It's going to be fun.  This will involve debunking a lot of economic myths that have been spread by economists who refuse to give consideration to what may be the most important economic parameter.  It will necessarily be a very abridged version of the explanation given in the book but I think that I can do it justice in a series of articles.  So stay tuned!  If you haven't read the book, you won't want to miss this series!  Just subscribe to the RSS feed if you want to be alerted each time a new article appears.  And if you have questions about any of it, just put your question into a "comment" at the end of the article.  I'll answer each and every one.  There are no stupid questions.  This is a brand new economic theory.  You won't find it any place but here. 

The first article will be posted very soon.

Best time to go:

June-August (dry&cooler 28°C)
January- February (dry but very hot) & more expensive

Serengeti National Park: all year around (wildebeest, zebras, antelopes, gazelles, lions)
Katavi National Park: June to mid-October
Tarangire National Park: June to mid-October

Mount Kilimanjaro: best months for climbing are August to October and from January to March.

See the official website of "Tanzania National Parks"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General information:

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Name: United Republic of Tanzania

Area: 945,000m²

Capital: nominal Dodoma (population of approx. 300,000), factual: Daressalam (population of approx. 3 million)

Population: in 2005: 38,3 million (World bank), in Zanzibar: approx 1 million foreign nationals: approx. 20.000 Indian, 5.000 other nationality's; compound <a annual growth growth rate: approx 1,8% (World bank)

Climate: tropical, all year wet and hot

open Borders: Kenya,Malawi, Mozambique,Rwanda, Uganda, Zambia
unsafe Borders: Congo (Zaire) and Burundi are not advised

Languages: Kiswahili, English

Religion: approx. 40% Christians, ca. 30% Moslem's, ca. 30% other; Zanzibar ca. 95% Moslem's

Head of government: Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, CCM, President of United Republic of Tanzania, since Dec. 2005 (premiership 5 years)

Picture: President of the United Republic of Tanzania - Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete. pic 2006

Gross domestic product (GDP): 2007: US$ 14,2 billion

GDP/person: US£ 355 in 2007

Expectancy of life: Men 46years/Women 47years (see "Brot fuer die Welt")

Infant death: 7,6 %

National holiday:

1 January - New Year
12 January - Zanzibar Revolution Day
25 March - Good Friday
28 March - Easter Monday
26 April - Union Day (Tanganyika and Zanzibar)
29* April - Maulid
1 May - Labour Day
7 July - International Trade Fair
8 August - Farmers' Day
14 October - Mwalimu Nyerere Day and Climax of “uhuru Torch Race”
3* & 4 * November - Idd - El Fitr
9 December - Indepedence Day
25 December - Christmas Day
26 December - Boxing Day

Tel: international code 000, country code 255

The supply is generally 220-240v and plugs are three-pin square or round. If you have a video or digital camera, make sure your battery charger is of the same voltage.

Visa: US$50 for 30 days issued at the borders.

Tip: This is where a little knowledge of Kiswahili can cause some inconveniences. Tanzanians don't function on the same time as Westerners. For Tanzanians, it's illogical that the day would start in the middle of the night. Since sunrise and sunset happen pretty much at the same time all year round, 6am and 6pm, the day starts at 6am which is 0 hour. So when telling time in Kiswahili, Tanzanians always subtracted 6 hours for western time. 11am is 5am to a Tanzanian. To avoid any confusion, a Tanzanian will tell time in English if they want to use the western standard and in Kiswahili if they use local standard. If you want to practice your Kiswahili, just keep this in mind if you discuss appointment times with a Tanzanian. If you say Saa kumi na moja asabuhi (11:00am), instead of Saa tano asabuhi (5:00am), you'll end up waiting for 6 hours for the person to arrive, that's if they are on time!

 According to Sharon Jayson of USA Today, we are just now beginning to experience what experts are terming a "boomlet" akin to the Baby Boomers of the 50's and 60's of which I am one.  

A record 4,315,000 live births were recorded in 2007, a significant increase over the past few years.  It hasn't been this high since 1957 - 51 years ago! 

The 2007 numbers are attributed to a "perfect storm" of factors: more immigrants having children, professional women who delayed childbearing until their 40s, and larger numbers of women in their 20s and 30s in the population, keeping the fertility rate high. The average number of births per woman was 2.1 in 2006, the highest since 1971.

