From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 16:41:24 MDT
Damien Sullivan wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 06:57:40PM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
>
>
>
>>That's extremely interesting. So a corollary would be that urban
>>populations have a lower birth rate than rural populations. Do
>>
>>
>
>I'd thought urban non-replacement was connected to higher infant mortality in
>the filthy crowded areas.
>
>-xx- Damien X-)
>
>
>
That's one of the thing's that's been blamed. But it hasn't always been
true. *LOTS* of things have been blamed, many of which sound eminently
reasonable. What's the cause now? As population moves from the
countryside to the city, entire countries are having to turn to
importing foreigners from more rural countries. Well, I'm heard of lots
of explanations. Polution with new and strange chemicals, etc. But
this is an effect that is long standing. It's really strange that there
is a different explanation for every occasion.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 16:48:34 MDT