Introduction to Microeconomics – 13 of 14 – The Labor Market – Murray N Rothbard

INTRODUCTION TO MICROECONOMICS
Presented by Murray N. Rothbard in 1986 at New York Polytechnic University. Recorded by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

13. Intro to Micro: The Labor Market

Economists can say little about population and its size, despite the gloomy views of Malthus. More people are a good thing because of the division of labor. Living standards are higher when populations are higher. Living standards are higher when populations are denser. When people voluntarily reduce births, average population age rises. Many of the poorest areas of the world are low density, e.g. Africa and interior Brazil.

Part 13 of 14. Presented in 1986 at New York Polytechnic University.

This lecture as a Podcast: http://enemyofthestate.podomatic.com/

Sourced from: https://mises.org/library/introduction-microeconomics

Source: Introduction to Microeconomics – 13 of 14 – The Labor Market – Murray N Rothbard – YouTube

http://www.readrothbard.com/introduction-to-microeconomics-13-of-14-the-labor-market-murray-n-rothbard

TRANSCRIPT

00:00
today I think a schedule of examinations
00:02
which 200-250 SS 231 huh wait am i’m
00:10
just i’m just getting of that know me
00:14
and the schedule final examination which
00:18
we are located ignore it I mean you
00:20
might if you want to show up but I love
00:22
it do you know I’m not gonna be there
00:24
funny the final will be next Monday at
00:29
the same time same spot as Thursday
00:33
another word me say remember in other
00:36
words we have a class yeah we have a
00:39
class now I know what we also have a
00:41
class on Thursday and room 503 on Monday
00:46
next Monday will be if it will be
00:48
Thursday no but monday has that been
00:49
designated in the end the wisdom of
00:51
Brooklyn Polly a Thursday we show up we
00:54
act as if it’s Thursday on Monday when
00:56
it’s going to be the final only where
00:57
could be to our class in room 503
01:00
keeping our fingers crossed everything
01:02
works out as they room huh yes in other
01:06
words from to Teufel Victoria yeah from
01:08
two to four I’m room 503 Monday up a
01:15
date anyway next monday right sir when
01:19
they may burn ya 2 4pm room 503 for the
01:32
firmware and we saw a labor market we
01:34
finished the union question and now
01:36
dealing with population in other words
01:38
one of the things of course the
01:40
determines the labor supply of the stock
01:42
of Labor’s how many people there are so
01:48
quiet please there’s been a lot of
01:50
nonsense poke about populations i think
01:52
i mentioned last time just review it and
01:54
the old old days it means there’s
01:56
certainly a history of Western
01:58
civilization let’s say it was consider
02:00
the more people are better in the words
02:03
higher populations in sort of a test of
02:06
whether the society doing well so the
02:08
idea is to have increased population
02:09
also of course the ruling classes of the
02:12
time of the
02:13
few awards and the privileged merchants
02:16
and the Kings etc one or more people
02:17
they have more cannon fodder more people
02:19
have march against burgundy or overly
02:21
You Know Who am the enemy is around the
02:22
hill so the higher population means a
02:25
bigger army then as I think I mentioned
02:28
in the early 19th century late
02:31
eighteenth actually 1790 1820 period
02:35
Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus famous
02:39
English Anglican Church manan economist
02:44
botas famous essay on population giving
02:47
rise to the theory called Malthusian ism
02:50
same population his uh here we wrote
02:56
this and they in a period when england
02:59
had embarked on its industrial
03:00
revolution or the Santa industry an
03:02
industry was increasing tremendously and
03:04
span of living was going up a lot of
03:05
population was going up a lot in other
03:07
words to put this to over simplify a lot
03:10
the population of euro remain about the
03:11
same from say a thousand eighty two
03:13
about 1750 with certain punctuation but
03:16
basically remain about constant see
03:20
where you stand of a situation the
03:21
population grows every year didn’t do
03:22
that in the old days so then after the
03:25
industrial industrial revolution comes
03:26
in about 1750 population of England
03:29
started bubbling after every 30 years of
03:30
whatever it was I started going up a lot
03:32
The Bling 50 years whatever it was and
03:34
so mouse is running around here
03:37
observing a situation where the well the
03:39
Santa living was going up and the
03:41
population was going up and he’s very
03:42
gloomy everything’s going to hell
03:44
because population is pressing on the
03:45
