Kenya not doing baldy demographic wise.

[RV Pundit]

• Tweet

3.9 Kids per woman - against global average of 2.5. There is need for more investment in reducing this to 2.5 - more contraceptives, more women/girls being educated to secondary level, better health care (lower mortality rate).
http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/news/Kenya-women-having-fewest-children-in-East-Africa/539546-4073266-99iw9q/index.html

[Georgesoros]

Kenya is on a wrong path populationwwise. Too many people with too few resources.

[Nefertiti]

Population is about manpower really... on its own it's not a useful indicator of anything. For now the average children per woman in Turkana is probably lower than Nairobi yet people are super-poor and die of starvation there.

Better to focus on GDP growth - we need 10% growth to ascend to upper middle status - Mexico or Indonesia status. Yet we are doing 5% average.

[RV Pundit]

I don't think so. Population structure is very important. Turkana people are fewer but on average each family has more kids than Nairobi. Meaning the manpower (that is 16-65) of Nairobi is way bigger than Turkana (where most people are 0-16) Kids.

And this is very important. Kenya had growth rate of 10% from 1960s - all the way to 1984s - but it had fertility rate of 8-10% - making that growth useless - both at personal(micro) and national(macro-level). This is where South Korea leapfrogged us - otherwise our 60/70s growth rate averaged nearly 10%. South Korea were getting 1-2 kids - and we were popping on average 10-15 kids per family.

What is important is for population (whatever the number) to transition from having more children/old people(dependants) to having more adults (16-65) who can engage in work - that would mean more GDP/More Savings.

Otherwise growing GDP and growing the number of dependants is waste of time. That is what Kenya has been doing from 1963 to 2000. From year 2000 is when we see that changing..and now more people will move out of poverty. You can see Kenya has one of highest middle class & least poverty in Kenya due to that.This is esp true in Central & Nairobi province - Other places need to catch up - the fortunes of their families and the whole country will improve.

Kenya has pop of 45m - but going by IEBC voters - we can say about 20M are adults - remove old men - and you are talking about 15M people who can be classified as active manpower - and go further remove those in colleges & universities - and you're talking maybe 10M kenyans are working to support 45M. That is all the population that work, earn and spend money. The rest are depending on their families or gov (kids in schools, old men)

Population is about manpower really... on its own it's not a useful indicator of anything. For now the average children per woman in Turkana is probably lower than Nairobi yet people are super-poor and die of starvation there.

Better to focus on GDP growth - we need 10% growth to ascend to upper middle status - Mexico or Indonesia status. Yet we are doing 5% average.

[Georgesoros]

Do you walk the streets of any city in Kenya?
Lots of young people sitting around at 10am, nothing to do. If that is progress then call be stupid.
No jobs, depended on family, etc

I don't think so. Population structure is very important. Turkana people are fewer but on average each family has more kids than Nairobi. Meaning the manpower (that is 16-65) of Nairobi is way bigger than Turkana (where most people are 0-16) Kids.

And this is very important. Kenya had growth rate of 10% from 1960s - all the way to 1984s - but it had fertility rate of 8-10% - making that growth useless - both at personal(micro) and national(macro-level). This is where South Korea leapfrogged us - otherwise our 60/70s growth rate averaged nearly 10%. South Korea were getting 1-2 kids - and we were popping on average 10-15 kids per family.

What is important is for population (whatever the number) to transition from having more children/old people(dependants) to having more adults (16-65) who can engage in work - that would mean more GDP/More Savings.

Otherwise growing GDP and growing the number of dependants is waste of time. That is what Kenya has been doing from 1963 to 2000. From year 2000 is when we see that changing..and now more people will move out of poverty. You can see Kenya has one of highest middle class & least poverty in Kenya due to that.This is esp true in Central & Nairobi province - Other places need to catch up - the fortunes of their families and the whole country will improve.

Kenya has pop of 45m - but going by IEBC voters - we can say about 20M are adults - remove old men - and you are talking about 15M people who can be classified as active manpower - and go further remove those in colleges & universities - and you're talking maybe 10M kenyans are working to support 45M. That is all the population that work, earn and spend money. The rest are depending on their families or gov (kids in schools, old men)

Population is about manpower really... on its own it's not a useful indicator of anything. For now the average children per woman in Turkana is probably lower than Nairobi yet people are super-poor and die of starvation there.

Better to focus on GDP growth - we need 10% growth to ascend to upper middle status - Mexico or Indonesia status. Yet we are doing 5% average.

[Nefertiti]

Exactly - huge unemployment makes the adult-dependant ratio misleading. Unemployment and inflation are two key metrics without which the 25-65 "adults" Pundit is describing are actually dependants.

Do you walk the streets of any city in Kenya?
Lots of young people sitting around at 10am, nothing to do. If that is progress then call be stupid.
No jobs, depended on family, etc

I don't think so. Population structure is very important. Turkana people are fewer but on average each family has more kids than Nairobi. Meaning the manpower (that is 16-65) of Nairobi is way bigger than Turkana (where most people are 0-16) Kids.

And this is very important. Kenya had growth rate of 10% from 1960s - all the way to 1984s - but it had fertility rate of 8-10% - making that growth useless - both at personal(micro) and national(macro-level). This is where South Korea leapfrogged us - otherwise our 60/70s growth rate averaged nearly 10%. South Korea were getting 1-2 kids - and we were popping on average 10-15 kids per family.

What is important is for population (whatever the number) to transition from having more children/old people(dependants) to having more adults (16-65) who can engage in work - that would mean more GDP/More Savings.

Otherwise growing GDP and growing the number of dependants is waste of time. That is what Kenya has been doing from 1963 to 2000. From year 2000 is when we see that changing..and now more people will move out of poverty. You can see Kenya has one of highest middle class & least poverty in Kenya due to that.This is esp true in Central & Nairobi province - Other places need to catch up - the fortunes of their families and the whole country will improve.

Kenya has pop of 45m - but going by IEBC voters - we can say about 20M are adults - remove old men - and you are talking about 15M people who can be classified as active manpower - and go further remove those in colleges & universities - and you're talking maybe 10M kenyans are working to support 45M. That is all the population that work, earn and spend money. The rest are depending on their families or gov (kids in schools, old men)

Population is about manpower really... on its own it's not a useful indicator of anything. For now the average children per woman in Turkana is probably lower than Nairobi yet people are super-poor and die of starvation there.

Better to focus on GDP growth - we need 10% growth to ascend to upper middle status - Mexico or Indonesia status. Yet we are doing 5% average.