« Back to story "Recession blows over the Midwest"

Story Comments

Posted by: crespi 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

100%
crespi5 months, 2 weeks ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

They also have some of the lowest POPULATION.

No one LIVES there...

Does that means we SHOULD START HAVING SMALLER FAMILIES commensurate with our nation's resources?

Yes.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
2 Replies

loading ...
- 100%
  chevydog5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Yes, people do live there. But their big cities are more humanly sized than most on the East and West coasts.
  
  In response to your last rheotorical question, probably yes. But resources can be measured many ways using many different criteria. And if I remember correctly, we reached zero population growth maybe 30 years ago; the only thing that has kept our population growing is immigration. That's good in some ways, not so good in some.
  
  I'm not sure we would have the political will (or even want to have it) to match families with resources. China's one family- one child policy has not been a particular success.
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  1 Reply
  
  loading ...
  - fiftynineComment removed: Hard Banned