food supply with he’s writing this in a
03:47
period but one of the few periods of
03:50
population wasn’t pressing on the food
03:51
supply knees and he he’s gloom and doom
03:54
and soft woman doom personified so what
03:56
he said was that the population tends to
03:59
tends to grow geometrically when he
04:04
meant by that is that everybody’s got
04:07
every every two people have four kids
04:10
and this person has four kids whatever
04:12
sort of grows exponentially or whatever
04:16
over years you have a tremendous
04:17
increased population something like
04:19
fruit flies you know give them food
04:21
flies their head and they and they
04:22
quadruple every couple hours whatever
04:24
it’s not that’s not done of that rate
04:26
the ideas that people so like violin
04:27
like animals are by proof lies wherever
04:29
they keep multiplying all the time the
04:31
other hand the food supply increases our
04:33
oath medical another one going goes up a
04:35
certain amount each year so as a result
04:40
of that the population tends to press
04:42
and famous phrase and Mathis has the
04:44
press on the food supply a means of
04:46
subsistence being food supply so
04:50
population is always pressing on the
04:51
meeting this assistant for this causes
04:53
the wage rate always to be around
04:56
subsistence level just about enough to
04:58
keep people keep people functioning and
05:02
reproducing that’s about it so in other
05:05
words the Senate living can never go up
05:06
for any like the time because people
05:08
read faster you got impresses the
05:10
population right down again so you have
05:13
in other words that this is the
05:14
supplanting wage rates and we are in
05:16
real terms and real wage rates min
05:18
incorrectly for inflation and price
05:20
level changes and if the man for labor
05:25
goes up a little bit let’s say and wage
05:26
rates go up very soon population would
05:29
read up until you’re down again to the
05:32
subsistence level Ricardo then adopts
05:36
this Smith really adopted more awesome
05:39
Accardo a constant this gets in the
05:40
classical economics and Carl Barks
05:43
adopted let’s eat what you have is
05:44
basically the so-called iron law of
05:45
wages where wages are always pressing
05:49
enemies always always the people always
05:53
on the brink of starvation in other
05:55
words because if they get a little bit
05:56
they get a little bit more affluent they
05:59
breed more kids right away your back
06:00
down its to starve semi starvation level
06:03
population is then kept in check by
06:05
various what he called in my mouth is
06:07
calls check so the word people are
06:08
breeding like rabbits and you get in the
06:10
cup population kept down by famine okay
06:14
ah by disease which is more or less
06:17
which is quite similar and by war where
06:20
people are quarreling over the last
06:23
piece of bread left the water facility
06:25
so more famine of these and keep them
06:28
keep down a population keep a population
06:31
level from going over the edge actually
06:33
goes over the edge comes back again so
06:34
to speak so this is a gloomy view of
06:37
life in general of course
06:39
and malthus’s mouth has only his only
06:44
remedy for all this was his own
06:47
euphemistically late marriages and with
06:49
abstinence and late marriages so that
06:51
your then keep down the population level
06:54
as one might expect there’s nothing that
06:57
there wasn’t a mass more than any mass
06:59
adoption of this doctrine and practice
07:01
at least so people might be Malthusian
07:04
theory but in practice they didn’t
07:05
really follow us the Neo Malthusian they
07:08
who have a more or less the same view as
07:10
mouth except don’t have his religious
07:13
outlook of course a favor of birth
07:16
control of them as a method of wrong
07:18
wrong with an abstinence as they’re
07:21
keeping now population but they the same
07:23
that focus more or less the same without
07:25
the yes without the arithmetic geometric
07:27
stuff basically the idea being that the
07:29
population keeps breeding multiplied etc
07:32
and you have to have voluntary of a
07:33
strain of some sort or even compulsory
07:35
restraint to keep down a population uh
07:40
oddly enough for the 19 by Ronen 1920’s
07:42
1930’s population growth was going down
07:45
to mattify to the extent the population
07:46
in France I think was actually going
07:48
down over the years this point and
07:52
population Europe of leveling off even
07:54
going down after a couple hundred years
07:56
or 150 yeah yeah it’s certainly that
08:01
helped wear one will help reduce yes
08:05
help to decrease the population a lot no
08:08
question matter the actually and the
08:14
Christmas Carol Charles Dickens screws
08:16
