GEN
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's my impression that most worlds in the Spinward Marches are going to
be more equivalent in terms of population growth to contemporary
`developed' nations than to `developing' nations (just my opinion).
Furthermore, while one might expect high birth rates and low death rates
(due to available high tech medical care) on `developing' worlds one
would also expect high rates of *emigration* (to high population worlds)
to keep the net growth rate low.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I agree with your explanation for a lack of change in the pop numbers -
there's a lot of info in the UWPs of just the Spinward Marches, GDW
would have had to do an awful lot of work just to adjust those figures
for a 15 years period (just wait until they release 'official' Regency
data and have to deal with 80+ years!).
Actually changes in population I feel would depend on the planetary
environment and pop density with a bit of influence from the type of
government (possibly a corporate govt of oppresive dictatorship wouldn't
want even a 10% increase). I should think that low pop worlds with
plenty of room for development would have quite a large increase in
population while harse environments would experience next to no growth
or a net loss as people seek more habitable worlds.
PBJuzyk | 'Most plans don't even survive
Reading, PA | contact with Reality'
Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8) | -Hammer Lanthrop, *Smash & Grab*