Reaction to the Published Article, "About Montalvan"

About the article posted, it talks about Malthus' theory on how to control a population of a country. He based his theory on the population explosion that was already becoming evident in the 18th century, and argued that the number of people would increase faster than the food supply (stated in the Law of Supply and Demand). This theory supports the famine we are now facing in the Philippines which is the rice and crude oil shortage and also supports the law that implies supply and demand. Population would eventually reach a resource limit. Any further increase would result in a population crash, caused by famine, disease, or war.

Malthus was not optimistic about the outcome and suggested that only ‘moral restraint’ (birth control) could prevent crisis. Recent famines in Ethiopia and other countries, where drought, civil war, and poverty have reduced agricultural output, might suggest that Malthus was correct. In the USA, the UK, and many other countries, the agrarian revolution boosted food production, and contraception led to a decline in birth rate; and in some countries population control policies have been introduced.

To my point of view, I 50% sided to the statement "Increase in population will devastate the economical status of a country" and 50% to the statement "Increase in population will help the economical status of a country".
To further ellaborate (I will only focus here in the Phil.), to the side of devastating the economy, for example here in the Philippines, it's a fact that the greater the population the lower the economical status. Tracing back way in 1990's the Philippine population was more than 66 million, up from 48 million in 1980. This figure represents an annual growth rate of 2.5 percent, down from 2.6 percent in 1980 and from more than 3 percent in the 1960s. And in 1990's we're still progressive at that time. Why the Philippines is in great crisis now is in the leaders itself and the habbit the pinoys have-- poor people always looking up in our government for aid instead of making iniatiative how to survive. We should help our country to solve our problems not contributing! The trend of law of supply and demand states that the higher the population, the higher or even highest the demand exist. About our leaders, money that come from the government which is suppose to be for the people, they're just putting it in their pockets like nothing happens!

Now, to the side of helping the economy. This requires labor force. The more the population, the more the labor force there is. So this would result to progress. Here in the Phil., we have more labor force but not fully used because there are many individuals who are jobless. But it's true that the more people there are the progressive the country will become. If China will continue its 2 child policy well it would lead to less labor force.

I am with Malthus when he said about the usage of contraceptives. In the Phil., it's the major contributor how to lessen population. Especially teens now are so hot, they need to bring pills or condom with them. In these days we cannot stop teens from being so "flitry", so they to bring with them contraceptives.

How can someone say in this IV-Rutherford group that poverty is not the effect of overpopulation? It's always overpopulation...overpopulation! Supply and demand remember? Malthus' theory is the solution now waiting to be seen by the government!