"We have three different phenomena around birth happening at the same time," says demographer Arthur Nelson of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.

Ronald Rindfuss of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, family demographer, makes an interesting point and says there is a bigger question looming than who's having kids.

"From the perspective of schools that have to educate these children, this is a real increase in the number of births and something they're going to have to deal with," he says.

I know over the past 25 years that my husband has been teaching in the City Schools of Decatur, we have seen the enrollment numbers drop through the years, seen schools closed and school communities consolidated into fewer neighborhood schools, and now, over the past several years, seen the enrollments begin to climb again.

Are our schools ready for this kind of influx? 

To read this article in its entirety, please visit USA Today.

The birth rate in America is on the rise. Although the article reports only a record number of births, but not the birth rate, you can do the math yourself with the data provided for annual births and see that the rate is on the rise. And the fertility rate is rising too. It's up to 2.1 births per female. This is far in excess of the 1.79 needed to attain population stability (along with a dramatic decrease in immigration). Why less than 2.0? Because of the steadily increasing life expectancy. If life expectancy were holding steady, 2.0 births per female is the rate needed for a stable population. But, because each generation is living longer than the previous, the fertility rate must drop below 2.0. (Consider the extreme: if life expectancy approached infinity, then the fertility rate would have to fall to zero. If no one ever died, there would be no room for anyone to have children.)

For some good news on this topic, just scan the comments at the end of the article. The vast majority are written by people concerned about population growth. Clearly, attitudes have changed and people are concerned about overpopulation. The time is right for our nation's leaders to open a dialogue with the American people about population. How many is too many? Can our standard of living and quality of life really be maintained in an environment of unending population growth? Can real progress be made toward energy independence and toward mitigating climate change if we keep adding more and more oil consumers? Will any of our problems be easier to solve with a larger population? It's going to take a lot of courage to be the first politician to broach the subject, but the time has come.

I came across this article the other day about a new book by Paul Ehrlich, author of one of the most controversial books of the 20th century, The Population Bomb. Ehrlich is one of the world's foremost authorities on the subject of overpopulation. It's an article well worth reading and there's little I can add, except to comment on a few passages as follows:

Some economists suggest a declining population can lead to labor shortages, a weaker tax base, fewer customers for business, and a shaky pension system.

In a sense, I agree with economists who say that a falling population will lead to labor shortages. It just depends upon how you define a "shortage." It's the very premise of my book, Five Short Blasts, that reducing population closer to an optimum level will restore per capita consumption in overpopulated nations and will, therefore, improve the demand for labor relative to the supply. To me, "shortage" implies that some critical work will be left undone because there won't be enough workers. If that actually happened, it may be an indication that the population has been reduced too far to a "below optimum" level. But the optimum level is low enough that most countries would have to reduce population a very long way to reach this point.

A weaker tax base? No. Of course, revenue would drop but so too would the need for revenue; in fact, it would drop faster. It's simply a matter of an overpopulated nation requiring far more government intervention in order to maintain an orderly society than a less densely populated one.

Fewer customers? Obviously. But there would be fewer businesses too. The ones that would remain would be healthier because, overall, per capita consumption will be higher when consumers have the space required to own, use and store products.

A shaky pension system? Yup. For a while. And that includes Social Security and Medicare. It's a problem that would have to be worked through but, ultimately, pension systems would emerge stronger because unemployment and poverty will have been reduced. It's a problem that must be faced eventually because it's inevitable that the population will stabilize and begin a decline at some point. Will the pension problem be easier to manage now or when we've doubled the number of retirees? The answer is obvious.

To Ehrlich, though, such problems are far less serious than those rising from the current population "bomb." He would like to see the world's population drop voluntarily over many decades to about 1.5 billion to 2 billion, a number that he reckons is sustainable. It would allow people both to live in big cities with their cultural advantages or with nature, as they prefer.

I think Ehrlich is right on with his estimation of a sustainable population. Could we sustain more people? Sure, but not at a high standard of living. So what would be the point of it? Overpopulating the planet isn't a game, like college kids trying to set a record for packing people into a Volkswagen.

Ehrlich sees a "lack of leadership" in Washington on the population issue, including both from the White House and from those on the campaign trail.

