Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark
.
.
.
The "boomer" generation had the luxury of a better economy and thus more plentiful, better-paying jobs, and cheaper, more easily attained luxury items such as cars, TVs, houses, etc. Birth control and changing attitudes brought birth rates down, thus allowing people choices that the previous generations would not have dreamed of.
So is this actually a trend among the masses in all of Canada (and the rest of the developed nations), or just the wishes of a small group of skyscraper/urban planning enthusiasts on websites such as this? I do get the sense that in general the younger generations have rebelled against the conspicuous consumptions of the previous generations and want to have less impact on their planet through waste, etc, and also that it is becoming harder for the younger generations to purchase homes of their own due to unstable job prospects and increasing costs.
A very complex issue, but I'd be interested in reading the opinions of others here.
If this is too far off topic, please disregard.
|
The following excerpt from this link -
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=35 - gives a good explanation of the current population growth trends in Canada and the rest of the developed world. I think it loosely applies to this thread. The peninsula will need many more dwellings in order to recover its past population because of smaller family sizes.
Quote:
.
.
.
...Over the past 50 years, the total fertility rate has dropped significantly in Canada. From a high of 3.93 children per woman in 1959, the TFR underwent a sharp decline in the 1960s and then continued to drop until it reached a historic low of 1.49 children per woman in 2000. After that, the rate increased to reach 1.6 children per woman in 2011. The highest TFR value seen in Canada in 2011 was recorded in Nunavut (3.0). In contrast, British Columbia, in 2011, had the lowest value, namely 1.4 children per woman.
The replacement fertility rate, or average number of children that the women of one generation would need to have to result - solely through natural increase - in a generation of the same size, is estimated at 2.1 children per woman for developed countries like Canada. However, it should be noted that very few developed countries reach this level, as indicated by the fact that in 2010, no G8 member had a total fertility rate reaching the replacement rate.
|
Most of the world population growth is occurring in "less developed regions" as discussed in this UN document -
http://www.un.org/esa/population/pub...p2300final.pdf. In my opinion, it won't be sustainable in the less developed regions because it will be self-regulated by lack of food and starvation (such as what occurred in China before leaders introduced the one-child policy).