comment: >
  
  In the US, Telugu is the language with the largest increase in speakers. In India there are around 81 million native speakers and it’s pretty much only spoken in 2 states. Crazy numbers
context: Those two countries (China and India) make up 35% of the entire planet's population.  That's crazy. >
  
  And 70% of downtown Toronto! >
  
  There's a lot of Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh in that. >
  
  Nah man, there is only Chinese and Indian.  If you are Korean, Japanese, Taiwanese, Pilipino, Thai, you are all Chinese.  If you are Sri Lankan, Pakistani, Bangladeshis, then you are all Indian. >
  
  Taiwanese are actually really chinese ethnically, same language, same culture, etc >
  
  Bro seriously? >
  
  He’s right, but the Taiwanese don’t like being associated with the communists up north, to such an extreme degree that they don’t consider themselves Chinese.
  Even though that’s not true at all, period.
  Cultural difference is about on the same level as Russia and Ukraine, which is to say… not too different.
  Only significant difference is in political philosophy. >
  
  Isn't there a small subsection of their population that are actually indigenous Taiwanese that aren't the same folks that ran from the mainland? >
  
  Yes, indigenous taiwanese are different >
  
  And India is like 1/3rd the size of China! >
  
  A lot of China is fairly uninhabitable though. You’ve got the Tibetan plateau in the southwest, the taklamakan desert in the west and the Gobi desert in the north. 
  Roughly 80% of their population lives in an area just a bit larger than India. >
  
  That sounds really crowded! 
  I remember in the civilization games, if your cities were too crowded, your people would become enraged. 
  "It's too crowded!" "There's not enough ROOM!" 
  It was pretty funny. Even had little angry faces for angry population. >
  
  South Asia is definitely still the worst in that regard. The densest populated state in America, NJ, has a density of 488km2. 
  Bangladesh has a density of 1328km2. >
  
  It's funny how Bangladesh has more people than Russia and Russia is like 50 times bigger, if not more. >
  
  Russia is 114 times the size of Bangladesh, and has 26 million less people >
  
  I was going to say 100, but was insecure due to mercator and changed it to 50 lmao.
  Thank you though, I was hoping someone would point out the actual number. >
  
  Glad to see someone aware of map distortion. The Mercator projection is fantastic for direction, terrible for comparing area. >
  
  I remember when I was a kid looking at Greenland and being baffled at the size of the thing only to be disappointed when looking at a globe for the first time lmao. >
  
  I had no idea this was even coming. Wow. >
  
  It was confirmed last year with the UN as soon as they found a target date for humanity surpassing the 8 billion mark (Nov 15, 2022). >
  
  They say population will "even out" around 10 billion.  Even if that is true that is 25% increase from here.
  You think food is a lot now?
  You think housing is a lot now?
  Not to mention we know places like India with higher populations and climate changes are going to be even more dystopian than they are now.
  We have changed so much of our landscapes into crop production.
  We have destroyed almost all the biodiversity on this earth.
  Hopefully we can learn this lesson and limit the insane downspiral of quality of life and affordability of life that is going to come in the next few decades or else we are going to see more insane rises of political extremism and other social shit from sheer alienation, frustration, of huge segments of the population.
  We need to get ahead of this shit.  
  Just like we should have gotten ahead of world populations and climate change. >
  
  doomer posting, people grow food, people build houses. >
  
  World population could fit in Texas >
  
  Well, at an insanely high density >
  
  For some reason, I was under the impression they already had >
  
  I've seen some articles speculating that China has been overestimating their population numbers for years, and that India likely surpassed them some time ago. No idea how credible that line of reasoning is though. >
  
  There surely has to be an algorithm for Communist exaggeration by now. I swear every time I watch a documentary on the Soviets I hear something else that makes me say, "Really? They fudged the numbers on that?" >
  
  OH YEAH?!! invades Taiwan >
  
  *Proceeds to cost more lives than are gained. >
  
  Even if they capture it without firing a single shot, they. Are. Fucked. Still the biggest importers of food and energy and now they're dealing with the pandemic, with vaccines that don't work and a population that's been locked up for 3 years and has built up no immunity. >
  
  Is that you Peter Zeihan? >
  
  Zeihan is blowing up lately. Found a keynote of his on YouTube at a Iowa agricultural convention a couple months back and next thing I know he's on Rogan scaring the shit out of people. >
  
  When will we see the slow down of India's population and reproduction rates, like in China? >
  
  India is now below replacement levels for births. It's only Africa that is above replacement level.
  From the Wall Street Journal: 
  
