4 ms·

The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. Btw this article neglects to mention a very important feedback loop: less babies equals less

The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. Btw this article neglects to mention a very important feedback loop: less babies equals less economic growth, which equals less babies because it’s too expensive, which in turn leads to less economic growth and so on. Collapsing birth rates are a serious problem! You won’t notice until the country becomes a depopulated wasteland and then it will be too late to do anything about it - at least for 30 years.

kneebonian 4y ago
Great talk about that here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi_nFz1CJSI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi_nFz1CJSI
- chrisbaker98 4y ago
  Zeihan is great.
  - nicodjimenez 4y ago
    Zeihan is not always intellectually honest and I don’t trust what he says about Ukraine but he says a lot of interesting things about demographics. He says nothing though about culture, sovereignty, or the quality of bureaucracies.
Retric 4y ago
Considering that’s never actually happened it seems you have an unreasonable level of certainty about the outcomes. People who don’t have kids don’t pass down their culture, which seems like an obvious feedback loop to keep things going. On top of this population declines have generally resulted in increased individual prosperity for hopefully obvious reasons.
- nicodjimenez 4y ago
  It is already happening very successfully in fact in some communities.
- nicodjimenez 4y ago
  And you are wrong about individual prosperity being a result of fewer people. Extremely wrong in fact. In a village of 100 people everyone is poor. Part of the reason US is becoming less prosperous in the last 50 years is because of this collapsing birth rate.
  - Retric 4y ago
    Prosperity after population decline is supported by history, look up the economic impact of the Black Plague for example. What confuses things is local areas tend to lose population due to economic decline and prosperous areas attract people. However, when the decline is on much larger scale things flip.
    - nicodjimenez 4y ago
      History is not a useful guide here. Widespread birth control is an extremely new phenomenon. Cannot be compared to any other era. We are already seeing the impact of low birth rates on economic growth / home ownership etc and it will become even more dramatic as the boomers continue to retire.
      - Retric 4y ago
        Everyone always says this time will be different, but you didn’t actually put forth any reasons why it would be. Fewer people from war, disease, or birth control still just means fewer people. You need to look at economics after population decline not causes of population decline to suggest why today might be different.
        nicodjimenez 4y ago
        War and disease have existed forever and hasn’t stopped human population from exploding. Sometimes “this time is different” is actually true. What’s different about now is that you have this feedback loop of less kids -> less growth -> less kids. That’s never happened in history because people have never had so much control over their reproductive rights. Most of your ancestors were “surprise” children - you certainly would not be born today if your ancestors could have just used a piece of plastic to avoid the trouble. There is a reason sex feels good. People for the most part don’t have sex to have kids. Birth control hacks this process and turns sex from a necessary condition for human survival to a drug people take to feel good. Like I said this is unprecedented.
inetknght 4y ago
> The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. It might solve the "problem" that the article discusses. But it will create many many more worse problems.
- nicodjimenez 4y ago
  Worse problems than a dying population? I don’t think so. If the population keeps getting older and smaller by definition it is dying. And not dying is the first imperative of life.
  - inetknght 4y ago
    > Worse problems than a dying population? I don’t think so. What worth is it to have a population who don't feel they're valued? Forcing others to have children just because you're concerned about population ignores the truly human element. You should instead focus on wanting to help people be happy and feel secure in their economy and self such that they want to have children. Abolishing contraceptives is not the right way to do that. It is utterly disrespectful to the people.
    - nicodjimenez 4y ago
      The human element? Humans like kids naturally especially their own. A lot of women will have kids when they hit 30 and wish they’d started earlier and recognize the incredibly disrespectful attitudes towards women who want to continue human civilization.
      - inetknght 4y ago
        > Humans like kids naturally especially their own. I personally do not like children. I know a lot of unnatural humans then; a lot of humans who neither like kids nor ever want kids of their own. And there's many (!!!) anecdotes of people who had children they do not like or want. And that's on top of the responsible adults who realize that they can't afford to give a child a healthy loving home when they can't even afford to properly take care of themselves.
mcv 4y ago
> The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. Is that a serious comment, or sarcasm? Because banning condoms will not solve any problems, it will create more. If you want people to have more kids, make sure they can afford more kids: pay young families more, give them the ability to buy a house big enough to raise children in, provide affordable childcare, and offer better healthcare to pregnant women, instead of worse.
- nicodjimenez 4y ago
  People can’t afford enough kids because there isn’t enough economic growth, because there’s not enough young people, the only solution is more people. Banning condoms - or banning premarital sex as Indonesia has done recently - are sort of the only ways out of this mess. You’ll know I am right if you live long enough - another 30 to 40 years and it will be obvious to anyone how catastrophic low birth rates can be.
  - mcv 4y ago
    For the next 30-40 years, the world's population will continue to grow. And banning condoms or sex is a bit of a weird take. I've got the feeling you're not really talking about population growth, but simply about sex you disapprove of.
    - nicodjimenez 4y ago
      It’s not about morality it’s about pragmatism. I don’t want to live in a dying country like Japan with suicide forests and old people committing crimes so they can go to jail and actually have human contact, I want to live in a young and vibrant and growing country. A big part why people are so lonely in USA these days is because of birth rate collapse, people have less siblings and young people are heavily outnumbered by the old, which means that after college they are a minority wherever they go.
      - mcv 4y ago
        I understand that, but I also don't want to live in a country where people have children they can't afford to raise. Simply forcing people to have kids they don't want is going to create more problems. You have to address why people don't want kids in the first place. Japan, even more so than the US, is an extremely work-centric country. People there live for work, rather than for their family. Work is their family. If you don't give people time with their actual families and children, why would they have any? People need to work less, and be financially secure enough to raise a family.

