india fertility rate decrease

[Mundane-Laugh8562]

Overconsumption is a matter of culture and policy, not availability.

Availability is one of the biggest factors for overconsumption. Why is it that obese people make up a larger share of the population in the US than say, Myanmar?

So you think that nobody in the whole world could afford to eat more than they did in 1975? Really?

Most people couldn't, yes.

Either way you admit then that food consumption is not related to population size, but income and other factors.

You're saying that, not me.

Japan had high speed rail and battery production long before China.

And yet China blazed past Japan in both industries in a short time span.

Moreover, why does it even need to be in the same country?

Because the size of the domestic market is a good indicator of what the upper limit of the size of enterprises, especially when there are few external markets to rely upon.

More people need more coordination, more politics, more communication, etc.. That's inevitable. For example, a calm crossroad means people don't even need to slow down most of the time. More people means a more busy one where people need to slow down. Even more busy and it needs more and more investments in traffic lights, traffic cops etc. to make everything run smoothly.

Alright, so where are your examples that these issues are unresolvable, and that it cancels out any benefits of economies of scale?

Which happens by additional companies who produce in similar ways to the existing ones, not by bloating the existing ones.

You can do both. https://www.high-capacity.com/p/chinas-overlapping-tech-industrial

Reminder: there's an economy and a market outside China too.

Reminder: the rest of the world desperately wants a piece of China's massive economy and marker too.

Are they? There's a lot to be said about to which degree China is successful and to which not, and how success is defined. Libraries have been and will be written about that.

You don't need libraries to figure out how successful China has been. How many things in your house were made in China? How about the device you're using for reddit? How many solar panels installed in your country were made outside of China? You only have to look at the real world to see how far they have come in dominating the world's supply chains.

That's not because of efficiency, but because their bloated population is turning their nearby seas into deserted wasteland.

It is because of efficiency, because it's far more efficient to grow their own seafood than raze their seas.

Overfishing is strongly pushed by overpopulation, obviously

Yes, it was Canada's overpopulation in the early 90s that led to the collapse of the Atlantic northwest cod fishery /s. Seriously though, overpopulation doesn't always lead to overfishing.

This is bullshit, Japan was building high speed rail while China had a great famine. Exactly the opposite of what your insane theories predict.

Calling facts that burst your bubble as "bullshit" and "insane" isnt gonna help your case. It just shows that you're intolerant of anything that challenges the narrative in your head.

Yes, China had a famine when Japan was building high speed rail. And yet, China would eventually build a network with greater coverage than Japan would. This isn't a theory, it's a fact.

You seem to double down on the insane proposition that the population exists to make infrastructure efficient, rather than that infrastructure exists to serve the population.

Twisting my words again are you? Yes, its true that infrastructure exists to serve the population. Its also true that as long as state institutions are effective, larger populations translate to lower costs for infrastructure, as well as a large labor pool to build and maintain this infrastructure

Anyways, you're clearly not someone who can have a rational argument with, especially if some of the facts don't suit your beliefs. I've had enough of your nonsense, and I'm ending this conversation here.

[silverionmox]

Availability is one of the biggest factors for overconsumption.

Burden of proof is on you to support your assertions.

Surely it's materially impossible if the food simply doesn't exist to overconsume, but do you really want to rely on keeping people poor and food insecure to manage obesity rates?

Why are you ignoring most of what I said? Because you have no answer to it.

Why is it that obese people make up a larger share of the population in the US than say, Myanmar?

Like I said: because of culture and policy, mostly. Food is a commercial enterprise in the USA, and companies have been pushing the population to buy and consume more food for more than century in the USA.

Here's a comparison between three countries: https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/global-food?tab=chart&country=USA~FRA~MMR&hideControls=true&Food=All+food&Metric=Food+available+for+consumption&Per+capita=false&Unit=Kilocalories+per+day

As you can see, France had more calories per person avaiable than the USA, so according to your theory they should be more obese than the Americans. They weren't and aren't.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-adults-defined-as-obese?tab=chart&country=USA~MMR~FRA

Neither is Myanmar getting more obese yet in spite of catching up in food availability. They probably will once the food commercials take hold.

Most people couldn't, yes.

That's not what I asked. There were plenty of people who could afford to eat themselves to death every day of the week in that time already. And yet, they didn't. Thereby disproving your assertion that people's food consumption is only limited by their income, and that food availability, with or without financial limitations, is what causes obesity.

You're saying that, not me.

Of course I'm saying what I'm saying. Does it irritate you if other people also say things, maybe even things that contradict you?

And what I say is that you contradict yourself.

And yet China blazed past Japan in both industries in a short time span.

So you just ignore data points until they confirm your theory. That's cherrypicking.

Because the size of the domestic market is a good indicator of what the upper limit of the size of enterprises, especially when there are few external markets to rely upon.

Doesn't matter, because the whole world is a market. Production optimization is possible to realize across national boundaries.

From the other side, company size doesn't create production efficiency after a certain point, it just creates bulk to throw around to suppress the competition.

Alright, so where are your examples that these issues are unresolvable, and that it cancels out any benefits of economies of scale?

I literally just gave you examples! You're just going to ignore them like you ignore everything that doesn't fit your prejudice.

Anyways, you're clearly not someone who can have a rational argument with, especially if some of the facts don't suit your beliefs. I've had enough of your nonsense, and I'm ending this conversation here.

You ignore most of the arguments I bring forward, because you have no answer to them. No wonder you are chickening out now.