your watch that on television or reddit
08:18
scoot is the epitome of the Malthusian
08:21
classical economists and work and
08:23
anytime they ask screw should you know
08:25
give a dollar tulip or something not
08:27
always what has it you have to reduce
08:28
the surplus population if you if you
08:32
help anybody out it means you’re
08:33
delaying this beneficence reducing
08:37
surplus population so the idea of the
08:39
surplus population comes from mouth
08:41
Malthusian doctrine so what’s so the so
08:45
this has been at yeah you’re right well
08:46
one certainly help quote-unquote help to
08:48
reduce the population and then bye-bye
08:51
1930s western
08:52
European governments began to give
08:54
subsidies to get people to breed more
08:57
kids because they’re worried about
08:58
cannon fodder again how will France or
09:01
Germany whatever have enough people
09:03
going on the army to fight so they start
09:06
having subsidy of bounties per kid after
09:11
World War two it was the increasing
09:13
number of kids really and United States
09:16
and sociological veterans came back on
09:18
it they started to shift away from women
09:20
and working like there’s a big increase
09:22
in women working 20s and 30s after World
09:25
War two the shift back through was off
09:27
to the home and family etc so called
09:30
baby boom came into operation and a lot
09:34
more kids were born in the 50s and 60
09:36
big families became became popular again
09:39
etc by the 1970s the late 60s early 70s
09:42
the ZPG movement comes in a bunch of
09:45
Neil Malthusian hysterics will call the
09:48
zero population growth and usually their
09:52
their their forecasts a very some one of
09:55
the guys that say we were running out of
09:57
oil in ten years is very similar they
09:58
took the population growth siphon rate
10:01
of population growth 1960s extrapolated
10:04
for 100 years as if is going to continue
10:05
the same rate and king came inclusion in
10:07
50 years we won’t have any room the walk
10:09
but you know 22 quadrillion people he
10:11
couldn’t move that was it basically the
10:14
argument and using computers inside
10:17
doesn’t doesn’t doesn’t reduce the
10:18
naivete this approach and they started
10:22
calling for zero population growth for
10:24
advanced birth control techniques etc
10:27
etc economists are on the sum of so many
10:30
comments on the forefront of us it’s
10:31
typically only kind of us came up
10:33
distinguished professor the kind of
10:35
stress of building a mirror see Colorado
10:37
came up he was a big ZPG person he
10:40
wanted introduce and marketing approach
10:41
to it leaves a true ZPG or the mill of
10:45
the DP years and favorite compulsory
10:47
birth control in other words allowing
10:49
every woman can only have two kids have
10:52
a third kid you shoot the kid or
10:53
whatever they whatever the approach is
10:55
okay these are the extremists this has
10:57
has been done and I believe in some
11:00
extent in China at least under Mao the
11:03
Pope sorry compulsory sterilization
11:06
yeah infanticide and call late abortion
11:12
I guess you can call it any right the
11:15
bowling being a free sort of free market
11:18
economist comes up believe but they want
11:19
get approached it popular with who I’m
11:21
the two people forever you for every
11:24
woman the kids for every month this
11:26
approaches that we shouldn’t know we
11:28
shouldn’t say every woman should have
11:29
only two kids that’s sort of tyrannical
11:31
sort of the spa tech so the totalitarian
11:34
we should do is this every woman is
11:35
conferred to the right of the Asian
11:37
whatever age age of ten or something and
11:39
give the each each female the right to
11:41
have two kids this might have our market
11:44
I go shovel on the market so if you want
11:46
to have three kids you have to buy the
11:47
right from someone doesn’t want two kids
11:49
with that one or zero kids they have a
11:52
free market quote unquote free market
11:54
and baby rights and this way you pay
11:57
only get a market price the baby right
11:59
is then the term of my supplying a man
12:01
like taxi medallions are as well get
12:03
into that today a Thursday as determined
12:07
them by about supplying the man only an
12:10
economist could come up with nonsense
12:11
it’s true that it’d be better for a
12:14
libertarian perspective they have a free
12:17
market and baby rice to have two kute
12:19
kids for every female still totalitarian
12:21
however but only the icing on the cake
12:23
at any rate the ZPG hysteria reaches
12:27
maximum around later I would say the
12:28
early 1970s just at the point when least
12:32
when the population growth began to
12:35
decline in other words this is typical
12:37
that’s what happens in social trends
