The total fertility rate is declining though. 30 years ago in the period 1985-1990 the fertility rate was about 6.3 babies born per woman, in 2016 it's about 3 so less than half of that. The reason why there are more births is because the population is much larger than it was before (it was a little above 100 million 30 years ago) which means a lot more women are giving birth to kids. Women are now having less kids per capita and the fertility rate will most likely decrease even more.
Generally that's the difference between poor and rich countries.
I wouldn't exactly call Pakistan a "developing" country.
Good way to fuck up the planet. Lets see how Pakistan is doing 25 years from now. Good luck.
It's 100% a civilization issue. Look at the Philippines vs. Thailand. One took family planning seriously, the other one didn't. Only one is committing state sanctioned extrajudicial murders.
So the article says the birth rate is currently 22 births per 1000 people, while according to your link it went down from 42 to 28 from 1985 to 2010. The title of the article is just plain wrong, isn't it?
How is it possible that the more they are poor, the more they make babies...?
Philippines declined birth control due to the Catholic Church saying condoms were bad.
Iran is another example. Their birth rate plummeted from 6 in the 70s to below 2. Turkey, Morocco and Indonesia also have the same issue.
Well the bigger problem with surging population is that most and most of them will end up being illiterate and the spiral Of everything bad and backwardness will haunt everyone.
Literacy rate in Pakistan has slipped by 2% already and it's going downhill every year
We will endup with lots, lots many fools and off course with a religion.
yes - religions are like cancer.
Yeah, I think they were confusing birth rate with the total amount of births.
overpopulation leads to famine, famine leads to war.
"Animals Rule Chernobyl Three Decades After Nuclear Disaster"
Well facts don't care about your opinion or labels. It doesn't matter what you call Pakistan, the fact is that it's a developing country.
Thanks, I missed that. So it's clearly a declining birth rate, not a rocketing one.
Yeah but combining India like it's full of just one big people group, culture and ethnicity is like combining all of Europe or all of East Asia and saying their population adds up to __________
Yeah but combining India like it's full of just one big people group
I'm not combining it like it's just one group of people, I'm just going back to WHAT IT WAS just a few decades ago.
India + Pakistan + Bangladesh + Burma was one "country" just a few decades ago. It was called the british raj. Then burma was removed in the 1930s and it was called "british india". And after ww2, the british left and Pakistan and Bangladesh was separated from "india".
Europe was never a "country". But it's population is about 800 million.
China has as much ethnic groups as india, but it is a single state. It has about 1.4 billion people.
It was called the british raj
Raj or British Raj was never a country. It was called India then too. Raj (राज) just means "rule" in Hindi
A developing country... with nuclear weapons.
If you scroll down a bit, it's 25 in 2016 and I don't know what it currently is in 2017. Maybe not 22, but somewhere between 24-25 is my guess.
I can definitely see the birth rate rocketing here!
Do you consider North Korea to be a developing country?
Economic conditions plus a healthy dose of religious misguidance.