Re: I will quote LGsinmyheart on the matter:

Quote: But that is precisely part of the reason! Current society, partly by accident (the social changes since 1945) and partly by design (the bureaucratization of youth affairs), makes it all the harder for young parents to prosper. More young parents will reverse the trend, by forcing society's hand to consider them, and by having they create alternatives for themselves.

Nah, antiabortion people make it actually easy for a young mother to raise a child, though it normally becomes the grandparents' kid, with the mother slowly losing more and more possibilities to think about her own personal growth. But the girl herself is the one who more often than not, would prefer to have fun (and learning in the way), instead of being charged with responsabilities, and is rarely mature enough to raise a kid into a rational human being.

Quote: (two things that not-particularly-young single mothers did a generation ago).

Umm, and they failed? Most single mothers are pretty careless about their children, and live as parasites of the child's parent and the government. And most criminals were raised by single mothers.

Quote:
Yes and no. Technology will replace most workers in labour intensive, little value added jobs: ie, the least desirable jobs to have. Knowledge intensive jobs, high value added jobs, specialized jobs, highly qualified jobs, and a lot of the service sector will actually be gaining more jobs than they lose to technology.

Well, that's what I meant by most workers.

Quote: Food production is still increasing without increasing land and water use. Urbanization is still going on, even in developed countries: making it easier to deliver services from water and sanitation to health and education to more people. Both trends will also improve the environmental sustainability of our lifestyles within the next decade. And then, as I said, many countries already are or soon will be losing population, not gaining it.

The planet's resources are limited, and current growth is often linked to the deshumanization of less developed countries. People are living longer, and most of the people in the world currently are living at extreme conditions, in China and India. 'Underpopulation" is hardly a concern, specially since suicides (that happen often at asian countries due to cultural reasons), should be avoided as they reflect either immaturity or unhappiness, and true progress should actually decrease both in most population. Again, the revolution here should be educational and spiritual rather than anything else.

Quote: Yes they can. Sarah Palin gave birth in a helicopter. OK, some claim the story is apocryphal, and Palin might not be the person you would like as an example. The point is that it is still very well possible.

Umm, you failed the point there. And while it may be possible under certain circumstances, for a mother it's impossible to be fully dedicated to something of her interest or she'll be considered an awful human being.

Quote: Well, nothing (or nobody) is, as such "necessary". But the more variety there is, the richer the whole human experience is, and the better we all are because of that.

Oh, I meant necessary for mankind's progress. We shouldn't think of our species as animals just looking for survival.

Quote: I am not limiting anyone: I am talking about social trends, not personal stories. There always are personal stories that run against a social trend, no matter how strong and evident the trend looks for a statistician.

It's individuals who lead the world, statistics and social trends are useless when trying to view the big picture since society as a whole acts according to choices of individuals influenced by very specific morals.