Re:Industrial ammonia emits more CO2 than other chemical-mak...
by vorpalhex on Saturday January 22, 2022 @02:32AM
(#30034531)
> low birth rates are stigmatized as they are correlated with lower GDP
You have this backwards
Re:Industrial ammonia emits more CO2 than other chemical-mak...
by shroompasta on Sunday January 23, 2022 @12:29PM
(#30048123)
the case in point was obviously Japan which fell from the third largest economy to the sixth largest in the past two decades.
Japan wants to be like China and the US, not like Qatar or Switzerland.
GDP is not GDP/Capita
I believe you have this backwards.
Re:Industrial ammonia emits more CO2 than other chemical-mak...
by dragonwriter on Saturday January 22, 2022 @03:37AM
(#30034855)
> I'm just demoralized that low birth rates are stigmatized as they are correlated with lower GDP
Low birth rates are correlated with higher GDP/capita; concerns are raised about them because they have a (decades delayed) effect of population aging producing a drop in the ratio of workers to those two old and infirm to work.
Re:Industrial ammonia emits more CO2 than other chemical-mak...
by Chris2048 on Saturday January 22, 2022 @07:09AM
(#30035973)
The real problem is "living behind your means" at a generational level by putting debt in future generations. This is a problem with democracy, which incentivises short term gains over longer term. The solution is democracies that aren't allowed to accumulate long term debt over agreed upon levels.
Re:Industrial ammonia emits more CO2 than other chemical-mak...
by adgjlsfhk1 on Saturday January 22, 2022 @03:20AM
(#30034778)
the hard part about shrinking populations is that they cause your population to get older which has a bunch of annoying economic side effects (like fewer people working)
I'm just demoralized that low birth rates are stigmatized as they are correlated with lower GDP, when low birth rates are somewhat of a godsend in times like these.
Then nations with low birth rates scramble to find ways to up the birth rates despite understanding the C02 cost.
It's ironic, really.