I'm not trying to divide Europeans at all. They, by the way, are doing the job fairly well on their own.
Funny, but I sometimes have exactly the same impression about Americans.
That Ayn Rand endorsed these ideas doesn't make them wrong.
I read an interesting quote once, but can't remember by whom. It went along the lines
"It is interesting that a country, funded by and based on the values and morals of Puritan immigrants, seems to embrace something as a core value that every Christian church teaches us to be a deadly sin: covetousness."
Reading Ayn Rand always reminds me of that quote.
Norway is an exception to most rules, due principally to the very large (relative to population) oil revenues it derives from the North & Norwegian Sea oil fields. Take away the petroleum and the economy is just limping along.
According to official Norwegian numbers, it has a GDP per capita of $ 50,750 (even though the "CIA World Factbook" only lists a p.c. GDP of $ 40,000). Oil and gas extraction plus oil and gas related services constitute around 19% of the Norwegian GDP. Take that away and the GDP would still be higher than that of the United States - indeed an exceptional record.
The Norwegians are prudently saving a large fraction of the revenues, and will likely be prosperous - and Socialist - for a long time.
The current administration is saving most of the revenues, and even though the opposition parties would like to see more of it spent I don't see the government changing its disposition.
They are not a part of the EU.
That's true. I'm sorry, I wasn't sure if you were just bashing the EU or all of Europe.
georgeob1 about demographic decline wrote:
I guess you are saying that the numbers can be ignored. There are few statistics collected by governments that are as accurate and complete as the records of births and deaths among their residents. OK by me if you wish to ignore these facts, but it doesn't lend confidence to your conclusions.
Nope, don't want to ignore 'these' numbers, but again it would be helpful to know what we are talking about - the EU 25, the continental European Union or maybe all of Europe...
The total European natural population growth for example was about 63 000 last year, with positive numbers for the 25 countries of the European Union by some 183 000 and negative by 247 000 for the other member states.
georgeob1 about demographic decline wrote:
Fertility among immigrants has always been higher in this country than among the native born. Even among white Americans, fertility is higher than prevails in Europe. On the whole Americans are between three and four years younger than Europeans - a huge difference by demographic standards. There are no trends yet detectable that would support your thesis. Not only is female fertility lower among Europeans of child-bearing age, but, as a result of past low birthrates, the percent of the population in these age groups is smaller than in this country. Europe has a smaller fraction of its population producing more Europeans and, in addition, a lower production rate among them. For this reason sustained demographic trends such as this tend to accelerate, not diminish.
Declining birthrates are a fact in both Europe and America, yet undeniably more so in Europe. Nevertheless, the overall population in Europe remains relatively steady if you take immigration into account, while it is continously growing in the US. The question is obviously whether you deem immigration to be desirable or not.
You seem to imply that continental
Europe has more problem facing immigration, yet most immigration from without the Union is taking place into the UK, both percentagewise and in absolute numbers. This is undeniably creating issues that will have to be adressed and that are being adressed.
Nevertheless the United States are facing quite similar challenges. Out of a population of about 260 millions (of citizens 5 years and over), almost 50 millions speak a language other than English at home. Almost 30 millions speak Spanish, and more than 20 millions out of those speak English less than "very well", according to recent census data.
I don't think this will lead to the question of "cultural survival" for the United States neither. That is, unless you view the English language at the core of US identity, which I wouldn't necessarily subscribe to. English is not the official language of the United States, and that it was the language of choice for quite some time is rather astonishing, given the various immigration waves during the last centuries.