12:38
hysteria about a certain problem usually
12:41
reaches maximum just after the problem
12:42
being eliminated so when the 1970s
12:47
census came out takes about two or three
12:49
years the process of census it
12:51
discovered by God and lo and behold
12:52
population rope broke really the client
12:54
severely during 1960s and reached a
12:57
point where ZPG will arrive in about 20
12:59
30 years or whatever so as a result of
13:03
this its discovery the ZPG affair is
13:06
more less died out last 10 years and
13:09
might always come back again these these
13:10
things happen at fashions so it’s
13:13
something i hem lines or whatever it
13:15
that every 10 years is a different
13:16
different stick here but any rate the
13:21
and they’re now getting to the point
13:23
lozito now that we have more or less
13:25
we’re getting to the point of DPG we’re
13:27
getting the point of reclining
13:28
population growth these same people are
13:30
complaining about the no standing room
13:32
you have to have compulsory birth
13:33
control or whatever and I was saying
13:35
Jesus a lot of problems with slower
13:37
population growth amines the population
13:39
gets older every year man indeed it does
13:41
in other words if you cut down the rate
13:43
of population growth this is the
13:45
so-called population pyramid you have if
13:49
this is number of people from 0 to 10
13:51
and 10 to 20 and 60 to 80 or something
13:53
and the width is number a number of
13:55
people this is the age bracket if you
14:00
cut down you have a high population
14:01
growth it means have a lot of big base
14:03
of the pyramid on a small small pop if
14:06
you have the cut damn population growth
14:08
of course the average age is gonna get
14:09
older obviously so all of a sudden these
14:11
same jerks are now saint-jean meet the
14:12
average age is getting old we have more
14:14
old people to support how’s work we have
14:16
to shoot the old people gonna happen
14:18
before we shot the kids now we have no
14:20
no we have to shoot the old people
14:21
that’s the latest specifically is
14:23
problem horizon at any rate the also the
14:27
mayors of different cities kept saying
14:29
no there must be more people in other
14:30
where they had a senseless every ten
14:32
years of the sense of their since it
14:33
says 3.2 million people in certain city
14:35
mayor says no no there’s got to be 3.8
14:38
million because they get federal aid per
14:39
person so every mayor every city is
14:42
costly scouring beating the bushes
14:44
calling for a recap demanding more
14:46
people and these same people ten years
14:49
ago were calling for compulsory birth
14:50
control more or less of something like
14:52
it at any rate the the mayor the major
14:58
point here is the popular the whole
15:00
population problem with overblown it’s
15:03
it’s not really much of a problem and
15:05
the sea wireless the best one of the
15:08
best ways to look at it the concept call
15:12
the optimum population up own population
15:16
point the word optimum is a bad one is
15:21
it implies that it’s somehow the best
15:25
population but it doesn’t supposed to
15:28
mean that but anyway so it’s useful way
15:30
of looking at it if you have
15:35
you have a diagram on the y-axis a
15:38
standard of living or output per person
15:41
with productivity or I’ll put a good in
15:43
some good goods per person obviously you
15:47
can’t really measure it but it’s some
15:48
vague way and you can understand it can
15:51
be more or less I’ll put four persons on
15:53
the y-axis a number of people is on the
15:55
x-axis and again if you got no people
16:00
the whole world was wiped out by let’s
16:02
say that I had a neutron bomb hommage on
16:04
a neutron bomb wipe no new trauma of
16:05
course is one which is beloved by many
16:08
most establishment think tank type it
16:10
killed only people doesn’t destroy any
16:11
property only kills people it makes it
16:13
good I could ever figure out why exactly
16:16
my name is buddy any rate you have no
16:19
people the whole world will wiped out by
16:20
one giant play it still be the factories
16:23
in the land the natural resource of
16:24
eight multi-home people here for my own
16:25
production again you start at the point
16:28
of origin 0 people girl production at
16:31
any given time in other words given the
16:33
capital investment and given the
16:35
technological knowledge in any given
16:36
moment I have something like this add
16:38
one more person you get you get some
16:40
production etc so you get to the point
16:42
and i’ll put per person where it reaches
16:45
a peak as you get more and more people
16:47
and finally turns downward this is
16:50
except average productivity remember the
16:51
