Topic: Population: Economic strength or weakness - page 11. (Read 1682 times)

In a way population has an impact regarding the economic status of a country. However, it mostly comes down to the way government officials handles the overpopulation or underpopulation state of a nation. For example, countries like China and India shows that despite their known overpopulated country they are still able to boost their economic status, whereas other countries that are reaching peek overpopulation are simultaneously facing the problem of poverty.

Western developed countries suffer from underpopulation and reduced births in general, as newer generations tend to have fewer children than older ones used to, which is going to hurt their economies in the long run due to the increase in the aging population. Underdeveloped countries in Africa or Asia, on the other hand, suffer from overpopulation, which isn't helping their state and is happening due to a lack of education and protective measures. Even though India and China, which previous users mentioned, are supposedly two of the largest superpowers, the majority of their people are suffering from poverty and poor living conditions. There needs to be some balance in terms of birth control. The earth is overpopulated, but at the same time, the Western world is suffering from underpopulation and a decreasing number of births.

If a state pursues the right economic policy, it does not matter how much population it has. Of course, the larger the population, the greater the economic and military potential. If the population is small, such a state can be swallowed up by a larger one at any time. Although Switzerland is small, its economic potential is quite large

Access to education and free/fair markets are what's required to sustain an economy on a fundamental level. Government corruption usually affects the latter. African countries are overpopulated relative to their GDP which accentuates poverty. Given the lack of education, there's no economic activity. India had problems with this too, but they were able to grow their economy to overcome their population growth by educating their population and having a capitalistic economy with emphasis of free enterprise.

Population reduction (not overpopulation) is catastrophic: https://apnews.com/article/japan-birth-rate-record-low-population-aging-ade0c8a5bb52442f4365db1597530ee4

Japan will eventually run out of healthy young workers to subsidize the older and retired workers. You need population growth in order for an economy to survive, just not overpopulation of an educated populace.

If the country has a very large population, then it can create its own separate economic zone.  To do this, it needs to develop its industry and agriculture as much as possible, as well as stimulate domestic demand.  Over time, it will become a regional power (and possibly a leading world power).  

A country with a small population should enter, on mutually beneficial terms, into an economic zone centered on a country with a large population.  Such a country should fit into the chain of cooperation with other countries.  

No country can exist alone.  

At the same time, countries with large populations have a chance to become the center of the economic zone.  

Countries with small populations have no such chance.

The more the population does not mean the stronger the economy of a country, for example Nigeria and Singapore, you can see that Nigeria is 1.284 times bigger than Singapore, but at an economic level Singapore is much higher than Nigeria. From this we can conclude that with population density, it does not guarantee that a country is big in terms of economy.
But Nigeria's advantage compared to Singapore is the availability of a workforce and young people who are ready to defend the country and develop its economy. Even though in the future technology such as Artificial Intelligence will become more massive and the military will become more sophisticated, the need for young people is still needed so that a country is not filled with the majority of "old" people.

Moreover, third countries will not always be "modern slaves" of developed countries, of course they also have the desire to become developed countries. And now many countries have woken up from their long sleep and are trying to fight against the world order that has long been established by America and Europe. Countries in Asia have started to rise up and advance their economies to become developed countries, the point is that it only takes time for them to get there and of course developed countries don't want that to happen because it will have a massive impact on their countries and they don't want to be on par with these "third" countries.

China and India supports your position also. For them, their population is a blessing and not a curse. They have used their population for an advantage rather than disadvantage like African countries. Population should be an advantage if properly planned because countries need market where they can export their manufactured products, so such is an advantage to countries who have large population as they have already existing market for themselves and others, trade is important. There are other advantages, like human resources apart from welfare, they are also involved as expatriate which generate foreign income to them.

That's right, if population rates were an indicator of economic well-being, China might deny it.
My government has some good policies and programs that I think will bring about significant economic changes during the 5 year period of leadership. Unfortunately, corruption is a default problem of the governance system that is difficult to get rid of, the effects of policies are not distributed effectively. While there is big financing in every policy that requires increasing the national debt, from here you know how the story goes.

I noticed that Japan also seems to be trying to improve its human resource management system which they themselves are in danger of becoming extinct. Some cities there find it difficult to find permanent residents, the declining birth rate is due to the perception of marriage that is being implemented recently. Switching to India with the largest population in the world also does not always seem ideal, the government finds it difficult to strike a balance between economic distribution plus the special structure which is an obstacle.

Here, both high and low population, even if the government is able to balance it with the resources it has, it will not be a big problem. Asian and African countries are in the spotlight because their government systems are corrupt, access to the job industry prioritizes foreign workers, increased unemployment while the dependents per head of family are above 2 or 3 or even more.

Still in the Asian region we have a family planning program where one family is enough for 2 children, the aim is to slow down the unstable population rate. Even though the program is not mandatory for all citizens to follow, so far it can be said to be a temporary solution that is quite ideal.

The dilema of a growing population, yes. This problem has many layers. Its as if we've taken the standard Malthusian idea and blindly applied it to all countries without taking into account their unique circumstances. However, blaming overpopulation for economic stagnation or stagnation for population growth is a reductionist view.

There may be underlying issues with governance and resource management rather than population density that need to be addressed first. Utilzing one's workforce efficiently is the key. It would appear that poor leadership and unfair allocation of resources are the main culprits in the economic woes experienced by developing countries.

Its worth exploring the alternative viewpoint, though. In a very real way, industrialized countries need the labor force of overpopulated ones. Reduced population growth in these countries could lead to a lack of workers in industrialized nations. Its like a chain reaction, but on a global scale. We need to pause and deliberate about equitable, long-term population strategies that take into account the effects on both the domestic and international levels

When we talking of over population or over populated nation those people are somehow facing difficulty in terms of work and job opportunities. Most times it could be very hard for the government of the nation to satisfy everyone's need due to the over population whereby causing lack of employment, we can use Chinese as an example.

Sometimes population are being controlled by the government and also they creates job opportunities, but what I understand mostly is that any nation that is creative and not depending on the government for working opportunity or to get employed in white-collar job. With the much population the inhabitants creates jobs for them selves without waiting for the government just as you have said earlier. Lemme use Nigeria as a case study, there is a much population in our country Nigeria and there's no employment opportunities but what her citizens does is to create work and chances for themselves by so doing they have one way or the other contributed to the strength and growth of the nation.

So alternatively, population doesn't hider the growth of a nation except such the inhabitants are too weak and are solely depending on the government for works. With the rate at which some countries are being populated they must not wait for a government or their country rather they should think of what they could do for their country to grow economically and scientifically.

Agreed. China and India both use a form of government that is centralized to the leader since both this country use parliament and communist that allows the government to use all the country resources without giving much consideration what's the opinion of everyone unlike democracy which sometimes slow the process of implementing law because there's always a different party to opposed on every law because of their self interest motives.

I really like democracy if there's no corrupt politicians but on the current status of most democratic country. I think communism is very good to improve the economy of a developing country.

You have drawn an interesting perspective of relationship between population and prosperity of the people living in any specific country. It highlights an important  aspect of how the number of people in a nation can impact their overall prosperity and economic success.

China is a good example for debate on this topic, as it is most populous country with persistent highest GDP growth rate. The key factor to understand this phenomenon  lies in the wisdom and visionary approach of the leadership, effectively harnessing its population to enhance agricultural and industrial production that results in overall well being of the general public.

For the price of Bitcoin, the more people the better.

That is an interesting question. How many people are too many people and how few people are too few for an optimal economy, given the fact that we have only planet earth to live our lives on? People think we can terraform mars or populate the moon but that those are all dreams. People would rather live underground before having to live in radioactive deserts with no atmosphere. So we definitely have a limited amount of room for human beings. Some say 10 billion but thats a crass underestimate, if you ask me. I am sure we can easily get to a hundred billion people, but everyone would have living conditions like the poorest people in China. So, they would not have a very good life. So economically, that would be everyone being driven by a need to survive, not thrive. The difference between rich and poor would be hopelessly, extremely far apart. Basically like in the movie "In Time".

Although anyone with a single Bitcoin would be a Trillionaire. So feel free to save Bitcoin ahead of time and your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandchildren can be rich. If nobody spends or sells the BTC before...

