Germany’s Der Spiegel does a better job of reporting on the world’s 7 billion people. (Article is in English.) In 2060, I’d be 84, so it’s fully possible that I could live to see this new demographic trend:
But,” says Wolfgang Lutz, “that shouldn’t distract us from the fact that an entirely different development has been underway for some time.” Lutz is the director of the Vienna-based International Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA) and one of the world’s most prominent demographers. As he sees it, it is “highly probable that mankind will begin to shrink by 2060 or 2070.”
It will be a global turning point. For the first time since the Black Death raged in the 14th century, the world’s death rate will be higher than its birth rate.
I had truly never thought this far ahead, but 2056–I’m gonna have a big birthday party. 80! Woo-hoo.
by 
Hey,stop your rubbish about abortion!Are you aware that even if you’ve never made abortions or used pills and IUD which all dont prevent fecundation and kill new lives you are guilty of creating new human lives fordoomed to death?I am going to explain elementary scientific facts to you,ignorant.On the average it takes about 2 years to a couple to conceive an embryon.But before this happens and the embryon starts to grow many other conceived embryons will not survive.So for example 1 in 3-5 embryons wanted (planned) by the couple survive.In practice every woman who had sex already had spontaneous micro-abortion.So shut up on abortion,stupid!you’d better study human biology and spend your time on something more useful than that rubbish of abortion.
women should have free access to abortion and men should also be granted the right to abortion.So for example when you get pregnant from a man who doesn’t want any children from you you will obliged by the law to make abortion.
Andrei Yudin,41 y.o.,Moscow.
@Andrei:
Yes, people can and do die from natural causes, even people who are at the embryonic stage of their natural development. However, most of us understand the distinction between a natural death and a deliberately caused one, the latter kind being conventionally referred to as “murder”.
“…men should also be granted the right to abortion…”
So, you want the state to kill someone who is inconvenient to you, and the right to use women as mere sex objects. Nice, Andrei. You’re a real man. I’m sure all the ladies in Moscow are impressed.
Yes,Dan,there is a certain difference between killing embryons through abortion,pills,IUD etc. and foredooming fecundated ovules and embryons to death through spontaneous micro-abortions.But if you know these scientific facts,you should stop copulating so that not create nw lives foredoomed to death.When you kill someone by chance,that’ without intention,you regret it and you would not have done that action which caused his death if you had known it.Right?It should be the same case with copulating.
Andrei Yudin.
Life of all animal and human beings is organised the way that all of them must kill others to eat and live.It’s not man who invented this way of existence but there is no other way of surviving.Human beings can’t abolish this natural law of existence they only can regard it phylosophically.The same case is with sex.If you don’t want to kill new lives don’t copulate at all.But almost all people,both men and women,are not able to bear life without sex.So killing embryons should be regarded as necessary one.The more so as embryons are not human beings at all and what’s more an adult animal of certain species is superior to children below for example 3 years.Furthermore,usually it’s not you who kill the embryon in case of abortion,it occurs at a hospital,as well as it’s the butcher who kills animals for your meal.
Andrei Yudin.
As to your assertion on “using women as mere sex objects”,it’s also anti-scientific rubbish.Most women want to have sex with men.Who’s then a “mere sex object” for whom?The more so as on the average a woman’s orgasm is more intense than that of men.
Andrei Yudin.
Had I caught Andrei`s comment before there was a response I would have deleted it, because I consider it embarrassing–for him. But apparently he is shameless and has now added three more embarrassing comments, none of which make enough sense to bother engaging with. So, dear readers, I`d suggest leaving poor Andrei alone.