  India has long been a byword for overpopulation, but this is about to change. According to a new national survey, India’s total fertility rate, the average number of children a woman will bear during her lifetime, has fallen to 2—below the replacement level of 2.1 for the first time. >
  
  Excellent >
  
  It's all about economic development and giving women the tools and agency to control pregnancy >
  
  Congrats? >
  
  Yeah, this is the only thing that China doesn't want to be number 1 in. >
  
  Not as concerning as people might think. Despite the high population India's demographic breakdown is much more favorable than China's (who lost a lot of prime working age people due to the one child policy and is now having trouble sustaining a rapidly aging population). India is on track to stabilize population growth by 2050. >
  
  Thank you for being informed and not shitting out a knee jerk comment like “aw man, people over there should stop having kids! The world is overpopulated and we’re all gonna die.” >
  
  Just what India needs, more people. >
  
  No kidding.  India is dystopian as fuck.  
  Higher and higher populations may mean growth for the richest of the rich but it means absolute horrid affordability and quality of life for almost everyone else.
  When people say "Oh the world population will start evening out around 10 billion" even if you believe that it is 25% more people on the earth than right now.
  You think food costs a lot now?
  You think housing costs a lot now?
  We need to reward people for not having children or only having one.  Monetary and socially reward them big time because this is going to sink us all.
  It's already transformed so much varying landscapes for crops and nearly wiped out all the biodiversity on the planet.
  We are next.  People don't realize how bad it is. >
  
  
  India is dystopian as fuck
  
  Said the westerner in his utopia. >
  
  And India will be one of the countries that is going to suffer massively with climate change. They may be the most populous now, but in the next 20 years, I dunno. >
  
  Heat stroke is no fun. I’ve had it and it literally feels like you’re shutting down but slowly. You reach a point where you’re covered in sweat but stop feeling hot (actually you stop feeling anything really). I had goosebumps like I was cold but I knew I was hot. I was dizzy and vomiting and numb until I just fainted. Luckily my friend was able to put ice around my body to bring my core temp down. Went to the hospital after and they said I suffered a mild heat stroke. >
  
  Hey y'all, we prob need to stop having babies >
  
  no, india and china need to stop having babies. >
  
  They already have
  The Chinese are below replacement levels and face a serious demographic crisis in the next 40 years, and the Indians are fast approaching replacement levels too. 
  It’s really just Africa that is driving human population growth. The likes of Mali and DR Congo are each having more than 5 kids per woman >
  
  The reality is the quickest way to get people to stop having babies is having the country modernize.
  Education, healthcare, and food stability causes birth rates to plummet. People have a lot of children when they think many of the kids will die to hunger or disease, especially in countries where they need those kids to work ASAP just to survive. >
  
  Yep, and it’s also partly a monetary/lifestyle thing 
  If you’re well off, your investments are your finances 
  If you have no finances, your investments are your offspring, so they can help out and look after you 
  It doesn’t pay for people in abject poverty not to have lots of kids the way it does for an average person from the US or Europe. >
  
  Don't forget sex education and access to prophylactics or birth control methods... >
  
  India Fucks! >
  
  Actually birth rates have been declining consistently since the 1960s and are currently near replacement levels. Any growth is carried by the sheer population momentum. >
  
  Do they have anything similar to China's one child policy. >
  
  To add to this. My friend lives on Delhi, he had once posted a screenshot of a delivery app listing their stats. Condoms were the most ordered item, even more than rice. >
  
  For perspective; United States population is equivalent to 4.3% of the total world population. >
  
  If both india and China lost a billion ppl each, the US would still be the 3rd most populous country >
  
  There is trash everywhere in India. People just throw it on the ground and it piles up. Then once and while someone lights the pile on fire. You can smell burning plastics and rubber all the time.
  People keep on buying more cars and bikes, the have no traffic lights or stop signs, they just honk their horns. You will walk along and someone comes up behind you and honks their horn!
  Middle class is growing. Everywhere is crowded.  India seems to have no plan for the future. >
  
  China is basically the same.
  Edit: I'm talking about the trash thing. No Westerner can go to China and walk away thinking it's a clean and sanitary place. Downvotes don't change reality. >
  
  China varies greatly depends on the place. Is it as nice and clean as Japan? Hell no, but I think tier 1 cities like Shanghai and Beijing are very much comparable to places like New York or Chicago. 
  You sure as hell won’t be seeing trash piles burning in any of these cities.
  Hell Shanghai is probably cleaner than SF these days. 
  When you go into the much smaller cities or the country side, then all bets are off. >
  
  shanghai is much cleaner than nyc these days.  nyc is just generally not a very clean city. >
  
