2010 Census: U.S. Has More Dogs Than Kids
Die Seite kann nicht angezeigt werden, weil:
- Ein veraltetes Lesezeichen
- Eine Suchmaschine hat einen veralteten Index der Website
- Eine falsche Adresse
- Kein Zugriff auf diese Seite!
- Die angefragte Quelle wurde nicht gefunden!
- Während der Anfrage ist ein Fehler aufgetreten!
Bitte eine der folgenden Seiten ausprobieren:
Bei Problemen ist der Administrator dieser Website zuständig..
Beitrag nicht gefunden
USA Today Analysis of the 2010 U.S. census recently revealed that there are now more households with dogs (43 million) than children.
The study also found that the share of the U.S. population under age 18 dropped in 95 percent of U.S. counties since 2000.
Hooray!! Woot!! Hallelujah!!
Understand, it is not my intention to offend those of you who have children with this joy. Many people dream of raising a family all their lives, and most have the means and intelligence to do so competently and confidently.
But many do not.
My joy at this statistic is merely a result of my belief that this world’s natural resources cannot continue to support humans at the (ahem) level of comfort to which we have become accustomed.
In a 2008 speech at Kansas State University, General Michael Hayden, director of the Central Intelligece Agency, stated his analysts now believe that the most worrying trend in the world is not terrorism but demographics (Care2).
“By mid-century, the best estimates point to a world population of more than 9 billion,” Hayden said. “Most of that growth will occur in countries least able to sustain it, a situation that will likely fuel instability and extremism, both in those areas and beyond.”
In my opinion, one of the best things you can do for the future of the planet is to limit the number of new humans you bring into it today. It’s far easier than trying to convince an entire generation that they should recycle, ditch their cars, and offset their air travel–even though their predecessors never bothered to.
Although the mere mention of limiting family size as a way to reduce global warming is likely to raise the hackles of individuals on both sides of the aisle, some environmentalists believe that there is no other alternative, and are proudly embracing a life of voluntary childlessness as GINKs: green inclinations, no kids.
I’m proud to admit that at this time in my life, I count myself among the GINKs.
But don’t worry, if you’re not willing (or able) to commit to this adults-only lifestyle, you can still help to lower birth rates by working to raise the standard of living for women worldwide.
Many studies have shown that countries where women have less access to health care and education have the highest birth rates. Just last year the U.N. Population Fund stated that the battle against global warming could be helped by making free condoms and family planning advice more widely available.
What do you think about the dropping birthrate? Is it merely a symptom of a shaky economy, or evidence in a shift in consciousness about population impact on the planet?
Image Credit: Flickr Creative Commons – jamescridlandby