@fmf saidWhatever.
The post of mine that this 'banter' of yours is supposedly a response to is about the link between poverty and high rates of population growth and not about "greed and corruption".
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf
Did you happen to go to this link and read any of it?
@secondson saidAs I said earlier on this thread, I have been fully aware of the content of Agenda 21 since it came out 26 years ago, including Chapter 5.
Whatever.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf
Did you happen to go to this link and read any of it?
@secondson saidIt wisely identifies the need to reduce the rate of population growth in the fight against poverty.
Fully aware? So what do you make of it?
The current birth rate in Indonesia is about 2.3 births per woman; in 1992 it was about 3.0. Its target for 2025 is 2.1 births per woman.
Just as an indicator, the rate was 5.6 in 1972 and 4.7 in 1982.
Poverty in Indonesia has more or less been halved since 1992, during which time de-facto military dictatorship has been cast aside, multiparty democracy has blossomed, the middle class has increased exponentially as has access to improving education and health care services and to the court system.
@secondson saidWhat do you make of "medullah's theories" about demography as they pertain to the 4th biggest country in the world?
I seriously doubt you can make an objective discourse, as evidenced by your many objections relative to medullah's theories
@fmf saidAre you saying that as a result of the implementation of the policies outlined in agenda 21 the health and welfare of some people in a few areas of the world has improved, including political stability, by reducing the rate of population growth?
It wisely identifies the need to reduce the rate of population growth in the fight against poverty.
The current birth rate in Indonesia is about 2.3 births per woman; in 1992 it was about 3.0. Its target for 2025 is 2.1 births per woman.
Just as an indicator, the rate was 5.6 in 1972 and 4.7 in 1982.
Poverty in Indonesia has more or less been halved since 1992, durin ...[text shortened]... exponentially as has access to improving education and health care services and to the court system.
@fmf saidNot sure. Can you describe a specific theory that you may be taking exception to? Or at least point me in the direction of a particular post medullah made giving his theories?
What do you make of "medullah's theories" about demography as they pertain to the 4th biggest country in the world?
@secondson saidJust go and read the thread for yourself or ask him to explain his ideas to you.
Not sure. Can you describe a specific theory that you may be taking exception to? Or at least point me in the direction of a particular post medullah made giving his theories?
@secondson saidReducing the rate of population growth - a policy which obviously predates the 1992 - has been one of the keys to fighting poverty around the world over the last few decades.
Are you saying that as a result of the implementation of the policies outlined in agenda 21 the health and welfare of some people in a few areas of the world has improved, including political stability, by reducing the rate of population growth?
@FMF
I found this very interesting site while googling.
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
Rising life expectancy around the world
"In the pre-modern, poor world life expectancy was around 30 years in all regions of the world. The estimates by historian James Riley shown here suggest that there was some variation, between different world regions, but in all world regions life expectancy was well below 40 years.5
The historical estimates are associated with a considerable uncertainty – it is worth reading the work by Riley to understand the limitations and strengths of the estimates.6 But of course these uncertainties are much smaller than the very large increase in life expectancy since then.
Infectious diseases raged in all parts of the world and as we show in our entry on child mortality almost half of all children died before they reached adulthood. And those that survived often died soon after. Without public health measures and without effective medicines diseases were killing most people at a very young age.
This was the reality for humanity until very recently. Life expectancy in each region of the world stayed fairly stable for most of history until humanity started to make progress against poor health just a few generations ago. Epidemiologists refer to this period in which life expectancy began to increase substantially as the “health transition”."
I believe the data found at the link I provided above demonstrates that improvements in the health and welfare of the world's population has a history going back far before "agenda 21" was created.
I think the existence of the U.N. is primarily for the purpose of the grabbing up of power and material resources under a global one world governing superstructure, and the dissemination of misinformation. Namely the attribution of the increase of health and welfare and political stability in the world to the implementation of agenda 21.
"Life expectancy has increased rapidly since the Age of Enlightenment. In the early 19th century, life expectancy started to increase in the early industrialized countries while it stayed low in the rest of the world. This led to a very high inequality in how health was distributed across the world. Good health in the rich countries and persistently bad health in those countries that remained poor. Over the last decades this global inequality decreased. No country in the world has a lower life expectancy than the countries with the highest life expectancy in 1800. Many countries that not long ago were suffering from bad health are catching up rapidly.
Since 1900 the global average life expectancy has more than doubled and is now above 70 years. The inequality of life expectancy is still very large across and within countries. in 2019 the country with the lowest life expectancy is the Central African Republic with 53 years, in Japan life expectancy is 30 years longer."
@secondson saidI don't think it is. The U.N. and many of its policies urge international cooperation but not a "one world government". I think the purpose of the U.N. can be more or less extrapolated from the U.N. Charter and from things like The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I think the existence of the U.N. is primarily for the purpose of the grabbing up of power and material resources under a global one world governing superstructure, and the dissemination of misinformation.
@fmf saidThanks for what? Is that a dodge?
Thanks.
Attributing the increase in the health and welfare of the world's population to the policies of the U.N. is a ruse. The U.N.'s existence is solely for the purpose of creating a centralized governing control of the material wealth and political power over the population of the planet.
The U.N. is siphoning off billions of dollars to implement courts and militaristic forces to undermine the self governance of sovereign nations, and its policies are geared to the eventual seizing of all power and resources with the goal of establishing a one world order.
All the while ignoring the unraveling moral fabric of the world.
@secondson saidI don't agree.
The U.N.'s existence is solely for the purpose of creating a centralized governing control of the material wealth and political power over the population of the planet.