2 ms·

Fertility dropped from 3.8 kids to less than 2 in 10 years, or am I reading the chart wrong? Did they put a gov official in each bedroom to lower birthrate or w

Fertility dropped from 3.8 kids to less than 2 in 10 years, or am I reading the chart wrong? Did they put a gov official in each bedroom to lower birthrate or what? Birthrate of 4-6 is unsustainable (unless, maybe, they're Canada with all that land and resources) but above 2 is needed. Someone needs to work in 25 years and pay social security so old people get theirs. Looks like stormy seas ahead. They can open the spigot for a while but unless the tank keeps refilling (oil prices might not cooperate) it will run dry.

raverbashing 8y ago
The earlier we stop the crap about "we have to be above replacement rates" (because of outdated pension models) the better
- AvocadoPanic 8y ago
  You could argue replacement rates are not just about pensions, but continuing your society and culture with people that look like you.
  - timbit42 8y ago
    What a vain and outdated way of thinking.
    - onetimemanytime 8y ago
      Vain might be called wanting to have your own kids too, but I disagree
- gwbas1c 8y ago
  I'm disappointed you're downvoted. This is a good discussion to have. A lot of problems that we, the human species, face, can be simpler to solve if there are less people! We have some very clear problems to solve if we have a negative birthrate. Caring for elderly is very hard work, harder, IMO, than raising young children. When we have a negative birthrate, how do we care for the elderly without it becoming a significant drain on our economy? We can essentially run government programs, like American Social Security, like a Ponzi scheme, because as long as population is growing, there's always more people who pay in than take out. And, just "saving more" won't solve the problem, because then there will be a bunch of rich old people who can't hire help because there just isn't enough young labor! Leads to a good discussion!

raverbashing 8y ago

The earlier we stop the crap about "we have to be above replacement rates" (because of outdated pension models) the better

AvocadoPanic 8y ago
You could argue replacement rates are not just about pensions, but continuing your society and culture with people that look like you.
- timbit42 8y ago
  What a vain and outdated way of thinking.
  - onetimemanytime 8y ago
    Vain might be called wanting to have your own kids too, but I disagree
gwbas1c 8y ago
I'm disappointed you're downvoted. This is a good discussion to have. A lot of problems that we, the human species, face, can be simpler to solve if there are less people! We have some very clear problems to solve if we have a negative birthrate. Caring for elderly is very hard work, harder, IMO, than raising young children. When we have a negative birthrate, how do we care for the elderly without it becoming a significant drain on our economy? We can essentially run government programs, like American Social Security, like a Ponzi scheme, because as long as population is growing, there's always more people who pay in than take out. And, just "saving more" won't solve the problem, because then there will be a bunch of rich old people who can't hire help because there just isn't enough young labor! Leads to a good discussion!