No. The growth rate at - .1% would mean population decline.
And did you just quote a population theory published before the pill's impact?
And why do I get a weird feeling that this topic is political somehow?
You have an issue with me posting a population theory published before the pill's impact but not with someone else's opinion who's based on a theory that well predates that? We're talking about theoretical perspectives here and their implications and how they inform research. Do you have a more modern theory that we should subscribe to? Or shall we all just post a bunch of random data with no way to interpret its broader meaning?