"Lack of leadership" is putting it mildly. America's leaders are doing a terrible disservice by not having the courage to even start a conversation on this, the most urgent matter of our time. Even backward nations like the Philipines, Egypt and Yemen recognize the need to stem their growing problems of overpopulation.

Family planning, as Ehrlich sees it, leads to both fewer abortions of unwanted children and fewer deaths of mothers lacking access to relatively safe abortions.

I couldn't agree more that family planning reduces abortions. Abortion is not a product of family planning; it's a failure of family planning. But I do wish that family planning organizations would drop abortion from their inventory of tools. It's totally unnecessary for achieving population stability and dropping it would remove the biggest obstacle faced by our politicians in opening a dialogue about population management.

Well, if I may, take my stand on this, I say, don't you dare.

For narrow focus, it's a matter of personal choice. But lets see it differently. Big picture view this time. Then its a matter of national concern.

For the unmarried, usage of contraceptives brings out a feeling of immunity for the consequence of doing something wrong in the first place. It alters proper thinking of the minds of young adults. Especially with the provocative advertisement we see on tv and billboards. Its basically suggestive to doing it without thinking of the outcome. It promotes a society with disregard for the rights of women. A condom is a bandage solution to a problem.

And why do we want to control our population anyway? Is it because we are afraid that we will become a nation of gaping mouth with nothing to eat?  Damn! People are gold! The trick is make them all productive!
Give them jobs!  Make them till the land and harvest the seas!  Arestohin ang tambay and force them to farm! That one tambay will be able to feed 3 people at the least if he farms.  Imagine all the able Filipinos working.  Imagine a nation full of productive people.  Why would you cut your hands?!!  The more the hands the more the output!  The better the economy!  The stronger the Philippine nation!

So what does the government need to do to harness the potential of its people?  Give more focus on education.  Create more productive state owned economic institutions.  Say, government managed farm cooperatives.  Revise the penal law.  Make the inmates more productive.  You do the rest of the thinking...  Point made....

MABUHAY ANG PILIPINAS!!!!!

Canada, Alberta, Calgary's Homeless population jumps beyond 4,000

More families also do now need help:   July 16, 2008 in the city that was supposedly the home of rich people, millionaires now too

Calgary's homeless numbers are growing significantly faster than the city's general population, leaping 18 per cent since 2006 according to this year's count.

As of May 14 there were 4,060 homeless Calgarians, up from 3,436 in 2006.

Local Officials say the cannot. or refuse cannot explain it, but the rate of homeless families jumped dramatically, rising to 197 from 145 in 2006 -- a 36 per cent increase.

These figures are just the tip of the massive iceberg of the high cost of living in Calgary, and the actual low paying jobs mostly available in Alberta for the average persons, excluding the executives, cit hall and governmental  ehh..

There are many other problems in this city not advertised, such as the extremely high rate of divorce too, all even as a result of past Conservative policies, denials  too.. too  many poor, homeless, suffering people have already left the province so now they are no longer included in the figures of the prior poor  and needy, suffering people..

It has been known for decades in Alberta that their free  food banks are one of the busiest places in Canada too.

Alberta's Conservatives, evangelicals still do tend to still bash the poor people, for they  tend to live and practice in the law of the jungle, survival of the fittest, everyman for himself.. all done yes in the home town of Canada's professing Christian Missionary Alliance Prime Minister Stephen Harper now too.. the richest province in Canada cannot, or refuses to look adequately after it's own poor people.. shame on them all.

"Low-wage jobs are plentiful, but Alberta does not have rent controls. . Many of Calgary's homeless are employed -- as many as 60 per cent staying at the Mustard Seed Street Ministry, said operations manager Floyd Perras."

  But this spring, Metro Vancouver -- which has at least twice Calgary's population -- released a preliminary number of 2,600 homeless, a 20 per cent increase from the count done in 2005.

 

 

 see also

http://postedat.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/how-many-rich-people-in-calgary-edmonton-alberta/

http://postedat.wordpress.com/2008/06/22/alberta-the-devils-belt/

Going through some older bookmarks, I re-discovered this little gem created by Ben Mautner of Wider Angle:

Population One: One Pixel is One Person

While I'm ordinarily not a fan of web pages requiring horizontal scrolling, I found this to be a terrific application for this otherwise frustrating task. In fact, in this case, I found the very act of scrolling (...and scrolling...) to the right to be integral to the delivery of the message and conveying the enormity of 6.5 billion - the Earth's population (current estimate, U.S. Census Bureau).

