3 ms·
This comments feels a little ambiguous, and driving replies for two separate issues. At a societal level, is an imbalanced population pyramid a problem? Yes, a
by jehb 4y ago
This comments feels a little ambiguous, and driving replies for two separate issues.
At a societal level, is an imbalanced population pyramid a problem? Yes, and many countries are solving this by opening up immigration options.
Should an individual opting not to have children be expected to have negative consequences in old age? IMHO, no.
- willcipriano 4y ago> opening up immigration options Unless they are getting immigrants from off world, that is at best a game of musical chairs. Birth rates are plummeting globally.
- jehb 4y agoThis is misleading. Birth rates globally are still above replacement level. Even if they weren't, immigration still provides opportunities for people to move from areas of higher relative birth rate to areas of lower relative rate, should they choose to.
- willcipriano 4y agoGlobal warming alarmism is similarly misleading, the current climate can easily support human life.
- istjohn 4y agoIt's called climate change for a reason.
- willcipriano 4y agoBirth rates are depicted over time for a reason.
- missedthecue 4y agoit's not really misleading at all. Places like Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, India, Bangladesh, and Malaysia all had birth rates below replacement in 2021. Sure, you can still find nice big numbers in places like Niger in sub-saharan Africa, but even they are starting a sharp decline. And they are starting with a low base. Their entire national population is only the size of the greater NYC area.
- AlgorithmicTime 4y ago
- notch656a 4y agoWhat you're describing is tragedy of the commons. No negative consequences to not having children, but big negative disproportional cost to the parents raising them. With disproportionately privatized losses and socialized gains. People often say you shouldn't have kids for your own retirement. In the ultimately hypocrisy, they often mean kids will be for everybody's retirement (when they're forced to pay social security taxes as adults). The economic incentive is to let others have kids and shoulder disproportionately the costs, while you can free ride and "not have negative consequences." Immigration doesn't solve this problem at the system level as removing children from foreign tax pool into our domestic pool shifts benefits from one elderly person to another.
- AdrianB1 4y ago> Should an individual opting not to have children be expected to have negative consequences in old age? IMHO, no. The question is then who will care for these people when they get old? Other people's children? So other people should have children, put the effort to raise and educate them for your benefit? This is a very egotistic view.
- jehb 4y agoI would argue that expecting your children to care for you is actually far more egotistic than merely expecting a social safety net for all people to exist.
- AdrianB1 4y agoI did not say that in any means, shape or form. I said that all people need someone to help them when they are old, so all people have some responsibility these "someone". The "someone" are children of people, so society needs people to have children that will become adults and be part of society; all people, if possible (medical conditions are usually the accepted exception).