by MrBean » Mon 30 Jun 2008, 11:28:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Homesteader', '
')I have no problem with a person saying "I disagree with. . . ." However Mr. Bean said the "That is wrong". Then gave his own personal definition.
Not a personal definition, just common sense understanding about importance of social change:
Some versions of the DTM assume that population changes are induced by industrial changes and increased wealth, without taking into account the role of social change in determining birth rates, e.g, the education of women.
In fact the developers of the DTM were aware of the importance of social change, but some were content to analyse the statistics of the transition rather than develop a comprehensive explanation for it. In recent decades more work has been done on developing the social mechanisms behind it.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')The causes for the declining birth rate in Cuba may not be for the reasons Mr. Bean gave but rather for the reasons Monte gave.
Here is a statement and a link that could be interpreted to support Monte's contention:
"By 1993, as Cuban production and imports plummeted, the daily intake of the average Cuban citizen had descended to 1863 kilocalories, including 46 grams of protein and 26 grams of fat, all figures well below FAO recommended minimums for a healthy diet."
link:
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0104koont.htm
There is no evidence of special period having any noticable effect on fertility rate or death rate, total fertility rate had dropped from 4 in 1970 to 1.8 already in 1990; since 2000 it tfr has been 1.6.