3 ms·

As usual, society is not preparing itself for new economic realities (many I speak to do not understand this particular one at all), but, has it occurred to you

by brnt 4y ago

As usual, society is not preparing itself for new economic realities (many I speak to do not understand this particular one at all), but, has it occurred to you that this is very good news in terms of livability on planet earth and our continued existence? Sure, humans will adapt but only when it's too late, as usual, but at least this is a change in positive direction. Forever growth is nonsensical, and this isn't the worst way it could end.

remarkEon 4y ago
The only way your hypothesis is plausible (ignoring everything else that’s weird and troubling about it) is if everyone on the planet decides to go along with it. Not every society has this problem of low fertility, and those who own the future are the ones who show up.
- brnt 4y ago
  Fertily reduction correlates strongly with increased prosperity worldwide. Policy making and cultural attitudes play a role too, but the correlation is uncontested and rather evident.
  - jxramos 4y ago
    Sometimes I wonder if it’s a short term trade off. If you carve out of the effort budget that portion allotted for rearing the next generation and swap it out for or bias it strongly toward higher technology development, deeper universities, or whatever, then you cut yourself off the branch you sit on so to speak when the degree of that bias is so out of proportion. Maybe a generation can afford to delay the investments into the demands of population continuation. If the delay prolongs too long and bleeds into the next generation and interferes with how they define fulfillment in terminal non regenerative endeavors then they have effectively made their choices and continuation is not one of them. That phrase the meek shall inherit the earth, I wonder about lately. The meek, the non power searching types who don’t busy themselves with all the variety of non regenerative endeavors that consume all those who chart courses out into deep space and all its loneliness perhaps avoid these population traps and mentalities that lead to the end of a people. The salt of the earth, those who preserve humanity effectively. What a startling pack of implications seem to be packed into that statement so pregnant with meaning.
    - imtringued 4y ago
      What are you rambling about, how do more poorly educated children help? If we need those we can just import them. Also, if someone actively desires and seeks out the end of humanity maybe they have a reason for that and are fully aware of what they are doing rather than being ignorant about the wonders of poorly planned procreation.
- jxramos 4y ago
  That slogan has caught my eye too—the future belongs to those who show up. I’ve been thinking about these things in terms of generational investment. To pour time and resources etc into oneself is an investment in generation 0 with respect to the individual. If our societies don’t encourage investment in generations beyond 0 (ie in our children) then they effectively vote their genetics and those of their ancestors to be not worthy of continuing. They exit the cosmic stream of existence. I’ve often pondered seeing in my own children the echoes and higher order harmonics of combinations of traits and proclivities of their living ancestors which show up in their unique combinations of their being. I daydream about perhaps catching glimpses of non-living ancestors whom I never met and what things we inherit from them. That thought translates to other family lines and I wonder about that vast set of traits and peculiarities I will never experience once they’ve departed this life.
  - imtringued 4y ago
    >If our societies don’t encourage investment in generations beyond 0 (ie in our children) then they effectively vote their genetics and those of their ancestors to be not worthy of continuing. Societies with more investment per child have less children. You are getting everything backwards.
    - mensetmanusman 4y ago
      An investment that scares the next generation from having kids is a failed investment.
matheusmoreira 4y ago
Good news for who? While developed nations are below replacement rate, many developing nations are having over half a dozen children per family. The aging population of developed countries is not conducive to production and a healthy economy. This will lead to immigration. If this trend continues, people from the developing nations will eventually inherit the developed world. Until they too fall below replacement rate.
- oezi 4y ago
  You haven't looked at the data it seems. There are only a couple of countries left with 6 children per family. Every other country is already on its way to 2 children or below. The global average is now 2.5 children per women. The age of huge population growth is effectively over.

by brnt 4y ago

remarkEon 4y ago

The only way your hypothesis is plausible (ignoring everything else that’s weird and troubling about it) is if everyone on the planet decides to go along with it. Not every society has this problem of low fertility, and those who own the future are the ones who show up.

brnt 4y ago
Fertily reduction correlates strongly with increased prosperity worldwide. Policy making and cultural attitudes play a role too, but the correlation is uncontested and rather evident.
- jxramos 4y ago
  Sometimes I wonder if it’s a short term trade off. If you carve out of the effort budget that portion allotted for rearing the next generation and swap it out for or bias it strongly toward higher technology development, deeper universities, or whatever, then you cut yourself off the branch you sit on so to speak when the degree of that bias is so out of proportion. Maybe a generation can afford to delay the investments into the demands of population continuation. If the delay prolongs too long and bleeds into the next generation and interferes with how they define fulfillment in terminal non regenerative endeavors then they have effectively made their choices and continuation is not one of them. That phrase the meek shall inherit the earth, I wonder about lately. The meek, the non power searching types who don’t busy themselves with all the variety of non regenerative endeavors that consume all those who chart courses out into deep space and all its loneliness perhaps avoid these population traps and mentalities that lead to the end of a people. The salt of the earth, those who preserve humanity effectively. What a startling pack of implications seem to be packed into that statement so pregnant with meaning.
  - imtringued 4y ago
    What are you rambling about, how do more poorly educated children help? If we need those we can just import them. Also, if someone actively desires and seeks out the end of humanity maybe they have a reason for that and are fully aware of what they are doing rather than being ignorant about the wonders of poorly planned procreation.
jxramos 4y ago
That slogan has caught my eye too—the future belongs to those who show up. I’ve been thinking about these things in terms of generational investment. To pour time and resources etc into oneself is an investment in generation 0 with respect to the individual. If our societies don’t encourage investment in generations beyond 0 (ie in our children) then they effectively vote their genetics and those of their ancestors to be not worthy of continuing. They exit the cosmic stream of existence. I’ve often pondered seeing in my own children the echoes and higher order harmonics of combinations of traits and proclivities of their living ancestors which show up in their unique combinations of their being. I daydream about perhaps catching glimpses of non-living ancestors whom I never met and what things we inherit from them. That thought translates to other family lines and I wonder about that vast set of traits and peculiarities I will never experience once they’ve departed this life.
- imtringued 4y ago
  >If our societies don’t encourage investment in generations beyond 0 (ie in our children) then they effectively vote their genetics and those of their ancestors to be not worthy of continuing. Societies with more investment per child have less children. You are getting everything backwards.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    An investment that scares the next generation from having kids is a failed investment.

matheusmoreira 4y ago

Good news for who? While developed nations are below replacement rate, many developing nations are having over half a dozen children per family. The aging population of developed countries is not conducive to production and a healthy economy. This will lead to immigration. If this trend continues, people from the developing nations will eventually inherit the developed world. Until they too fall below replacement rate.

oezi 4y ago
You haven't looked at the data it seems. There are only a couple of countries left with 6 children per family. Every other country is already on its way to 2 children or below. The global average is now 2.5 children per women. The age of huge population growth is effectively over.