tal,
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

This means they will distribute this wealth to those who have more children, to infiltrators.”

Well, you’re the government in power. If you think that childrearing incentives are too high, I don’t see as how you can blame someone else for that.

Muslims may be having more kids in India – it’s certainly true, at least in the US, that religion is a strong predictor of number of children. Let’s look for numbers.

googles

ideasforindia.in/…/hindu-muslim-fertility-differe…

Differential fertility between Hindus and Muslims – the two major religious groups in India – has always fuelled controversy among academicians and policymakers. According to NFHS-5, TFR among Hindus was estimated to be 1.9, while among Muslims it was 2.4.

That’s a difference, though not massive compared to the ones I’ve seen between some US religions; the gap between atheists and the Amish is quite large.

Let me ask a question: on what grounds does one say that Muslims are having too many, rather than Hindus not enough? India has below-replacement-rate TFR today, albeit not far below, and it is continuing to fall. India’s population is still growing due to inertia from past births, from the childbearing cohort being larger then in previous generations, but not expected to do so for much longer. As things stand, the UN expects India’s population to peak in about 2063. Muslims aren’t keeping Hindus from having children. If one feels – and perhaps one does not – that a steady state for population is at least a sustainable target, then a target should be about 2.1…which is right in the midpoint between India’s Hindus and India’s Muslims, based on the above article. It seems to me that one might just-as-readily apportion “blame” equally, and given that TFR is continuing to drop and that pulling up is probably going to be desirable, perhaps more to those who are having fewer children.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • world@lemmy.world
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines