4 ms·

The last one is a serious problem in most Western countries. As the society gets older, there are fewer people who can work and actually sustain the rest of the

The last one is a serious problem in most Western countries. As the society gets older, there are fewer people who can work and actually sustain the rest of the population.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Fewer babies are the results of the disastrous labour, wages and housing policies in the west, making having a family and a home super expensive for young couples, so everyone spends the prime of their fertility studying and slaving away at shitty stressful jobs hoping to get a leg up in this insane economy. Baby boomer made tons of babies because housing was cheap, and stable jobs requiring minimal education were plentiful. Both of those are gone now. Tinder didn't cause this, our governments did and they have the power to fix it but don't want to because "house prices must go up" so speculators can get a return.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Macha 4y ago
  It's a longer term trend than even the "sexual revolution". My grandparents generation had plenty of families with 5-10 kids. My parents generation had 2.5 kids, mostly in their mid to late 20s. My generation will maybe start thinking about kids at 30. You could maybe argue that women in the workforce is a social change that contributed to this, as one thing that did change at the beginning of this trend, but surely this as much a fault of the incentives of capitalism turning "Women can work now" to "All working age adults must work, no more stay-at-home parents". Casual relationships, LGBT acceptance, etc. are much later than this trend starting.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  Surprisingly, it isn’t. Accounting for societal factors like the sexual evolution and the cost of living, researchers have found that the culprit is something else. Researchers found that starting in the 1950s, male fertility has been on a consecutive year after year decline in countries where enough industrialization has taken place. So far proposed culprits range from PFAS or endocrine disrupters like BPA, but there’s no definitive conclusion yet
  - dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
    I don't know about others, but in my circles very few couples don't have kids because they can't. Most of the time the decision not to have (another) baby is related to external factors such as high and rising costs of doing so.
    - chaostheory 4y ago
      According to the research even if the economic factors weren’t a roadblock, people still will have trouble having two children. There are reports about couples in their late 20s needing IVF
yakak 4y ago
A rich society has a billion existing options to fix this "problem". Given the collective psychopathy of the majority, an immigrant has to be free and employable on day one to be acceptable while a state can pay the minimum it has to for a child but should be calculating how to make the child's parents suckers. If it goes over board on this calculation, working age population declines decades later which is politically very acceptable.
welshwelsh 4y ago
Not a problem at all. There are two fantastic solutions to a low birth rate: Immigration, and robots.
dsq 4y ago
The developed nations may solve this problem by decoupling children from families a la Huxley’s Brave New World. Perhaps not via bottled babies, but through completely professional caregivers who will raise the children for everybody, leaving the biological parents to devote themselves completely to the production consumption system, as well as complete indulgence in satisfying desires without consequence.

The last one is a serious problem in most Western countries. As the society gets older, there are fewer people who can work and actually sustain the rest of the population.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

Fewer babies are the results of the disastrous labour, wages and housing policies in the west, making having a family and a home super expensive for young couples, so everyone spends the prime of their fertility studying and slaving away at shitty stressful jobs hoping to get a leg up in this insane economy. Baby boomer made tons of babies because housing was cheap, and stable jobs requiring minimal education were plentiful. Both of those are gone now. Tinder didn't cause this, our governments did and they have the power to fix it but don't want to because "house prices must go up" so speculators can get a return.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Macha 4y ago
It's a longer term trend than even the "sexual revolution". My grandparents generation had plenty of families with 5-10 kids. My parents generation had 2.5 kids, mostly in their mid to late 20s. My generation will maybe start thinking about kids at 30. You could maybe argue that women in the workforce is a social change that contributed to this, as one thing that did change at the beginning of this trend, but surely this as much a fault of the incentives of capitalism turning "Women can work now" to "All working age adults must work, no more stay-at-home parents". Casual relationships, LGBT acceptance, etc. are much later than this trend starting.
chaostheory 4y ago
Surprisingly, it isn’t. Accounting for societal factors like the sexual evolution and the cost of living, researchers have found that the culprit is something else. Researchers found that starting in the 1950s, male fertility has been on a consecutive year after year decline in countries where enough industrialization has taken place. So far proposed culprits range from PFAS or endocrine disrupters like BPA, but there’s no definitive conclusion yet
- dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
  I don't know about others, but in my circles very few couples don't have kids because they can't. Most of the time the decision not to have (another) baby is related to external factors such as high and rising costs of doing so.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    According to the research even if the economic factors weren’t a roadblock, people still will have trouble having two children. There are reports about couples in their late 20s needing IVF

yakak 4y ago

A rich society has a billion existing options to fix this "problem". Given the collective psychopathy of the majority, an immigrant has to be free and employable on day one to be acceptable while a state can pay the minimum it has to for a child but should be calculating how to make the child's parents suckers. If it goes over board on this calculation, working age population declines decades later which is politically very acceptable.

welshwelsh 4y ago

Not a problem at all. There are two fantastic solutions to a low birth rate: Immigration, and robots.

dsq 4y ago

The developed nations may solve this problem by decoupling children from families a la Huxley’s Brave New World. Perhaps not via bottled babies, but through completely professional caregivers who will raise the children for everybody, leaving the biological parents to devote themselves completely to the production consumption system, as well as complete indulgence in satisfying desires without consequence.