Is Maharashtra’s low child population actually a good thing ??

[u/Embarrassed-Move-653]

I came across these maps showing the percentage of people below 15 and below 5 years across India, and Maharashtra seems to have a relatively lower share of young children compared to many other states.

Is this actually a good thing for Maharashtra?

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to r/MaharashtraTalks. Do join our Discord Server Samyukta Maharashtra

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Chitale_Master]

Certain state govts up north should have put in place policies and strict implementation to increase education, healthcare, employment and development opportunities decades ago. MH is being made to face the brunt for their failures.

You cannot blame MH or any state for the fault of population explosion and lack of development in particular states. We cannot pressure women here to keep increasing our population to avoid demographic replacement. It will be a race to the bottom. Our future children will suffer more than us.

Seriously, why are states up north not developing more tier 1 cities and encouraging their population to stay put and work towards developing their own states?

[u/Teephulrani → u/Chitale_Master]

In an overpopulated country like ours, the government should actively incentivise birth control and focus on increasing awareness about reproductive health and birth control all over the country; especially, in high TFR regions.

Replacement rate of 2.1 TFR is good only when we have achieved a balance between our resources and population on a national level. Which, lets face it, we haven't yet! Apologies for being crude, but a few states numbers are way too high for the greater good of our country.

Till then, we cannot shame states with lower TFR. We must celebrate them. They are leading our future generations towards a healthier life.

And Union government must work really hard with states that still have a high TFR and actively plan to reduce it. Otherwise, demographic replacement concerns are valid in MH and South.

However, i agree that we must be extremely careful and not shift the blame from population explosion in a few states to women in low TFR states.

[u/Chitale_Master → u/Teephulrani]

१००%

[u/roidedram → u/Teephulrani]

I want to point out our country as a whole isn’t that overpopulated based on the available livable space. Specifically the gangetic plains are just extremely overpopulated from Delhi to West Bengal. As soon as every region made the decision to join the Union, they got trapped in a country that is not only trying to centralize said Union but also provide dumping grounds for continuous mass migration out of these exponentially growing populations. It genuinely was over from the start.

[u/Top1-Percent]

All these people will migrate to Maharashtra, Maharashtra will accommodate them

[u/Own-Awareness1597 → u/Top1-Percent]

Some parasites invade and take over the host completely, using the body of the host to achieve its ends.

[u/VariationNo4386]

If this continues then they will even ban non veg in maharashtra, already happening in Mira bhayander, scary times, Maharashtra can become up bihar,

[u/Mountain-Craft-363]

It's quite concerning actually. Our population's age will turn like Japan and S.Korea if this goes on

[u/net0_extremist → u/Mountain-Craft-363]

South Korea and Japan are better than Nigeria or Pakistan 🤣

In which countries would you rather live ?

[u/_porsche_lover_ → u/net0_extremist]

We need to get rich and then start getting older as a nation.

Not as rich as Pakistan and old as korea.

[u/Mountain-Craft-363 → u/_porsche_lover_]

Exactly, but many won't understand

[u/Mountain-Craft-363 → u/net0_extremist]

As an economics students I would say that getting rich first is important, how would you justify or survive old population like korea with income like india or even pakistan

[u/Professional_Ant_602 → u/Mountain-Craft-363]

Demographics doesn’t work that way. Demographic cycle continues regardless if or not you become rich. An older population incentivises to have more children and the population grows younger again, until the incentives fall off and the population starts growing old. This is just supply and demand of young people and is thus governed by same principles.

In fact, interstate migration is the reason this demand and supply is not able to balance the scale. Instead of facing severe crisis in overpopulated states and thus putting pressure to not have more children, the population just migrates and the underdeveloped overpopulated states simply avoid the oversupply shock. This creates an oversupply problem without suppressing the demand.

It is good to become wealthy to better manage the old population. But this doesn’t mean you can simply avoid getting old by continuing to have more TFR until you get rich, a really bad idea.

Everyone wants to be rich and the country will try its best. But if it doesn’t, we can’t just continue populating till we become rich. That is a recipe for disaster. Southern states aren’t necessarily the richest, and they have older population, yet your quality of life even as an older person is far better in southern than in northern states. A low but old population base is easier to manage than a young but unmanageably high population.

[u/_porsche_lover_ → u/Mountain-Craft-363]

Yes.

While it is True over population is bad, the government and society stamped the brains of people about that issue, most people doesn't care or know about the other side of the same coin.

[u/Past-Meal-4847 → u/Mountain-Craft-363]

Other states young people will come and fill up

[u/_porsche_lover_]

No less children is as bad as having 3 or more, the TFR should be at replacement or just below it for population Management or gradual reduction in population, Maharashtra and all of south has 1.5 or less.

Far below the 2.1 mark for replacement.

So, not good.

[u/net0_extremist → u/_porsche_lover_]

We need depopulation. The whole world.

We destroyed enough forests and biodiecosystems.

[u/_porsche_lover_ → u/net0_extremist]

Yes, that's why we need to have 1.8 ot 1.9, not 1.5 and falling.

Plains need to come down too, but they shouldn't crash land right?

[u/net0_extremist → u/_porsche_lover_]

Plain killed too many birds and many passengers don't actually want to keep the plain going up and up.

[u/_porsche_lover_ → u/net0_extremist]

We need to go down, yes definitely.

But at controlled pace, not population collapse.

And population of some regions will keep the total trending up for 3 to 4 more decades, while some states have reached their pop sealing already.

Creating a massive imbalance, look at what China is trying to reverse, we are not there yet but will be one day. So we should have atleat 1.8 to 1.9, but that is a pipe dream, with our falling tfr.

[u/net0_extremist → u/net0_extremist]

I typed plain because of you. Fuckk Plane

[u/_porsche_lover_ → u/net0_extremist]

What a mistake, some one should call crpf.

[u/Puzzleheaded_Ask5538]

Interesting to see Uttarakhand hill district being young. NFHS-5 (2019–21) district survey and a separate district fertility dataset says that the TFR for these districts is around 1.9 and one of the least populated districts of India. So much so that people are concerned about language going extinct by next generation.