  Bharat was already number one considering Pakistan and Bangladesh were carved out of it. >
  
  I don’t need India to win, I just need China to lose >
  
  thats a curse in most instances >
  
  A lot of these comments are taking their western view and applying it to countries where it doesn’t make sense.
  India does not have an aging population. It is primarily a young population. It literally continues to benefit them to have kids.
  Yes they will have problems down the line. But why would they care? If they give up the birth rate now, they lose their progress trajectory.
  Basically every single sector of India is growing and rapidly. Government policy has finally started hitting corruption and middlemen in agriculture and the rise of industrial and corporate farming is likely going to provide more food than ever in the next decade or two.
  They literally have incentives to increase birth rates at this point >
  
  India is now below replacement levels for births. It's only Africa that is above replacement level.
  From the Wall Street Journal: 
  
  India has long been a byword for overpopulation, but this is about to change. According to a new national survey, India’s total fertility rate, the average number of children a woman will bear during her lifetime, has fallen to 2—below the replacement level of 2.1 for the first time. >
  
  This isn't a good thing. There's too many damn people. >
  
  India is now below replacement levels for births. It's only Africa that is above replacement level.
  From the Wall Street Journal: 
  
  India has long been a byword for overpopulation, but this is about to change. According to a new national survey, India’s total fertility rate, the average number of children a woman will bear during her lifetime, has fallen to 2—below the replacement level of 2.1 for the first time. >
  
  Are you commenting this on every comment? >
  
  This really scares me, b/c global warming does not care about how cute kids are. >
  
  Good luck getting india to give a fuck about that.
  No one’s trading their only chance at progress for a long term future theyre not at fault for.
  As high as indias current emissions are they account for less than 3% of total human emissions over time. America is over 1/3 by itself.
  Developed countries need to do their part and help out. They caused the problem it’s on em to solve it. They have the means considering they profited off of it for centuries >
  
  indias is actually a lot lot higher but its just not officially recorded >
  
  Source? >
  
  Dear earth population, please use birth control. There are too many of us around right now >
  
  Will there be a livestream of the transition? I’d like to dial-in. >
  
  Damn, India be fucking. >
  
  In the US, Telugu is the language with the largest increase in speakers. In India there are around 81 million native speakers and it’s pretty much only spoken in 2 states. Crazy numbers >
  
  Where did you pull that 450 million figure from your ass because last time I checked there were only around 100 million Telugu speaker, which including second language speaker. >
  
  My dumbass mixed up language stats fml >
  
  Time to set bumble travel mode to 🇮🇳 >
  
  Gotta pump those numbers up rookie >
  
  Some random Indian guy:
  
  I'm doing my part 👍 >
  
  IPL about to go off this year >
  
  My world view is shattering >
  
  Whole lotta shakin going on. >
  
  Dammn chill yall >
  
  Post about India in popular? Time to let unbridled racism loose. >
  
  This makes me claustrophobic. 
  I enjoy wide open spaces, very much so. >
  
  Well, there's still no shortage of that in many places, unfortunately these tend to be pretty barren areas that are not very hospitable. >
  
  India stronk >
  
  This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 67%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  A report from the United Nations suggests that India will become the most populous nation in the world, surpassing China, in the next three months.
  The United Nations report shows that India is expected to overtake China in terms of overall population by April and will have almost 1.7 billion people by 2050 compared to China's expected 1.31 billion, Yahoo News reported.
  CHINA'S POPULATION EXPECTED TO DIP AHEAD OF 2025: OFFICIAL. "The Indian subcontinent has always supported a robust human population. India has also long been compared to China, and they have for a long time traded with one another. So as much changes over the course of human history, that's something that recurs - both the dense population of the subcontinent, as well as the comparison with China."
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: China^#1 population^#2 India^#3 report^#4 expected^#5 >
  
  That sucks for them, don’t they have way less land mass, the people must be miserable or do they get a cool prize cause it makes no sense.. people can’t afford to repopulate in the US but they live 14 deep in a 1ba in both those places for $43 usd and survive >
  
  India #1 China #2 >
  
  
  not something to be proud of >
  
  Nothing to be proud of really…. >
  
  Damn, China got fucked out of that spot. >
  
  They should start using condoms lol >
  
  Lol talk about uneducated comment. India's fertility rate is at replacement level i.e 2 >
  
