Congressman Pacquiao would like to ban condoms in his country

[Kev]

Love the boxing talk fellas...Miles wins. But Miles you can't debate a Pactard. They are never wrong and always right...lol

I have to say I really like marbleheadmai, a very intelligent new addition to the forum.

He is also completely on the money here.

The problem that you and Miles have, is your comparing our civilisations to the third world. It doesn't correlate. They don't have playstations and toys to buy for the kids, they don't have cars to drive or offices and stock exchanges to run.

These countries are primarily rural and agricultural.

They don't have machinary like we do doing most of their grunt work for them, people still do.

Thus, more children equals more people working, hence more money for the family.

As marbleheadmai points out, many of their costs are fixed, the only real extra expense in the third world is food and water per person.

If the child once grown (and I don't mean 18 like in the UK or US) is able to earn more than it takes to feed him/herself then how do they lose money exactly?

If a person is able to produce more than they consume then there is a net gain. Consider a beehive. More bees means a bigger hive will need to be built, but they will make more honey. Considering the value of honey exceeds the effort to make the hive I imagine therefore a bigger hive is preferable....

As the Phillipines is an Agrarian rather than industrial economy it is not suited to low birth rated. The need for child labour, higher infant mortality rate and an industrial revolution are just a few things needed to turn the country around before people can stop having kids..