Population are not a reason for the poverty or progress of countries, as there is China and India with a population density of more than 2 billion people. However, one of the two countries is significantly ahead of the other, despite the similar circumstances between them.
Resource management, politics, population management, economic plans, and the approach taken by governments is what transforms a people to be productive, for example in South Korea, and a people suffering from high levels of poverty, as is the case in North Korea.

I am not a supporter of the conspiracy theory or that there are countries that deliberately impoverish countries to get cheap labor, but cheap labor is in itself an economic force if it is properly exploited.

I think it's difficult to give a concrete answer in this case, it's not that there is no solution at all. Because a country must have a far-reaching mission to make its people more advanced and able to compete on various opportunities at the international level. If you look at the comparison between developed countries having problems with population numbers, developing countries have problems with employment. At first glance the problem looks simple, but it will be more complex if dissected objectively and thoroughly.

I can say that developed countries can take advantage of technological advances in the form of robots to help with daily work or office work. But the emphasis here is that developed countries want their citizens to increase birth rates, they do not depend on the supply of labor from developing countries. I think the problem of developing countries becoming developed countries is not a problem for them. It should be noted that this is only my personal opinion and of course each has its own opinion and solution.

Population growth may be bad for nature and circumstances, but good for business. I mean in general population growth means more households, more customers for all their needs from small to large and to own a house or apartment and other needs and also an increase in population means an increase in the demand for goods and services.
However, if uncontrolled population growth will lead to poverty and unemployment, excessive exploitation of natural resources, overcrowded cities, pollution and so on.
but it all depends on the government because it's not an easy job for them but they have to be able to handle it from top to bottom.

A part of economic situation is dependent on the over-population but governmental norms and their involvement in upbringing of the economy also plays a vital role in the economy of a country. China is one under one such situation where the country being one of the most populated countries of the world but on the other hand, the government is helpful in building various businesses and reducing corruption thereby creating multiple jobs for the Chinese citizens.

Most of the popular software applications of the United States are banned in China and they have been having their own alternative to tackle the shortcomings and through this approach they are cutting their ties with US in terms of data breach and creating a more powerful economy to become a possible candidate for the super-power. But India TBH is highly dependent on US in terms of software and through this approach, companies such as Meta & Google have been secretly learning about various happenings in the country.

On top of that, India has a mix of rich and poor population where one extreme is intelligent and literate while the other extreme is entirely the opposite being the poorest people on the planet with sub par knowledge. While comparing this situation with another populated country like Nigeria, majority of the population is not really literate and they can never contribute to the growing workforce of the first world nations. Countries such as United States have taken this opportunity and they have been using countries like India to fulfil their workforce needs by paying 1/10 of the pay scales.

Poverty in African countries/ Indian states has been associated with poor political instability and corruption rather than overpopulation. In India, the tax collected is being utilized by politicians and they are indeed getting richer and richer thereby making the citizens poorer. The same situation prevails in Africa which boasts one of the greatest natural reserves on the planet. To tackle such instances, the ruling party should be able to reduce the corruption, create opportunities for businesses to thrive and develop so that the citizens would be coming up with various alternatives thereby decreasing the domination and data theft being conducted by first world countries.

I think the two thing in population which is overpopulation and under population has pros and cons depends on the country. Well the country I know that have an underpopulation situation is Japan, we all know that Japan is advanced in technologies and considered has many intelligent people living in the country. Maybe these people wouldn't even bother to have a child due to they know the consequences of having a child which is actually good. The thing is under population could be a bad thing for the country itself as there's no even new generation coming to take the place of retiring people.

While in overpopulation case is just simply many people in needs of supply which is ain't enough to provide to all people due to huge amount of number to those in need. Plus the economic rate as there's a lot of unemployed people coming every year after they graduated. Well it might be an advantage to have a lot of labors or workers but the supply in your country wouldn't even be enough to support all of those people. Just have a proper family planning to educate every people about it. Population is one of the major factor that could affect the country.

I was also going to mention China and India, the two most populous countries in the world, but they also have economies that outperform many other countries. The population is not the main determinant of a country's economy. To be more precise, the economy will depend entirely on the direction and policies of the government, who decide everything. If it is a government that is not corrupt and always seeks to improve its people's lives, then that country's economy will surely grow no matter how large or small the population is.