  Actually, it’s a bit above the replacement rate which is about 2.1. Which means in the absence of immigration or emigration, the population would still increase. Still much lower than the birth rate form say, 20 years ago though. >
  
  I think 2.1 is the replacement level, to account for people who die before reproducing. >
  
  u/Sankscan - fox news is not real news. It is a far-right propaganda network designed to control gullible viewer’s thoughts and viewpoints. Stop linking to this this propaganda website >
  
  S'okay. The planet is about to take care of our overpopulation problem for us, since we didn't want to do it. But we probably won't enjoy it at all. >
  
  Can't believe it took them this long to be honest >
  
  The planet needs them to get some planned parenthood, stat. >
  
  I refuse to believe India and china have accurate enough censuses to make this determination. >
  
  Canada has lots of space for them >
  
  Nobody wants to live in most of Canada. The vast majority of their population is along the American border. >
  
  This isn't the achievement these countries think it is... >
  
  By official estimates? The way China has been lying about its coming population decline I'd say it's already happened. >
  
  Why in the hell would people want to raise children in the sardine can that is that country? FFS, discover birth control. >
  
  More like next week if China doesn't get it's COVID fatalities under control >
  
  Can only assume that's because of China's steadfast commitment to genocide >
  
  that’s why they remain dirt poor to this day with about the same gpd per capita as africa as a whole >
  
  I feel like it wouldn’t be a bad idea to have a one child policy for the whole planet for a couple years
  Eta: OK, I get it, the one child policy didn’t work out so well, I just meant more that we need to get our population growth under control, we can’t even take care of all the people alive right now 🤪
  Eta2:fine, everybody fuck like rabbits and have 18 kids, we’ll let our grandkids solve the population problem while taking care of us in a nursing home. >
  
  Not the whole planet. A lot of developed countries are having a population decline. >
  
  Which is why immigration should be welcomed in developed countries, not shunned. >
  
  Yeah no thanks. Homes are unaffordable enough as is where I live. More people doesn't make that any better. >
  
  And you think an immigrant will be competing with you in the housing market immediately? Your issue is with the companies that are using real estate to park their cash if anything. >
  
  But of course they are. Where do you think they live upon arrival? Housing doesn't just mean homes for sale: Rental rates have skyrocketed.
  Now, I happen to agree that immigration can't stop but this claim that high immigration rates have no effect on the housing market are ridiculous. More people means fewer homes if salaries can't afford them. Governments have completely failed to address the issue but that doesn't mean we should ignore the factors that are exacerbating the problem. If the government isn't going to do something about the problem, the least it could do would be to stop allowing it to get worse. >
  
  Does that include Indians born in India and living abroad? I wonder what the total headcount would be. >
  
  Country, not nationality. >
  
  Disgusting >
  
  I fail to see what there is to Brag about  . >
  
  Well, when you abort half your population for decades, things will happen. >
  
  The land that gave the Kamasutra is finally translating the theory into practice! >
  
  India will overtake China in all dubious stats and will lose on everything meaningful >
  
  this is terrible news. >
  
  Those two countries (China and India) make up 35% of the entire planet's population.  That's crazy. >
  
  India explained like it's a game of Civ:
  monsoon --> +1000 food in the Ganges valley --> record population >
  
  Partly true. India has a massive population because of the massive river systems that are fed by the glaciers in the Himalayas. That's the Ganges and Brahmaputra and the Indus rivers and their tributaries. Those are all glacier fed and augmented by the monsoons. There are also two other major river systems in the South that are mainly monsoon fed.
  Crucially, it is also the Himalayas that act as a cold weather barrier from the North aka Tibet and Northern China and Eurasia. That allows for a very temperate climate in the Indian subcontinent that allows for incredibly high population density.
  Many parts of America for example also have very high levels of rainfall and big lakes and river systems but the cold weather causes a much lower population density. Of course I am also ignoring history as India and China are much much older civilizations where the populations had a much longer head start. Besides politics - both regions had remarkable political stability compared to many other parts of the world several thousand years ago. >
  
  To add to the river systems, they are also extremely fertile. Combined with favorable weather, they are able to have two harvest seasons per year on their crops. And the choice of rice over other grains allows for higher caloric dense staple to feed a bigger population. Lots of factors. Probably a lot more than this. >
  
  So with the now disappearing glaciers and  changing weather patterns India is 100% fucked in the very near future? >
  