average physical productivity overall
16:54
average physical productivity can never
16:55
get negative you can’t have minus
16:57
production or you keep adding people
16:59
with a fixed amount of capital goods and
17:01
resources land and technological
17:05
knowledge will start turning down so
17:09
this is century of the average
17:10
productivity curves and we can say that
17:17
for any given level of capital capital
17:20
and technological knowledge that those
17:23
number of people would yield a maximum
17:24
average productivity is the so-called
17:26
optimum population point let’s say for a
17:29
certain country or a certain time to
17:31
minyan this is 2 million this is the
17:34
opcode optimum population so that below
17:39
that you have a lower productivity per
17:41
person above that you have a lower
17:42
productivity first so all we’re saying
17:44
is that at some point of some kind of
17:45
maximum
17:48
now nobody knows what the maximum is
17:49
there’s no way in any given time or any
17:51
given country to figure it out no test
17:53
is no but you can sort of vaguely say
17:55
all right this is more or less the
17:56
situation but somewhere around there
17:58
probably if you look at it this way if
18:01
for example tomorrow every move has the
18:03
people in country died of a play okay
18:05
and so the only behalf of people left
18:08
productivity for personal go way down
18:10
there will be enough people a man the
18:11
various machines on the rest of it and
18:14
so the productivity person will go down
18:16
the other hand and a magic cloning
18:18
system like a science fiction pictures
18:20
work everybody automatically
18:21
instantaneously clone it have twice as
18:24
many people now obviously they had
18:26
nothing to do that we know waiter they
18:27
could you know fit into the current
18:28
system and the productivity for personal
18:31
go down to so in other words somewhere
18:33
we’re somewhere in here nobody knows
18:35
exactly where we are any given time it’s
18:36
somewhere around the beanie of the peak
18:37
or something so that you then say this
18:41
is not a moral optimal say it’s the best
18:43
population point but it does say this if
18:45
you’re if you fill people of them
18:46
confronted with some kind of a choice
18:47
namely but have more kids at a course of
18:51
a slightly slightly lower living
18:52
standard for the family in other words
18:55
and they kind of thought they could
18:56
choose having more kids if she was
18:57
having eight kids knowing that your your
18:59
income per kid will be going down you’re
19:01
choosing to be some further to the right
19:04
no tricks you’re trading off between
19:06
living standard for the family and
19:08
having more kids after having kids is
19:11
only a positive benefit for the family
19:13
otherwise it really wouldn’t have them
19:14
so in other words they’re trading off a
19:16
psychic benefit of having the kid is
19:17
against the possible psychic or Thor the
19:19
drop the average living Stan and each
19:21
family make its own decision on that
19:23
basis so that’s I think much better way
19:27
of looking in other words population
19:29
grew population is usually fits in and
19:31
what what economically desire above the
19:33
time and at any given point they can
19:36
trade off every person or individual or
19:39
family can trade off living standard and
19:41
a number of people the another thing
19:46
you’re also very important to look at it
19:47
over time productivity keeps going up as
19:50
I said book capital has wheel wage rates
19:52
go up and unemployment goes up over time
19:54
as capital it’s increasing it gets
19:56
better so what you have over time is the
19:58
sort of stuff
19:59
it’s a family of curves which over time
20:01
keeps increasing so the productivity
20:07
keeps going up and the optimum
20:09
population point keeps increasing so it
20:10
goes out from here to here the lair etc
20:12
etc so over the decades in the centuries
20:15
the optimum population point keeps going
20:18
up instead of more people being a threat
20:20
more people as a good thing even
20:21
economically because you’re able to man
20:23
what’s more provide more division of
20:25
labor if you only have one person that
20:27
if there’s only one person left on the
20:29
country have a neutron at play one
20:31
person is left he wouldn’t be able to
20:32
produce much of anything you mean with
20:34
all those massive equipment so that this
20:37
optimum population point keeps going up
20:39
over time when Columbus discovered
20:42
America they were about nobody knows
20:45
exactly how many Indians that were here
20:47
there was somewhere say a few million
20:49
say 5 minion something like that the
20:52
Indians are mostly living on a
20:53
subsistence level and evil living a
20:55
subsistence level because they did their
20:56
more or less adapter the population more
20:58
or less adaptively for the available
21:00
resources so you have 5 million Indians
21:05
living a subsistence I we now have and
21:06
no this is all of North America by the
21:07
way south central and Canada United
21:11
States about 5 million now we have in
21:12
this whole area about two hundred
21:13
million something like that on with each
21:16
of which is living an infinitely higher
21:17
living standard on the five million over
21:19
here we got flu well European got here
21:21
so in other words what you have then is
21:23
over a ton enormous increase in
21:25
population each one at a much higher
21:27
living standards and we’re the
21:28
population optimum population point
21:31
keeps shifting upper and for the right
21:32
as you have more and more capital
21:34
equipment and more better technology and
21:36
all the rest of it so population in
21:39
other words is not really an active
21:40
force it usually adapts over con to the
21:43
for the available of expanded available
21:45
resources it’s very much like energy
21:49
things with that they doyle it’s not
21:51
become short because if i’m more oil you
21:53
got other energy sources it’s something
21:56
similar population the but usually I’m
22:03
what’s happening and I should go from
22:06
the underdeveloped countries developing
22:09
countries whatever you want to call them
22:10
third world
22:13
it’s been a fashion on this tour the
22:15
time I’ve been teaching economics third
22:18
world countries originally called
22:19
backward countries this is considered
22:22
discriminatory or a nasty the word
22:24
backward of them outlawed and then they
22:27
were called undeveloped country this
22:29
also is conserved nastiness then that
22:30
goes cold developing countries it’s just
22:32
rape the QE because we’re all developing
22:33
you have to me and it’s very odd now
22:36
it’s called a third whirling it’s good
22:38
of anything else anyway he third world
22:41
countries what happened there was
22:43
usually again the population level is
22:45
about the same other words birth rates
22:49
and death rates this is what happening
22:51
on the for 1750 and since they weren’t
22:53
pressing a means of assistance and that
22:55
well except they weren’t everybody’s not
22:56
a starvation level with a much higher
22:58
level at any rate and a sense birth
23:01
rates and death rates were about the
23:02
same and population more lights remain
23:04
about the same and then what happened
23:07
was and in in England an 18th century
23:10
would have was a big drop in the death
23:12
rate due to better their food know what
23:15
they’re eating better nutrition was
23:17
better and therefore diseases was kept
23:21
under control diseases much less disease
23:23
is largely caused by the way by bad bad
23:26
food in other words inadequate nutrition
23:28
when where the other and so as nutrition
23:31
got better these rates and death rates
23:34
and Britain went way down the same thing
23:36
happened third world countries in 1940s
23:38
and 50s as Western medicines spread to
23:41
the third world countries death rates
23:42
fell very sharp but what you haven’t
23:43
here’s birthrate population of course is
23:46
determined by birth rate and death right
23:47
but very sent make it very simple we’re
23:50
trading minus two that’s right in other
23:51
words the birth rate per thousand is
23:55
five and that for 8,000 for you can have
23:57
an increase in population 11 per
23:59
thousand so so that’s right suddenly
24:03
fell I know very sharply more so in the
24:06
third world at nineteen forty every
24:08
dramatic drop of death rates and burn
24:11
today continues gone from wow so if you
24:12
have during this period is a tremendous
24:15
increase in population and their studies
24:18
in Barbados and west in Barbados did you
24:20
make it cetera you can see that
24:22
happening in the death rate falls 40 to
24:25
50
24:25
birth rate remains insane big population
24:27
increase that most people think as
24:29
although some people read faster the
24:30
tremendous increase in birth that’s not
24:32
the way it works the birth rate amazing
24:33
about the same just that’s rate falls so
24:36
a population goes up and then what
24:39
happens after 20 30 40 years after a
24:41
transition period people get used to a
24:43
higher and want a higher living standard
24:46
the birth rate usually pulls
24:47
proportionately so you wind up somewhere
24:50
like here vacuums I can equilibrium
24:53
level so to speak with people then cut
24:56
voluntarily cutting their birds in order
24:57
to in order to enjoy our living standard
24:59
for family and this is this is what
