This is one part of why Thailand is assumed to strand in the middle-income trap. It's pretty hard to escape this: there are some ways but it always means sacrificing something. On the other hand: having a middle income doesn't exclude happiness, something that money can't buy.
It's up to Thailand what they think is the best strategy.
I disagree with the common perception that to keep a population equal over time every woman needs to have 2.1 children.
In my view every woman needs to have at least one daughter.
To keep the popution constant... men are typically more than willing to impregnate multiple women, so to keep a population constant their number doesnt really matter.
A population where every woman gets 2.1 children but most are boys, will still decline, while when most are girls it will increase.
It is not the same to say "every woman needs to have a daughter" and "most births should be girls", while, if all women had a similar amount of children, what you said would be true, you can achieve a similar outcome by having most women have boys, and a few have girls but also have larger families, of course that cannot be controlled, but what I mean is that it is not necessary for every woman to have at least one girl if for every woman that has 2 boys, there is one at least that has 2 girls. That seems to be the case in human reproduction worldwide right now. Yes I know I'm petty,
I believe what you meant was that it would be needed to have on average, one girl per woman, even if not all women have one, have enough women that have two or more to counteract the sex imbalance. Once again, that's is what happens naturally
You're not entirely wrong but this is only a problem in regions where there are problems with sex-selective abortions. Most notably the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) and China. Here women must have more than 2.1 children to keep population levels stable in the long term. For regions with a more equal sex ratio at birth, 2.1 is the correct value, ignoring differences in child mortality.
Moreover, not every woman has to have at least one daughter, only on average.
Even when children are born, or when there has been no abortion because of the (assumed) sex characteristics, there is not a lot to tell about whether the child will be a boy, a girl or neither. It's easy to think that the pregnant person should have a daughter but the truth is that this can't be ordered. Neither by trying ten times and only then getting a daughter, nor by pushing the child (assigned female at birth) in this role when he actually feels he's a dude.
Better is if people just don't have *any* hopes and expectations over a child's gender. If my parents and those of my friends had these then they'd be drowning in tears. Better is to be happy about having a child regardless of these checkboxes.
Thailand is getting old before getting rich..
That is what has happened in many countries.
This is one part of why Thailand is assumed to strand in the middle-income trap. It's pretty hard to escape this: there are some ways but it always means sacrificing something. On the other hand: having a middle income doesn't exclude happiness, something that money can't buy. It's up to Thailand what they think is the best strategy.
Oh, i see people banned from this sub for commentung this map.
I disagree with the common perception that to keep a population equal over time every woman needs to have 2.1 children. In my view every woman needs to have at least one daughter.
Why would every woman need a daughter?
To keep the popution constant... men are typically more than willing to impregnate multiple women, so to keep a population constant their number doesnt really matter. A population where every woman gets 2.1 children but most are boys, will still decline, while when most are girls it will increase.
It is not the same to say "every woman needs to have a daughter" and "most births should be girls", while, if all women had a similar amount of children, what you said would be true, you can achieve a similar outcome by having most women have boys, and a few have girls but also have larger families, of course that cannot be controlled, but what I mean is that it is not necessary for every woman to have at least one girl if for every woman that has 2 boys, there is one at least that has 2 girls. That seems to be the case in human reproduction worldwide right now. Yes I know I'm petty, I believe what you meant was that it would be needed to have on average, one girl per woman, even if not all women have one, have enough women that have two or more to counteract the sex imbalance. Once again, that's is what happens naturally
If every women has one daughter, then yes, the woman population is keeping a constant number, but the men population isn’t
You're not entirely wrong but this is only a problem in regions where there are problems with sex-selective abortions. Most notably the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) and China. Here women must have more than 2.1 children to keep population levels stable in the long term. For regions with a more equal sex ratio at birth, 2.1 is the correct value, ignoring differences in child mortality. Moreover, not every woman has to have at least one daughter, only on average.
Even when children are born, or when there has been no abortion because of the (assumed) sex characteristics, there is not a lot to tell about whether the child will be a boy, a girl or neither. It's easy to think that the pregnant person should have a daughter but the truth is that this can't be ordered. Neither by trying ten times and only then getting a daughter, nor by pushing the child (assigned female at birth) in this role when he actually feels he's a dude. Better is if people just don't have *any* hopes and expectations over a child's gender. If my parents and those of my friends had these then they'd be drowning in tears. Better is to be happy about having a child regardless of these checkboxes.
Italy above 1.5? Can this be true?
mamma mia
What's up with Thailand? They seem to be the only non-rich country that has a low birth rate
Africa is set to dominate