  Yes. Unless they adapt, of course. >
  
  They migrate >
  
  Where? >
  
  To space duh, that's why there's an Indian space agency >
  
  Ah the only place that hasn't been corrupted by capitalism. >
  
  I had no idea this was even coming. Wow. >
  
  Clearly a lot of men in India were coming, if you know what I mean. >
  
  Less than you would think, at least in women. India has a very severe issue with more men than women, it’s why people are not legally allowed to know the gender of their baby from an ultrasound. >
  
  Wouldn't that be roughly 14 mil more men than women roughly, going off the 1.4 billion population off twitter? Plus that number doesn't seem to account for what gender ratios look like per age group >
  
  My brain is not working - if there are 1020 women for 1000 men, how did you get 14 million more men than women? >
  
  Because while there are supposedly 2% more women compared to men, you can't just take 2% of the total. You need to take 2% of the number of men.
  1.4 billion * 1020 / (1020+1000) gives the number of women.
  1.4 billion * 1000 / (1020+1000) gives the number of men.
  The split according to those numbers is 50.5% women, 49.5% men.
  Edit: the numbers from that BBC article are from a sample and not from the census. There's criticism that the numbers aren't believable. >
  
  Right, more women. The guy above said more men. Number wasn't the issue here. >
  
  And India is like 1/3rd the size of China! >
  
  A lot of China is fairly uninhabitable though. You’ve got the Tibetan plateau in the southwest, the taklamakan desert in the west and the Gobi desert in the north. 
  Roughly 80% of their population lives in an area just a bit larger than India. >
  
  That sounds really crowded! 
  I remember in the civilization games, if your cities were too crowded, your people would become enraged. 
  "It's too crowded!" "There's not enough ROOM!" 
  It was pretty funny. Even had little angry faces for angry population. >
  
  South Asia is definitely still the worst in that regard. The densest populated state in America, NJ, has a density of 488km2. 
  Bangladesh has a density of 1328km2. >
  
  It's funny how Bangladesh has more people than Russia and Russia is like 50 times bigger, if not more. >
  
  Russia is 114 times the size of Bangladesh, and has 26 million less people >
  
  I was going to say 100, but was insecure due to mercator and changed it to 50 lmao.
  Thank you though, I was hoping someone would point out the actual number. >
  
  Glad to see someone aware of map distortion. The Mercator projection is fantastic for direction, terrible for comparing area. >
  
  I remember when I was a kid looking at Greenland and being baffled at the size of the thing only to be disappointed when looking at a globe for the first time lmao. >
  
  i remember asking a teacher why alaska was claimed to be twice the size of texas but appeared to be half the size of the whole continental us on all the maps and she had no idea. i was always so confused by that. i never learned about the map distortion until several years later from a vsauce video >
  
  For some reason, I was under the impression they already had >
  
  I've seen some articles speculating that China has been overestimating their population numbers for years, and that India likely surpassed them some time ago. No idea how credible that line of reasoning is though. >
  
  There surely has to be an algorithm for Communist exaggeration by now. I swear every time I watch a documentary on the Soviets I hear something else that makes me say, "Really? They fudged the numbers on that?" >
  
  It's one of the major downfalls (practically, not morally) of authoritarianism. The top might do it too but people every step of the way are fudging numbers and telling bosses what they want to hear >
  
  OH YEAH?!! invades Taiwan >
  
  *Proceeds to cost more lives than are gained. >
  
  Even if they capture it without firing a single shot, they. Are. Fucked. Still the biggest importers of food and energy and now they're dealing with the pandemic, with vaccines that don't work and a population that's been locked up for 3 years and has built up no immunity. >
  
  Just fyi, Zeihan has a lot of interesting takes, but he expresses his claims with too much certainty. For example he has twice predicted that China would collapse within a decade. Those decades have passed and China hasn't collapsed. That said he was right about Russia being the instigator of a war on it's periphery back in 2016.
  He needs to cite more sources other than himself. >
  
  Predicting that Russia would eventually invade one of it's neighbors isn't a deep geopolitical insight that only he could have made though, it's just stating the plainly fucking obvious. >
  
  Literally 2 years after he invaded, they predicted they would invade again. What a bold prediction! >
  
  Next 3 months? I was way off. I thought it was going to be 2025 at the earliest >
  
  Not surprissed, China popultion is much older on average. >
  
  Not as concerning as people might think. Despite the high population India's demographic breakdown is much more favorable than China's (who lost a lot of prime working age people due to the one child policy and is now having trouble sustaining a rapidly aging population). India is on track to stabilize population growth by 2050. >
  
  Thank you for being informed and not shitting out a knee jerk comment like “aw man, people over there should stop having kids! The world is overpopulated and we’re all gonna die.” >
  