25:02
happened in England 19th century and
25:05
what happens what happened now third
25:07
world countries it’s already beginning
25:08
to happen this process it takes it takes
25:11
a little while but the thing is you
25:12
can’t just a strap extrapolate
25:14
population growth rates for hundreds of
25:16
years there’s adaptation taking place
25:18
all the time and this is one of them so
25:21
it’s happening now the United States
25:22
after hysteria of taking over by the
25:25
19th by the 1960s birth rates are over
25:28
school as I say now that beginning a
25:29
bellyache about an older population so
25:31
as a result this is one of these in any
25:34
way no way of getting around as we cut
25:36
the population growth birth rates I mean
25:38
all the average age of the population is
25:40
going up so at any rate this is the
25:48
therefore usually situations there’s no
25:51
there’s no real long-range worry about
25:54
population population usually adapts the
25:56
resources and stand living available and
25:59
looks like the hopeful hook learn to
26:02
quieten as I say the population story is
26:05
really going to vamp damp down for a
26:06
while but can always pop up again and
26:08
yeah well I’m they probably they took
26:17
over the unfortunately the Western
26:20
Malthusian view of the population growth
26:22
population evil and say China India with
26:25
overpopulation is that really
26:26
overpopulation but I think they’re now
26:28
and now wising up to that I think that
26:30
there’s a trend away from this I think
26:32
Japan there there is so because the
26:37
problem is not really population the
26:38
problem was really
26:39
as in other words if you take the bus
26:41
let’s take another thing the you take
26:44
your yeah I think they were sucked until
26:45
I by Western Malthusian since
26:47
demographers oh sure yeah but I mean the
26:52
thing is that part of the living
26:54
standards having is for people want to
26:56
have kids part of their living standards
26:57
having kids there was a psychic stand of
27:00
living as a psychic question not just
27:01
strictly immaterial one other words
27:03
you’re you’re trying to fulfill various
27:05
goals and objectives one of your goals
27:08
that have several kids that’s part of
27:10
your living standards things you can’t
27:11
you can’t can have an outside person
27:13
arbitrarily say you got me we want any
27:15
creature let me kind of like fortunate
27:16
enough to have kids that’s them at the
27:18
real cut and psychic income I’m after
27:21
olean that objective it’s IKEA I’m other
27:24
worth of a failure or whatever your
27:25
objectives happen to bigger your goal
27:26
who happen to be the question is can
27:29
kind of outside groups set your goals
27:31
for you and oh no what your goals are
27:33
should or whatever it’s wrongly data
27:37
another thing if you look at population
27:39
density other way of looking at this
27:42
there’s no correlation between
27:43
population density which the objective
27:46
methodist number of people per square
27:47
mile and standard of living in other
27:50
words you’re a writer than Malthusian
27:53
were right it should be a high of the
27:55
density it should be a lower span of
27:56
living and you can’t you take a young it
28:01
doesn’t work that way at all in some
28:03
cases almost the opposite in for example
28:09
and the Western world the highest
28:11
density population is probably Holland
28:13
certainly Western Europe Holland has a
28:17
high standard of living and a high
28:18
density okay how long is probably the
28:27
highest density has one of the highest
28:29
standards living in europe west germany
28:32
is a high living high high density
28:33
population the
28:38
or taking or in United States as much
28:41
lower density population and in which
28:44
German West Europe the other hand is a
28:46
higher density population a lot of other
28:47
countries the somewhere in the middle of
28:52
density Switzerland is a high density
28:56
population is not very high spin on
28:58
living the matter of fact you can tell
29:01
the difference if you have you ever
29:02
visited both the Alps and Iraqis is very
29:05
instructive you look at population
29:07
density the Alps magnificently I like
29:09
high density least up to a certain point
29:10
or personally and I mean if you live in
29:14
Manhattan Ethel I like high nuts in any
29:15
way please the the twist every outgoing
29:19
the Alps every Alpert virtuous till
29:22
cultivated as a cabin every where the
29:23
cows they will mount up the slopes
29:25
that’s great you’re the rocky there’s no
29:27
people and then that moment no people is
29:29
to go from they drive across the country
29:33
from we get them in nebraska from
29:36
