afghanistan has an astonishing fertility rate of 5.5 children/woman. Russia, contrary to the rosy picture painted in the Forbes article has a fertility rate of 1.61 children/woman. A fertility rate of 2.1 children/woman is required to maintain a stable population, zero population growth. The fertility rates for virtually every nation are available for anyone to look up and with very few exceptions you will find that population growth is inversely proportional to economic well being. And that being the case both of the articles linked fall more in the category of propaganda as opposed to any sort of responsible reporting.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I wonder where the author went to school, or more to the point where these so called 'economists' went to school?



It has long been known by anyone that pays any attention to demographics that quite the opposite is true. The most impoverished and war torn nations on the face of the planet have the highest fertility rates. Conversely those nations that have relatively high standards of income show decreasing fertility rates to the point that negative population growth is the norm.

As an example Afghanistan has an astonishing fertility rate of 5.5 children/woman. Russia, contrary to the rosy picture painted in the Forbes article has a fertility rate of 1.61 children/woman. A fertility rate of 2.1 children/woman is required to maintain a stable population, zero population growth. The fertility rates for virtually every nation are available for anyone to look up and with very few exceptions you will find that population growth is inversely proportional to economic well being. And that being the case both of the articles linked fall more in the category of propaganda as opposed to any sort of responsible reporting.

Ishmael

I agree, I missed that.

Truly and clearly we can see that affluence leads people to focus on themselves and poverty (albeit not absolute total poverty) tends to sex (free) and family (purpose).

 

[mercury14]

I wonder where the author went to school, or more to the point where these so called 'economists' went to school?



It has long been known by anyone that pays any attention to demographics that quite the opposite is true. The most impoverished and war torn nations on the face of the planet have the highest fertility rates. Conversely those nations that have relatively high standards of income show decreasing fertility rates to the point that negative population growth is the norm.

As an example Afghanistan has an astonishing fertility rate of 5.5 children/woman. Russia, contrary to the rosy picture painted in the Forbes article has a fertility rate of 1.61 children/woman. A fertility rate of 2.1 children/woman is required to maintain a stable population, zero population growth. The fertility rates for virtually every nation are available for anyone to look up and with very few exceptions you will find that population growth is inversely proportional to economic well being. And that being the case both of the articles linked fall more in the category of propaganda as opposed to any sort of responsible reporting.

Ishmael

Don't forget to factor in the results of net immigration.

Not sure what ruse's point is in making this thread though.

 

[kbate]

Don't forget to factor in the results of net immigration.

Not sure what ruse's point is in making this thread though.

Probably his point is that we need to bring back the Cold War in order to contain the growing possibility of communist resurgence. Also because building tons of weapons is great for the manufacturing sector and better for the shipyards.

 

[mercury14]

Probably his point is that we need to bring back the Cold War in order to contain the growing possibility of communist resurgence. Also because building tons of weapons is great for the manufacturing sector and better for the shipyards.

His point is that we need to grant amnesty to 11 million illegal Mexicans in compete with Russian growth. Probably.

 

[kbate]

His point is that we need to grant amnesty to 11 million illegal Mexicans in compete with Russian growth. Probably.

Going out on a limb here, but I think you that you are wrong. It is possible that we need to kill 11 million illegal aliens in order to be on par with former Soviet pogroms.

 

[phrodeau]

Great, now there's more people to sell iPads and hamburgers to.

 

[Ishmael]

There are only 3 reasons for nation states to resort to wholesale immigration:

1. Extreme shortages in the domestic labor pool.

2. The need for the availability of men/women to swell the ranks of the military.

3. The need to expand the tax base in order to sustain ill advised entitlement programs.

The first two are not applicable to the current situation in the US, as a matter of fact we have a surplus of labor and/or cannon fodder available.

The third certainly does apply, however I can see no short or long term benefit to the wholesale immigration of individuals who are for the most part unskilled and largely ignorant. Studies have shown time and time again that in the short term they will have a net negative impact on the labor market and in the long term have a net negative impact on entitlement outlays. And the argument that they won't be able to partake of government benefits for 13 years is nothing more than fodder for the terminally ignorant, all that little slice of political theater does is set up a balloon payment situation. And the argument that they'll be paying for 13 years before they can start taking is a big "So what?" The overwhelming majority of them will be paying minimum taxes and will qualify for the EITC. About the only argument that can be made is that in the short term they'll prop up the payroll tax base, but even if they're using bogus SS numbers they're doing that now anyway.

Ishmael

 

[thør]

Russia is here to stay.

The Russians will survive after Putin. They survived the Czars, the Bolsheviks, Stalin, etc. Putin is just another ripple in the river.

 

[renard_ruse]

I wonder where the author went to school, or more to the point where these so called 'economists' went to school?



It has long been known by anyone that pays any attention to demographics that quite the opposite is true. The most impoverished and war torn nations on the face of the planet have the highest fertility rates. Conversely those nations that have relatively high standards of income show decreasing fertility rates to the point that negative population growth is the norm.

As an example Afghanistan has an astonishing fertility rate of 5.5 children/woman. Russia, contrary to the rosy picture painted in the Forbes article has a fertility rate of 1.61 children/woman. A fertility rate of 2.1 children/woman is required to maintain a stable population, zero population growth. The fertility rates for virtually every nation are available for anyone to look up and with very few exceptions you will find that population growth is inversely proportional to economic well being. And that being the case both of the articles linked fall more in the category of propaganda as opposed to any sort of responsible reporting.

Ishmael

President Putin is also allowing a responsible level of immigration which will help make up for the gap between 1.61 and 2.1 in the fertility rate. What the statistics are showing is that Russia's native population growth is nearing that of other populations in Europe. All European countries are facing the same situation, but Russia is getting back to a level similar to that of other European countries.

 

[renard_ruse]

There are only 3 reasons for nation states to resort to wholesale immigration:


2. The need for the availability of men/women to swell the ranks of the military....

Importing women for the military? You've been smoking too much feminist dope. Even with this putting girls in combat fiasco, they will NEVER be forced to combat because its biologically ridiculous. Even Israel gave up on that. A small number will be allowed to volunteer but the majority will NEVER be put into combat even in a situation of total onslaught warfare. You can only pervert nature so far.

War was invented by men, for men. A few girls can crash the party, but that doesn't change biological reality.

 

[jeninflorida]

Russia is coming back.

the have the KGB in power and have the largest oil reserves in the world...

at least Russia doesn't lie to their citizens like the obama does

 

[thør]

Russia is coming back.

the have the KGB in power and have the largest oil reserves in the world...

at least Russia doesn't lie to their citizens like the obama does

And they're very good at spying on their own citizens. The NSA would do well to take a few tips from the Russians on that one.