  We're still all gonna die though, either way. >
  
  Not me, I'm gonna get uploaded to the local supermarket ice cream machine. 
  ICE CREAM DENIED >
  
  Only 2 states in India is responsible for massive population in India because they lie on fertile lands of river Ganga.  Togather that amount to 300 to 320mn people . Rest of the country has replacement level below 2.1 >
  
  Very fertile indeed >
  
  Someone tell these people they China and India are historically most populous country. History that goes back to thousands of years. >
  
  China was. India was not a country but a geographical concept for a long time. >
  
  Yeah, I should have said subcontinent or that particular part of Asia. >
  
  Congrats? >
  
  I feel like 10 years ago I would’ve found this to be a cool fact
  Now considering the state of the world, I don’t know if this should be a point of pride or success >
  
  India is already at replacement level or below so it's pretty close to stabilizing and later shrinking >
  
  When will we see the slow down of India's population and reproduction rates, like in China? >
  
  India is now below replacement levels for births. It's only Africa that is above replacement level.
  From the Wall Street Journal: 
  
  India has long been a byword for overpopulation, but this is about to change. According to a new national survey, India’s total fertility rate, the average number of children a woman will bear during her lifetime, has fallen to 2—below the replacement level of 2.1 for the first time. >
  
  Excellent >
  
  It's all about economic development and giving women the tools and agency to control pregnancy >
  
  
  It's all about economic development and giving women the tools and agency to control pregnancy
  
  The first part is true. The second not so much.  
  It is mostly about getting people away from sustenance farm life. When people are poor peasents, they tend to have a lot of kids as those are free labour.    
  We saw France have a sharp decline in the 1800s, long before birth control and abortions was a thing for most. 
  Industrialisation and education is the key here. >
  
  And India will be one of the countries that is going to suffer massively with climate change. They may be the most populous now, but in the next 20 years, I dunno. >
  
  Heat stroke is no fun. I’ve had it and it literally feels like you’re shutting down but slowly. You reach a point where you’re covered in sweat but stop feeling hot (actually you stop feeling anything really). I had goosebumps like I was cold but I knew I was hot. I was dizzy and vomiting and numb until I just fainted. Luckily my friend was able to put ice around my body to bring my core temp down. Went to the hospital after and they said I suffered a mild heat stroke. >
  
  Oh, shit. I might’ve had a heat stroke when in middle school football practice about 20 years ago.  i remember feeling woozy and light headed then my sight went away. All I saw was something like black and white at the same time when i bent over to drink water. sight was gone, threw up and it came back. was confused but didn’t think too much of it bc I was just happy af to see again. >
  
  Unsure if heat stroke but it’s very possible. You definitely lost consciousness though >
  
  China screwed themselves with their one-child policy. So many families wanted their only child to be a boy, and when they found out the sex was female, they'd have an abortion, let them die after birth, etc.
  And now there's an overload of men without enough women to give birth, which is causing a birth rate decline. Even though they reversed the one-child policy, there's such a big gender gap that it'll take a very long time to reverse the impact. >
  
  The gender gap is not the driving factor though. Even at the worst age group China's gender gap is only like 12% more boys than girls. The driving factor is the lower birth rate as a whole. And the high cost of raising a kid. >
  
  12% is crazy. Mathematically speaking, every ~8th guy is bound to stay single for his whole life... unless women are allowed to have multiple husbands. >
  
  realistically speaking... more than every 8th guy is in his mom's basement on reddit these days >
  
  Which is not a good thing for society imho. >
  
  Hey y'all, we prob need to stop having babies >
  
  no, india and china need to stop having babies. >
  
  They already have
  The Chinese are below replacement levels and face a serious demographic crisis in the next 40 years, and the Indians are fast approaching replacement levels too. 
  It’s really just Africa that is driving human population growth. The likes of Mali and DR Congo are each having more than 5 kids per woman >
  
  The reality is the quickest way to get people to stop having babies is having the country modernize.
  Education, healthcare, and food stability causes birth rates to plummet. People have a lot of children when they think many of the kids will die to hunger or disease, especially in countries where they need those kids to work ASAP just to survive. >
  
  The fastest way for people to stop having many kids is to ensure girls stay in school and pursue higher education.
  Getting them married as teenagers guarantees a boat load of kids where the cycle likely repeats. >
  
  In my nursing program, an instructor explained how girls in impoverished countries often drop out of school when they hit puberty because they don’t have access to sanitary products.