Thank u

the article conveys is that if a vast majority i.e. over 75% of the popoulation is working then the country will grow faster

Really? Where? I’d be hard pressed to name even one country where 75% of the population is working. Can you?

I have never said that large population by itself leads to prosperity. Sauvik’s work (and I concur with his views) basically states that people are the main creators of wealth. So population (large or small) causes prosperity. If you see a country with a large population but poor, then there’s something else causing that poverty.

BTW, employment opportunity growth sounds like one more tired cliché from the socialist eras. If we have a free market, we wouldn’t be talking about it. We’d be seeing it happen.

india had a bigger population than us and european countries for the better part of its independent existence and where is the prosperity due to population.

free market will definitly ensure faster growth & in case of india superfast growth but that will happen even with a low population. singapore and the noradic countries score high on free market ratings have low population and are prosperous

India is currently running at a eco deficit of 0.3 contributed directly to by the size of the population. As the economy grows, the per capita foot print will only continue to grow. I see this as a serious problem given that we are already running at a deficit.

Their first error is that they regard resources as something that exist ab initio. There is great play made of the fact that there is only so much arable land to go around, and that it is this land that tends to get built on. This whole idea is of course completely ignorant. Resources are created by human beings via technology. As arable means “suitable for ploughing” it is obvious that before we invented the plough and agriculture some 10,000 years ago there was no such thing as “arable land.” There was just “land.”

Plus, please do not post “naked” urls. There is a formatting toolbar on the comment box. Click on the “link” button.

There is a difference between
(a) the US and Japan have a lower paercent of their population as working now compared to 20 years back and
(b) the US and Japan had 75% of their population as working.

(a) I agree with. (b) has no foundation in fact.

India’s prosperity has been hampered by various other factors. Read the pdf booklet by Sauvik Chakraverti.

I fully agree that freer markets ensure faster growth. Note, to your Singapore I can add Vietnam. Small population — quite poor. So lets focus on freeing our markets and ignore the “population” part.

To the avg. consumer a wafer thin silicon chip looks innocent and non-polluting - but in reality the materials that go into its production and its by-products are many times more.

This is where ecological foot print comes in. You can’t afford to think only about the production of the chip but you also have to think about where the resources (sometimes direct and at other time indirect) come from and also what happens to the by-products - currently drums and drums of highly toxic water which are stored because it is to expensive to treat safely - also the reason why chip manufacturers move thier operations to developing countries becase they quite happily dump the water into our water table - un acceptable in the US.

So if I were you I’d more closely investigate the concept of eco footprint. Companies like HP, 3M and Boeing have all embraced the concept and calculate eco foot prints for thier products and have adopted a cradle-grave product tracking system.

BTW your link system doesn’t seem to work for me

http://www.g-r-e-e-d.com/Nuts%20Game.htm