A simple, yet unique design, providing a powerful and humbling experience...and a reminder to make the most of my pixel.

Happy Singh: Oye yaar! Those $%&&%@ have ranked India #125? Unki toh...

Me: 125, you mean in the FIFA Football Ranking.

Happy Singh: No. We are #154 there.

Me: Okay, must be the Corruption factor then. Correct?

Happy Singh: Arre, No yaar! We are #72 amongst the least corrupted nations.

Me: Isse bura aur kya hoga?

Happy Singh: You think na.

Me: Chal, final try. Human Development Index, right?

Happy Singh: Udhar #128.

Me: Baap re! Accha tell me how do you know so much.

Happy Singh: Bas aise hi timepass.

Me: Bata bhi de. These questions are not even in Paanchvi Pass. Kya IAS coaching le raha hai?

Happy Singh: Nahin yaar nahin, meri girlfriend GMAT de rahi hai.

Me: Kaunsi number girlfriend.

Happy Singh: Abhi bani hai. 7th and final. Ab toh settle hone ka hai.

Me: Toh pareshaan kyon hai mere dost?

Happy Singh: India ki yeh ranking nahin badli toh mujhe apna naam badalna padega.

Me: Oh please, this is getting real Bheja Fry!

Happy Singh: We are #1 in democracy and tea production, #2 in population and rice production, and #3 in cricket and mobile phone connections. But, i am not happy.

Me: Why?

Happy Singh: India is #125 in...

Me: In?

Happy Singh: In...in The World Map of Happiness! Main unka mooh tod doonga...

Me: Cool down buddy! What happened to your mood, never seen you so angry even when you failed thrice in 11th class?

Happy Singh: How will i face everyone?

Me: We Indians don't care. We are happy with Roti, Kapda, Makaan Aur Mobile.

Happy Singh: But, my girlfriend does!

Me: Kyon?

Happy Singh: She wants to settle in Canada after her GMAT.

Me: And...

Happy Singh: Canada is ranked #10 in The World Map of Happiness.

Me: So...

Happy Singh: What will i say - that i am Happy Singh from Unhappy India?

Me: Toh yeh gall hai!

Happy Singh:Before I migrate to Canada on August 15, 2008, can anyone please tell me the Joys of being an Indian?

Me: Sure, i will request the readers of my blog.

Happy Singh: I don't want to change my name. Please let me be Happy.

 The Catholic Church said that the safest and the righteous way to control birth is the natural way? The natural way, for those of you who doesn’t know it, is by means of rhythm method meaning you have to plan your sexual intercourse when a woman is not fertile. According to the people who practice this, a woman is ok to do it 4 days before and 4 days after her menstruation, but this is not always accurate. Like me for example, I have an abnormal menstrual cycle so if ever I plan to be a sex machine any time soon, I’d probably end up being a mother to 10 kids because I really don’t know when the hell are my “safe days”  or if I even have any. They also said that giving away condom for free in health centers and in schools invites young people to indulge in early premarital sex. Hmmm, isn’t it that Snow White was only 16 when she married Prince Charming? That is a fact. And to think that Snow White is well loved by little girls…better look in to that, Church people! 

The Church must understand that using a condom is far different from abortion. The purpose of using a condom is to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease while Abortion is terminating a pregnancy. A person who uses condom doesn’t automatically mean she is having an abortion; these are two different things that our religion must comprehend or must we educate these so-called holy ones? We must find ways to control the ever growing number of our population because there are no enough jobs and shelters for everyone. Lots of families can not afford to give their children the proper education, food, toys, and the good health that they deserve because of little salary that would not even cover the basic commodities.

Il possède aussi une section exclusivement consacrée à la ville de Lausanne. Dans cette section, on trouve une rubrique «Portrait des quartiers 2007». Une rubrique qui nous révèle tout plein de chiffres parmi lesquels je vous en extrais quelques-uns.

• Les quartiers qui comptent le plus de femmes sont Montchoisi (55,9%) et Vallon/Béthusy (55,2%) ; ceux qui en comptent le moins sont les Zones foraines (48,1%) et, à égalité, Sébeillon/Malley et le Centre (50,7%).
   
• Les quartiers qui comportent le plus de jeunes de moins de 19 ans sont Sauvabelin - y.c. Pré-Fleuri – (32,8%) et les Zones foraines (28,8%) ; ceux qui en comportent le moins sont le Centre (13,6%) et Montchoisi (13,7%).
   
• Les quartiers qui accueillent le plus d’étrangers sont Sébeillon/Malley (52,9%) et Montoie/Bourdonnette (50,3%) ; ceux qui en accueillent le moins sont Beaulieu/Grey/Boisy (19,8%) et les Zones foraines (26,8%).
   
• Les quartiers qui présentent le revenu net moyen* le plus élevé sont Mousquines/Bellevue (82446 francs) suivi des Zones foraines (70865 francs) : à l’opposé on trouve Montoie/Bourdonnette (36606) précédé de Sauvabelin - y.c. Pré-Fleuri – (36 845 francs).

Voilà, c’est tout, je ne me livrerai pas à des interprétations fumeuses de ces chiffres et vous encourage, si vous voulez plus de détails, à vous rendre sur les pages du SCRIS consacrées à Lausanne.

* Selon le chiffre 20 de la déclaration d'avant 2003; exercice fiscal 2002, portant sur les revenus obtenus en 1999 et 2000.

MANILA, Philippines -- The Catholic Church's stance against contraceptives has been a “huge disservice” to women and denying communion to politicians whom the Church perceived to be pro-abortion would not solve maternal deaths, reproductive rights and women's groups said on Monday.

The Reproductive Health Advocacy Network (RHAN), a consortium of more than 20 women's and health groups, said Ozamiz Archbishop Jesus Dosado’s stance not to give communion to politicians whom he considered as supportive of abortion was “very misleading.”
Beth Angsioco, RHAN secretary general, said the bishop's statement, which was given a few days after the Church launched a campaign against reproductive health bills in Congress, seemed to equate reproductive health rights with abortion.

“Abortion is not reproductive health,” she said. “I don't know if the bishop has read the reproductive health bills ... Abortion remains illegal and punishable in the Philippines,” she said.

The Catholic Church recently reiterated its stand against contraceptives and surgical interventions like tubal ligation and vasectomy.

The Church considers these measures “anti-life” and immoral, like abortion, which the Philippine government does not support.

Last week, members of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines met with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to stress their opposition against reproductive health bills in Congress.

Angsioco said the Church was making a huge disservice to women by equating abortion with access to reproductive health.

Citing data from the United Nations, Angsioco said 10 women in the Philippines have been dying daily because of pregnancy complications arising from lack of maternal and natal care before, during, and after pregnancy.

“It is a huge disservice not only to women but particularly to the poor. Those who can afford contraceptives can buy, but those who are poor are really affected,” she said.

While it has expressed support for the use of contraceptives, the national government does not buy it for distribution to public health facilities, preferring instead to let local governments and international donors provide it.

“We are closing our eyes, the Church is closing its eyes to the fact that women are massacred,” she said.

The reproductive health bills in the House of Representatives would not legalize abortion, the RHAN official pointed out.

The bills seek to provide women with wider access to all kinds of family planning methods and a national reproductive health policy, according to Angsioco.

“It sets a national policy. It will no longer be dependent on local governments or the position of the President or chief executives,” she said.

Gabriela, a women's party-list group, said Dosado's call would not solve the problems facing women who lacked proper access to health and maternal care.

Instead of castigating pro-abortion politicians, the Church should take concrete initiatives that would help pregnant women and their families, Joms Salvador, Gabriela spokeswoman, said.

“We understand the concerns of the Church. We are also concerned about mothers’ health. The proposal to deny politicians communion will not solve the deep reasons why women undergo abortion,” she said.

She noted that some women chose abortion because they could not afford another child or they were raped. The current climate in which women could not have easy access to reproductive health care, has been making it difficult for mothers to make informed decisions, she added.

“There is a need to root out the causes of abortion. We challenge the Church to sit down with groups like us and interested parties to discuss the issue,” Salvador said.

In all the infighting between legislators who have proposed population management laws and the Catholic Church, women have been losing, Salvador said. “The women are burdened. They have needs and concerns,” she said.

