That idea is outdated.It is clear that we live in Europe with too many people on a continent that is too small. The Netherlands has to return to 10 million inhabitants. Of course you go through a phase of ageing, but the lack of manpower will be largely absorbed by robotisation and automation. You can also hire temporary, foreign contract agents if that is needed somewhere.
The permanent entry of large groups, not assimilating, partly from social security dependent foreigners is not the solution.We need to have a smaller population and we have the technology to solve the failure of the workforce. Also financially it is not a problem, the Netherlands has a latent tax claim on the pension funds and that is almost as large as the current sovereign debt. For the Netherlands, in any case, it is not sensible to stimulate population growth at all costs.
Population growth is increasing the economy.Twice as many people need twice as much food, shoes and auto s. Yet it does not necessarily grow prosperity.What you can say in accordance with evolutionary models is that in a purely growing market, population growth has created opportunities for variation. Grows the population there are also more bakers needed. Now, however, know 脙 漏 脙 漏 N of the often new joining bakers to bake more bread at the same job effort than his collega s, he does not compete from the market, but is himself profitabler. Traditional and innovative bakery exist next to each other. However, the latter deserves relatively more so that it can spend more money for consumer goods. He eats no more sprouts, but asparagus, no potatoes but rice. There is a market for 鈧?艙luxury 鈧?consumption. The traditional bakers also switch over to the innovative baking method and can also suddenly spend more without the Collega s suffering in a growing market.
It is clear that in the slightest disruption of the market or population growth, innovative bakers have more opportunities to anticipate than traditional.They can, for example, reduce the price of the bread. This is at the expense of their consumption and therefore also of the producers of such goods, because, however, in everything is a time lag, there are also innovatives that can turn the price screw. Are the market distortions gone, the innovatives survive. This innovation always has a positive impact on prosperity.
In a population-growing market, growth on an individual level is not market disruptive and can therefore be easily accepted by competitors.However, a hitch will only survive the innovatives. This has implications for positive growth in prosperity.
A minimum number of people are needed to provide a number of basic services.For instance, there will only be a school if there are enough pupils to cover the costs. The same applies to hospitals, (railway) roads, dikes, shops and recreation facilities. A country like Iceland with 300,000 inhabitants has difficulty maintaining a university or heart surgery department.
On the other hand too many people are also pushing prosperity.Space becomes scarce and living space more expensive, roads overcrowded and there are queues at hospitals and schools. Somewhere must be an ideal population, the Netherlands sits above that ideal while Iceland is under it.
More people means more growth, but also more mouths that consume this extra prosperity again.If population growth Is faster than economic growth then prosperity decreases per capita. You see this in large parts of Africa and the Arab world. If population growth Is lower than economic growth, prosperity Is increasing. You see this in China and in the Europe of the years 鈧?虄 60 and 鈧?虄 90
On average, each member of a community can generate a number of economic activity units.Depending on the state of the art, this number of units increases or decreases.
Because man does not have an adequate response to global warming, the average number of units per person threatens to take off.Policy makers are committed to avoiding this.
A significant proportion of that prosperity is based on debts, too many debts, which remain manageable only if the economy continues to grow.Even stagnate is nefast.
Immediately you will also know the underlying reason why we should applaud the arrival of alochthonous people.The indigenous population makes too few children, so the Alochtonen must help to bear the government debts.
Were those debts not to that extent as now the answer to your VTAAG would be 鈧?艙no “.Now that debts are there, the answer is full 鈧?艙yes “.