I think he's trying to make what he's doing more important than what it is. Don't get me wrong, it's great, but my understanding is the more upward in mobility a society/group of people get, the more affluent they become, the less children they have, not how healthy their children are. Big difference.

As far as feeding people goes, predictions are so bad we really shouldn't listen any longer. 1970 Global famine prediction (and there are countless others): Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

#1 No it won't.

#1 you are 100% correct. There is a correlation between education and family size, not health and family size. All he is doing is making them live long enough to have children of their own before they die of starvation or aids. Just because someone can make the best operating system doesn't mean they know squat about anything else, let alone world health and population.

The correlation is between education and birth rate, not health. I can't imagine why he would try to push this lie. I think he is just plain evil.
#3 He cant make an operating system. The original parts he acquired in rather underhanded business deals and since then its his employees who maintain it. Bill is just a cut-throat businessman.

The fact that he even asked that question is so disturbing yet at the same time expected of a liberal. Liberals have a history of killing people off for 'population control'. Abortion, eugenics, assisted suicide.......... Of course they give very 'compelling' reasons for these programs, but the result is the same.
However, you ask a different person and they'll give a different reason for the slow in population growth. For example, most will say that the education of women leads to families having fewer children.

Population growth is paralel with exploatation of oil and coal, both charts are exponential. Cut oil avaliability and in a one year humans are half in numbers of a pure hunger, nothing more. And this man is too much speaking about overpopulation...

he should stick with computers because clealy he knows nothing about population growth

#5 What idiocy. Another fool who gets his idea of what a liberal is from Youtube.

Liberal doesn't equal left-wing, and most of what you describe, abortion, and assisted suicide, are supported by left-wing people on the basis of the rights of the person. Right-wingers created the strawman that it is for population control.
Mexico, Iran and China have been great supporters of eugenics, and they aren't liberal nations. The Nazis were not liberals, and theirs was most definitely a eugenics project in great part. Ideas about improving the health of the nation have come in many forms. Among the left-wing it has been behind the creation of welfare programmes.

Right-wingers who want to outlaw abortion and contraception explicitly admit that they believe women should submit to their ideas about reproduction, mainly religiously based, but also ideologically secular in some parts.
Anti-reproductive choice policies in Central and Eastern Europe go hand-in-hand with nationalist tendencies and ideas of ethnic purity in many of these countries.

These are based on demography arguments. One example, birthrates are very low in Central and Eastern Europe, and, in an attempt to increase birthrates, women’s reproductive rights are being restricted.
They want to increase population in their own countries so they don't suffer economically in the future, but don't want to increase it by allowing in immigrants.
They aren't worried about over-population. Exactly the opposite. They only want Johnny Foreigner to restrict their birthrate while forcing the women of their own countries to have more children than they want. If they can force women out of the workplace and back into the home then all the better.

Trying to dress this up as a struggle against evil liberals who just want to control population is laughable.

#3 Yes, the correlation is between education and family size. But that doesn't rule out health.
There is a lot of evidence that through the teaching of literacy, numeracy, and other academic subjects, schooling transforms general intelligence into higher-order cognitive skills. These skills promote risk assessment and decision making abilities related to health.
It is education that allows people to live healthier lives, part of which is managing family size. You can't then dismiss making people healthier by itself.

#5 get over your liberal hating, and making everything a liberal vs conservative issue...only uneducated conservatives do that!! (and now I'm doing it too to show you how dumb it is)