(PDI)

Lim overturns Atienza ban on contraceptives

MANILA defied a Catholic Church-backed policy favoring natural family planning and lifted a ban on the promotion of artificial methods, allowing the distribution of condoms and contraceptive pills. 

President Fidel Ramos hit out at President Gloria Arroyo, accusing her of being subservient to the Catholic Church’s population policy.

The attack from the ex-president, an Arroyo ally, came as he addressed a United Nations forum on World Population Day.

Ramos told the forum that Mrs. Arroyo’s “flip-flopping” on the population policy was due to “unwarranted subservience to the Catholic Church.”

Without doubt this bit of news will raise protest from some sectors, primarily defenders of the Church, and it will be interesting to hear the counterarguments to the policy. Objectivity, again--should be upheld. Three things are important to address:

1. Does active population control through advocacy of artificial contraception make sense in addressing population growth?
2. Is there a basis for the administration's lukewarm approach to the issue of population control apart from political positioning towards the Church?
3. Does the Church hold any political influence?

What we really want to avoid in this case is countering one issue (i.e. population control) with arguments that address another (i.e. Church politics).

Of course, we should all be so lucky if this will be the case.

Here's a taste of the war of ideas that is brewing. Ducky Paredes' editorial on Population Control in Malaya:

Our runaway population 

Is it wrong to try to control our population? Is what the Bishops are telling us really what God wants for us – high population rates that challenge our country’s economic capacity to provide for her population?

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90882/6448620.html

Surpassing 6.7 billion, world population becomes important global issue

According to China National Radio, today is the 19th World Population Day. The world population surpassed 5 billion on July 11, 1987. To commemorate this day and to draw attention to the population problem, in June 1990 the United Nations Population Fund named July 11 "World Population Day." At present, the world population is over 6.7 billion, and this year alone it grew by 73 million. Accompanying population growth are declining water resources, increased desertification, decreasing biological diversity, and many other environmental problems. How to deal with the challenges that population growth brings is a major issue that concerns the whole world.

The UN Population Fund believes that if people practice birth control, the birth rate will decrease dramatically. With a decline in the birth rate, more women can be freed from the burdens of childbirth, and engage in more creative work.

By People's Daily Online

Record numbers of women are having two or more abortions, fuelling fears that they are increasingly seen as an alternative to contraception.

One third of terminations are carried out on women who have had at least one before  -  and some have had eight or more.

Some girls are on their fourth abortion before they reach 18, figures from the Department of Health show.

Girl power. Feminists must be proud.

The statistics have emerged as MPs consider relaxing the abortion laws to make the procedure easier to obtain.

Pro-life MPs and campaigners said it was clear that abortion is already available on demand.

In 2007, 64,230 abortions were carried out on women who had at least one before  -  a 12 per cent rise in four years.

Of these, 49,484 were having their second termination, 11,136 were on their third and 2,605 having number four.

Fifty-two notched up abortion number seven last year, and 29 were on at least number eight.

The number of under-18s undergoing repeat abortions is also on the rise, increasing from 1,446 in 2006 to 1,465 last year  -  or almost 30 a week.

Thirteen girls under 18 were among the group of women who were having at least their fourth abortion.

Repeat abortions were most common among women aged 18-24, suggesting the procedure is seen as an easy way out by those who become pregnant at university or while starting their careers.

Hmm, how about Girls + Alcohol + Feminism = Record Number of Abortions

Nadine Dorries, the Tory MP who earlier this year spearheaded a campaign to cut the abortion time limit, said: 'The figures show very clearly that for some, easy access to abortion has fostered a careless attitude to contraception and has itself become a form of contraception when required.'

Citing research which showed having an abortion raises the risk of mental health problems later in life, she said: 'Young women have the right to know the consequences of abortion, particularly repeat abortions.'

Abortions are carried out in two ways. Early pregnancies can be ended by taking two miscarriage-triggering drugs over a 48-hour period.

Women also have the choice of a 'surgical' abortion, in which the unborn baby is suctioned or scraped out of the womb under anaesthetic.

Both techniques can also be used late in pregnancy  -  but will be preceded with a lethal injection into the baby's heart.

But Dr Kate Worsley, of Marie Stopes International, which carries out around a third of UK abortions, said it was ' ludicrous' to suggest women viewed abortion as a form of contraception.

'Whether or not to have an abortion can be one of the most difficult decisions a woman has to make,' she said. 'No woman undergoes such a serious procedure lightly.'

Well of course she is going to say that, her company gets paid performing abortions. Ripping out your babies and throwing them in the rubbish bin puts food on their table. I wonder if repeaters get a discount from the taxpayer (who pays, as always.)

The more I have researched abortions, 'family planning clinics' and the like, the more I have turned against them. We all know the rules. If you don't want children, use protection or better yet, don't have sex. Simple really. But as is usually the case when you remove the consequences of a particular behaviour, incidences of that behaviour will increase if it appeals to a persons instincts. The promotion of abortions is done purely for reducing the worlds population, not because of 'overpopulation', a myth I have written about here, but because less people are easier to enslave.

In fact, all of those extra babies would go a long way to balancing our our birth rate, which is currently way below replacement rates, something that always happens with societies that adopt feminism. This conveniently encourages the Government to encourage immigration from other countries, including ones with diametrically opposed cultures and religions. These in turn create ghettos in the host nation, creating social disharmony. But bad news for the People usually means good news for the Police State.

FULL ABORTIONS SHOWN ON SPANISH TELEVISION - FIRST IN HISTORY

Right to choose

“The statement virtually condemns those who seek to give education and reproductive healthcare alternatives to women in a country where about 10 to 12 women die every day due to pregnancy-related causes. Besides, none of the bills pending in the House of Representatives endorse abortion as a method of contraception,” said Maza.

“In 2006, the national maternal mortality rate was 162. This is a far cry from the Millennium Development Goal target of 52.3. The MDG targets also state that all births should be attended to by skilled health workers by 2015.”

The Gabriela solon further said that “We need to educate women and their families and we need to make reproductive healthcare options available to make this country safer for women and children. Studies worldwide show that deaths and complications resulting from unsafe pregnancies as well as self-induced abortions remain high in countries where contraception and abortion is highly restricted or illegal.”

Maza also urged Church leaders to consider the case of Carmen, Bohol a municipality in the Visayas that has implemented a reproductive healthcare policy. This policy has resulted to virtually no maternal death in Carmen in the last five years except for one case in 2006. #

Philippine leader subservient to church on population: Ramos

MANILA (AFP) - - Former Philippine leader Fidel Ramos on Friday hit out at President Gloria Arroyo, accusing her of being subservient to the Roman Catholic Church over population policy.

The attack from the ex-president, an ally of Arroyo, came as he addressed a UN forum on World Population Day.

The Philippines, with a population of about 90 million, has one of the fastest birth rates in Southeast Asia at around 2.3 percent annually, according to the country's Population Commission. It has been estimated that the figure could hit 100 million within the next seven years.
Read the rest of the entry here.

Why do I say this? Glad you asked.

WE whine about the price of gas while we pump it into a large SUV that gets 4 gallons to the mile. WE whine about the price of food yet we throw away enough food to feed a small third world country. We whine about the leadership of the country but we continue the same types to Washington.

It is the age old problem, everyone sees the problem but it is up toi someone to solve it...we cannot be bothered with that part of the problem.

So I say to my fellow Americans....Whine on and do nothing...that is always a good solution to the problem.

I think Metro is unique in that people don't mind riding it, and they find it fairly useful. In many other cities, such as New York, the subway system is very extensive, but people instead choose to use other forms of transportation. For some reason I'm unaware of (I've only been on it once myself) many people elect to take cabs around New York, despite the fact that the subway is faster and cheaper. In other cities, such as Los Angeles, people rarely use the Metro system, because although it is available, it does not reach many parts of the city and is often confusing. Most people find that simply driving is much more convenient.

In DC, however, Metro is wonderful. It goes almost everywhere in the cities and reaches most bordering areas, it's relatively cheap (compared to most subway systems,) and it's easy to use. Something I've noticed, which I attribute to this convenience, is that Metro riders seem to consist of a population that reflects very well on the people who live in the DC area. People of all backgrounds, races, and socioeconomic classes regularly use Metro as one of their primary forms of transportation. Those of us who have lived in the area for a while tend to take Metro for granted, but I am personally fascinated by how something as trivial as a system of transportation fits into a city like DC and becomes part of it.