nebraska until the border of California
29:37
about 2,000 miles and zip there’s
29:39
nothing there no people no houses though
29:42
trees though not i also want to suggest
29:48
that for the ZPG people worried about my
29:50
population are the United States we have
29:51
just a parachute them in Arizona Wyoming
29:53
when I’m fun for them so what’s the
29:56
noise nothing else there even in
30:01
California except for selected sectors
30:03
very low density population at the end
30:06
and again you have an eight in Asia
30:09
probably the highest densities in Hong
30:11
Kong enormous does it extremely high
30:13
standard living for Asia it’s a we have
30:18
those of you have been the Hong Kong I
30:20
mean it makes Manhattan look like
30:22
Wyoming let’s face it any time of day
30:26
and I go out and for the morning
30:27
following the people bumping into you
30:30
there’s it up the mountain slopes of
30:33
appointment has up to the peak of every
30:35
man you know rows and rows of apartment
30:37
has fantastic they’re only about 45 at
30:40
homes of the old Hong Kong old British
30:41
colonial pipes and that’s it so it’s our
30:46
Japan is very high density a very high
30:48
population very high living
30:50
standard and also some of the highest
30:57
some of the poorest areas in the world
30:59
are low density Africa is very low San
31:03
living is a usually very low density to
31:04
the problem in Africa that though how
31:06
much go there resources of the capital
31:08
investment so the even though they’re
31:09
very few people they’re starving in
31:11
other words you have what you have is a
31:12
load and after mostly in Africa as
31:19
population density is very low and span
31:23
of living is very low in eight and many
31:28
parts of South America also South
31:30
America as low density most in a living
31:33
zillion the Brazilian interior low span
31:36
living and people they’re all starving
31:37
and low density so what you haven’t what
31:40
you have over the over the world is a
31:42
high income or high increase their
31:44
income increase your capital of us will
31:45
attract more people people then move
31:47
from from start where they’re starving
31:49
of the areas where there’s more
31:50
opportunity like United States in 19th
31:51
century or now so the population flows
31:55
to where they if it can flow permitted
31:57
by migration barriers close to where
31:59
there’s more opportunity of our higher
32:00
living standards so Julian Singapore
32:04
very high that’s me bright and hi
32:05
Stanley family and other people people
32:09
involved because the kids or if they
32:11
weren’t working in the factories they
32:12
were starving literally so that it’s
32:14
considered better to have an
32:15
eight-year-old working a cotton spinning
32:18
at seven or eight year old a diet
32:20
instead of fed up by the kid himself and
32:22
by the of family she’s only outside
32:25
intellectual them know what’s going on
32:27
sociology and journalists acceptor who
32:31
got the thing all screwed up they don’t
32:33
never went to the rural areas and this
32:35
is one of the problems by way with third
32:36
royal economists me american economist
32:39
has go to third world countries at least
32:41
until very quite recently would never go
32:43
to the rural area they just sit there in
32:44
the capital city and get the government
32:45
air-conditioned clubs and get the
32:47
government hand thats you know the
32:49
government officials that were like the
32:49
rural areas either they don’t want to
32:51
schlep up there and the jungles so they
32:53
omit the misconception misperception was
32:56
going on is enormous and any right so
32:59
this is pretty clear that the there’s no
33:01
correlation between density population
33:04
today’s fan of living and so that the
33:07
the focus on the populations being the
33:09
key element I think this could seize the
33:11
problem in and what in the West Indies
33:16
historically when when new group
33:18
entrepreneurial type groups come in like
33:20
Chinese and Lebanese emigrate the West
33:22
Indies a result left with no capital
33:24
they just come in there they start work
33:26
be entrepreneurs and saving and
33:28
investing in several they wind up
33:29
creating more jobs and more employment
33:31
and better working conditions and they
33:33
will announce them so you have a he have
33:35
an increased population and the higher
33:36
sound of living as a result of the
33:37
increased population this often happens
33:39
the Chinese mostly my rest of Asia
33:42
perform the same entrepreneurial role
33:46
any rate so the I but I think you’ll now
33:48
find the new trends in China I think
33:51
they’re getting away from this hopefully

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *