What's the effect of having plenty children to the national economy of a country

[reagansimms]

Is there an effect both positive or negative to the county's economy when couples have plenty children?

An increase in the population with an increase in the birth rate can have both a good and a bad impact on the welfare of families and the area where they live, there are pluses and minuses resulting from an increase in the birth rate. To overcome or minimize these problems, special attention is needed from the government with various strategies or the right way to overcome these problems in the hope that there will be the right strategy that can help make the economy in the region better.

The government needs to make several efforts to reduce the economic problems that can arise from the exploding birth rate by creating jobs in densely populated areas or implementing a transmigration program. Facilities and infrastructure need to be improved in order to advance or improve the quality of education and health to prevent the community's economy from being squeezed.

The government's role in improving the economy is urgently needed in order to maintain stability by utilizing or managing natural resources. In improving welfare, it is not only judged by how much income is earned, but also includes more essential aspects such as the economy, education and health.

[1715365156]

1715365156

[1715365156]

1715365156

[1715365156]

1715365156

[1715365156]

1715365156

[Kakmakr]

You can see the direct impact of over population in most of the third world countries. A lot of these countries have too many people and not enough jobs to employ enough people to sustain the families. The result.... "Poverty" ..... people live in makeshift housing and malnutrition is at the order of the day.

The low employment lead to an increase in crime and alcohol and drug misuse. The government will help with social grants to support the unemployed, but tax income are low.. so service delivery are poor and infrastructure are neglected and falling apart.

[Sim_card]

In a third world country, it is not advisable to have plenty of children because it will affect the economy system due to over population and less mineral resources or due to mismanagement of mineral resources. Parents should give birth to few children which they will be able to carter for,if the government shows less concern about the welfare of its citizens. If not your plenty children will be irrelevant to the society and won't be given the opportunity to add value to the economy if they can't motivate themselves and also create opportunities for themselves. On the other hand if it is a developed country it will be helpful to add more man power to the economy growth because government will make sure that the children are provided with opportunities to add value to the society through job creations and skill acquisition programmes

[Woodie]

Usually this concept boarders around adding more people to be contributing to the tax revenues of a country , which makes it easy for a government to archive or provide basic needs, deliver a good infrastructure network etc.

What gets better is if this growing population grows to be an educated one, which means skilled labor is readily available but can't say the same for a population of uneducated citizens as this amounts to cheap labor and puts pressure on government resources which is the worst case scenario a government would get!

[BRINIRHA]

Having more children means having more human resources at your disposal. And a country that has more human resources will not certainly have problems such as a labor crisis. There are many positive things that we can actually see from this factor, namely having many offspring. But in every case of course there are positive and negative sides. but I want to look on the positive side. because I personally live in an area with a family that always has many descendants. And here life is so prosperous. I even heard that in Japan there is a child crisis. because there are rarely couples who want to get married and have children. Even the government there encourages couples to marry and have children. so that the country does not experience a child birth crisis.

Because if a country lacks human resources, the country will have problems and must be willing to bring in other citizens to enter their country to become workers. And in the long run it is possible that native citizens will decrease and the country will be filled with immigrants. Wouldn't that be a little uncomfortable. For the economy it may not matter whether there are many offspring or not. Because I feel both things are the same. but other problems will surely arise when there is a crisis of child birth in a country in the long run.

[DrBeer]

Is there an effect both positive or negative to the county's economy when couples have plenty children?

In the past before the current economic era, around the 15th century and the beginning of the French industrial revolution, having many children was seen as fertility and good for both the family work force and country's also. The labour force was majorly manual and those who worked at the plantations were sort after as able bodied men or women.

But at the moment, what is the viability of having many children especially as it could reduce the per capital income.

The upside:
- With a birth rate of more than 2 children per family, the country is not at risk of degeneration of the indigenous population. This means that the population growth is higher than the mortality rate, which means that the population "will not age" and will be kept at a stable level + small increase.
- stable number of productive population, as a consequence - jobs, taxes.... True, provided the economy is growing steadily.

Negative side:
- A large population growth, as a rule, leads to the growth of poverty, because there is an oversaturation of the labor market, which means that working 1 person will be forced to support 5-7 not working.
- ... and further I do not even see the point of describing, there are many examples of countries where the birth rate is high, of the "high positive indicators" this is the only one, the rest is negative - poverty, high mortality, low life expectancy, unemployment, degradation of the economy,....

[Synchronice]

Is there an effect both positive or negative to the county's economy when couples have plenty children?

In the past before the current economic era, around the 15th century and the beginning of the French industrial revolution, having many children was seen as fertility and good for both the family work force and country's also. The labour force was majorly manual and those who worked at the plantations were sort after as able bodied men or women.

But at the moment, what is the viability of having many children especially as it could reduce the per capital income.

Think about this: Where do you have more possibilities, in small countries with small population or in big countries with huge population? Let's assume that both, small and big countries are equally developed. The answer is that you have more possibilities in big countries with big population because there is more demand and supply, you can produce things in bulk and can manage to maintain low cost. Also, more people mean more ideas and you are more likely to achieve your dreams.

At the same time, negative thing is that competition increases in business and work, China is a good example. There is a high rate of suicide among Chinese graduate students because of academic and graduation pressure because the competition is very tough.

By the way, the answer on your question very much depends on how developed the country is. If developing countries are giving birth to more children, then this is not good for them because parents aren't able to provide kids, kids sometimes have to work and are unable to get education and this endless, hopeless circle rotates. But that doesn't mean that these people are unhappy, no, statistically as far as I remember, people from poor countries and less access to education are happier than those who live in wealthy countries and are educated.

[Pierre 2]

There is a net positive effect of having more kids in a country. It means you have more people so more capacity in production and finances. Its net increase on total purchasing power too (more people = more taxes) compared to countries with lower population. But its not something related to personal wealth of people sadly.
Having not enough children in a country may cause labor shortages which would be very bad. Most of European countries are accepting more immigrants because of labor shortage I guess.

[G_Besar]

The normal is like this if we pay attention, population growth is geometrical while the growth of foodstuffs is an arithmetic progression and must be controlled properly, meaning that if a family has a large number of family members, in my opinion it will not be a problem. obstacles and burdens for the state because economic growth is positively correlated with happy families, meaning that economic growth can increase the number of prosperous families. I also come from a large family with many family members. We are all fine.

Having a large number of family members is not a problem for anyone as long as you have a pretty good and sufficient income in your finances, because problems in life and also in the family are more likely to arise through financial numbers even though each family member can be open to each other in communicating with each other. I'm sure you are doing well in that family because you have sufficient income and have a very wise way of managing finances so that the number of people in your family is not a problem for you.

And this is also very liked by the state because a family can still live in prosperity without any complaints even though the number of people is more than other families. I think the balance between economic growth and population growth must always be there so that the state can always have the next generation, both in managing economic resources and in developing human resources in a sustainable manner.

[palle11]

If the citizen are educated and don't mind to get paid with minimum or low salary, it will make the national economy increase since they don't mind about the money, they're want to become loyal for the country.

This will not matter much because it is just a few sample of opinion. If few people say they want low pay what about the larger majority? So I think more holistic reality of the effect of such is what will matter and not a small sample of people.

Now if you observe well, the number of people are increasing on daily basis and researchers are on look out for economic crisis that may hit the world if the population is not control. If there is economic crisis now, it is unwise to have plenty children that you won't be able to cater for.

Are you of the view that increased population is going to cause economic crisis instead of helping the economy grow? What about the the increased production that is likely to bring increase food to feed more people? What about the growth in technology that is helping more economy in export of technological products like cars, electronics etc to mention few.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Your allusion to the plenteous children of the French in the 15th century wasn't a secluded case. It was also evident in Africa (Nigeria). My Dad used to tell me that a part of the reason people of that era had many children and wives was to have enough farm hands who would help out at the farm and not get paid at home. Another was to fight boredom and loneliness. Can we say these reasons still stand today? Of course, not.

You know, I see it a little differently. In the fifteenth century, people hardly knew about all the methods of contraception, and it was because of this that they had children quite often.
But in our time, those people who can give their children a full-fledged education must afford to have many children, so that later the children acquire skills that benefit not only themselves but also the country.
But, unfortunately, there are people who do not know how to properly plan their family, relying either on religion or being complete ignoramuses. Being unable to feed themselves, they give birth to many children, which creates even more poverty. Is it possible to talk about such a population that can positively affect the country's economy? I think not.

[Flexystar]

I think there are many ends and thoughts to this. Having more children could be bad for the family if they are not financial strong. I mean until the right age parents need to look after the education of children that means more financial burden on the family or parents basically. Apart from this, note that every country does not have the same government structure or education system and also other type of schemes from the government.

For example, some countries might be capable of providing free education to their children, pay them scholarships to sustain the good life along with the education. On the other hand there might be country's so poor that they might not even be able to provide for the basic needs of their children.

This is a big thought to understand about.

Plus, in the modern era when things are getting "inflated economically" it seems really difficult to sustain such big family.

[MFahad]

If a individuals have plenty of children then at start there will be problem in bringing them up but when they become teenager they will all involved in certain jobs which will have positive impact on the economy of country.

Other benefit is that those countries which possess enhance number of teenagers are consider as a stronger country because youth are the power of a country. Everything has certain advantages as well as disadvantages so we should remember that if economy of a country is effected by plenty of children then these children also play an important roles in making the country a prosperous one.

[Wimex]

I remember I replied to a topic similar to this last month, only that this is with a twist as that was about population which I still view as the same.

Regardless, having plenty of children is not the problem, the problem is the positivity/negativity of the economy in relation to the working system the children meet, which determines the effect on the economy whether negative or positive. It will surely be positive if the system and the economy are progressive but will be negative if the system and the economy ain't working (regressive).

So long as the children are educated and well-trained, they can't ever be a liability to the economy, they will surely contribute to a positive economy one way or the other. Except that a bad economy and system into which some are born shapes them negatively and get to tie their hands thereby making many of them become nonentities and might never discover themselves.

However, some still manage to launch forth.

I believe that neither education nor the skills that the children who arrive in large numbers can contribute is what determines whether the economy progresses or becomes deficient. It seems to me that it has more to do with the social class to which they belong, since if they are born in conditions with low income, it would be a burden for the country since in most nations social assistance for people with low resources and whose families are excessively large is evident, so the more individuals in this category exist, more expenses would bring, and this in turn an alteration in the economy of the territory. In addition to the fact that the demand for employment, whether for those who are born into a family with a favorable income or not, would be too much compared to the opportunities that the government can offer or private companies, which in theory would cause an increase in poverty. So, thinking about it, uniting any social class, having many children for me, does affect the economy directly

[Gyfts]

But at the moment, what is the viability of having many children especially as it could reduce the per capital income.

This isn't entirely correct. The per capita income isn't actually dropping when you have more children because you're not accounting for future economic activity. Per capita income would drop if you assume that new lives born contribute zero to the GDP over a certain period.

Generally speaking, more children means higher overall GDP. If the younger supply of workers tank because of low birth rates, then there's no one left to subsidize older citizens and you'll have a collapse (this is where Japan is headed).

[Dzwaafu11]

There are countries like Nigeria and Ethiopia with people there giving birth to many children but their is no job. Many of them are educated, they go to school, they become graduates and they are doing unskilled work and many of them are unemployed.

Yeah man, people who are graduates that don't have jobs in Nigeria are many, and still, these people are even those who the country is benefiting from right now. Why did I say that? These people have their handwork that they do every day, and the citizens of the country use these people to meet some of their needs. These people are those who are giving the employees of the country ways to enjoy their lives. What I mean is that they do work for the employees, so you can see that these people are not as useless in the country as @Helena thinks.

However, in Nigeria now, with the way things are going, I can see that many youths have graduated from school, and they don't want to have government jobs because even if they do, it will not be enough, and instead they will suffer in the hands of the government to even get paid for their salary. That's why I can see many youths today in Nigeria preferring to be in business instead of struggling, and others will be eating the money they work for.

[palle11]

You know, I see it a little differently. In the fifteenth century, people hardly knew about all the methods of contraception, and it was because of this that they had children quite often.
But in our time, those people who can give their children a full-fledged education must afford to have many children, so that later the children acquire skills that benefit not only themselves but also the country.

I don't really think the lack of publicity of the contraceptives we know today was the reason that parents were giving birth to plenty children back then in history, I think they would have known other traditional means for a woman to avoid being pregnant. I think giving birth to numerous children then was intentional and deliberate and to support that is that men married more than one wife. In fact, in some cases the man married 4-7 wives and the purpose was for procreation, to have children who would help in farm work, defense in an enemy attack. Back then that was the story not that they perhaps didn't know about some traditional contraceptives but this current era, the story is totally changed. The reality is that the economic crunch has made people now nucleated from the extended family system. Couples now adjust their income to take care of few children to give them better t education, training and opportunity for better placing in the society and country at large.

[Iroh]

Is there an effect both positive or negative to the county's economy when couples have plenty children?

In the past before the current economic era, around the 15th century and the beginning of the French industrial revolution, having many children was seen as fertility and good for both the family work force and country's also. The labour force was majorly manual and those who worked at the plantations were sort after as able bodied men or women.

But at the moment, what is the viability of having many children especially as it could reduce the per capital income.

I would say there are both positive and negative effects to a country’s economy when marriages/couples produce a lot of children.
Admittedly, in the past, people may have actually given birth to a lot of children so as to have hands who would work the fields as things were mostly done manually and wouldn’t require payment. A full belly was payment enough. Another reason was perhaps due to ignorance and lack of family planning.

Today, people are more enlightened and having lots of children isn’t as trendy as it seemed to be back then. We don’t actually need a lot of people working the fields anymore as difficult tasks then have been made easier with technology. It’s now also expensive having and properly bringing up a lot of children. A family that’s managing with an average income and a large family, there would definitely not be enough to go around. Thanks to inflation

Today, People are somewhat still ignorant and don’t know or care little about family planning end up having lots of children. More than they could possibly handle.
An average/lower income household that produces a lot of children that end up having little to no education and probably no skills too, would in most cases add to the negative effects of the country’s economy.

If the government of a country can’t efficiently manage its resources to adequately suit the needs of the general population, reduce the poverty rate and generally make life better, it should start with aggressively educating its citizens on the need for family planning, as well as the importance of skill acquisition. An idle society could quickly become a crime ridden society, also adding to the negative effects to a country’s economy and growth.

[kawetsriyanto]

When couples have too many children than they can carter for, they end up causing problem to the everyone because that child can become a big problem to the community as they grow older and their needs increase. They can become thieves, armed robbers, kidnappers, touts etc. Practice family planning with your partner and agree on a number of children to bring into this world. Giving birth to children without making or having plans for them is not the best in the era where the economy is not doing well, you will suffer, the children will suffer, and the community also suffers slightly for your actions.

Ideally, every couple should have a clear plan before they decide to have some kids. It seems a bit unrealistically that a couple want have many children but they have no plan at all. I'm sure, every couple should have the ability to manage their children even they have many children. I believe the bad impacts won't be as bad as you explained above if the parents educate the children well, especially for the education about their religion. The first thing to ensure that they children know well what dos and don'ts in this life. If the parents can educate well the kids, those kids surely will grow with good characteristics.

However, every couple must consider their economic strength first before they decide to have some children. The number of children will depend on the economic strength of the couple.

[palle11]

.

it should start with aggressively educating its citizens on the need for family planning, as well as the importance of skill acquisition. An idle society could quickly become a crime ridden society, also adding to the negative effects to a country’s economy and growth.

It is a very big challenge for countries and its government to be able to take care of her population. For proper planning, the government need to show a good road map for the country and what population is estimated in the future year so that they would be able to have adequate budget and planning. There should be effort by the government to ensure that they have an engaged population because a large population without measurable productivity is going to have adverse effects on the economy as some would form different vices including terrorism and that will disstablize the government.