kneebonian 4y ago

Great talk about that here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi_nFz1CJSI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi_nFz1CJSI

chrisbaker98 4y ago
Zeihan is great.
- nicodjimenez 4y ago
  Zeihan is not always intellectually honest and I don’t trust what he says about Ukraine but he says a lot of interesting things about demographics. He says nothing though about culture, sovereignty, or the quality of bureaucracies.

Retric 4y ago

Considering that’s never actually happened it seems you have an unreasonable level of certainty about the outcomes. People who don’t have kids don’t pass down their culture, which seems like an obvious feedback loop to keep things going. On top of this population declines have generally resulted in increased individual prosperity for hopefully obvious reasons.

nicodjimenez 4y ago
It is already happening very successfully in fact in some communities.
nicodjimenez 4y ago
And you are wrong about individual prosperity being a result of fewer people. Extremely wrong in fact. In a village of 100 people everyone is poor. Part of the reason US is becoming less prosperous in the last 50 years is because of this collapsing birth rate.
- Retric 4y ago
  Prosperity after population decline is supported by history, look up the economic impact of the Black Plague for example. What confuses things is local areas tend to lose population due to economic decline and prosperous areas attract people. However, when the decline is on much larger scale things flip.
  - nicodjimenez 4y ago
    History is not a useful guide here. Widespread birth control is an extremely new phenomenon. Cannot be compared to any other era. We are already seeing the impact of low birth rates on economic growth / home ownership etc and it will become even more dramatic as the boomers continue to retire.
    - Retric 4y ago
      Everyone always says this time will be different, but you didn’t actually put forth any reasons why it would be. Fewer people from war, disease, or birth control still just means fewer people. You need to look at economics after population decline not causes of population decline to suggest why today might be different.
      - nicodjimenez 4y ago
        War and disease have existed forever and hasn’t stopped human population from exploding. Sometimes “this time is different” is actually true. What’s different about now is that you have this feedback loop of less kids -> less growth -> less kids. That’s never happened in history because people have never had so much control over their reproductive rights. Most of your ancestors were “surprise” children - you certainly would not be born today if your ancestors could have just used a piece of plastic to avoid the trouble. There is a reason sex feels good. People for the most part don’t have sex to have kids. Birth control hacks this process and turns sex from a necessary condition for human survival to a drug people take to feel good. Like I said this is unprecedented.

inetknght 4y ago

> The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. It might solve the "problem" that the article discusses. But it will create many many more worse problems.

nicodjimenez 4y ago
Worse problems than a dying population? I don’t think so. If the population keeps getting older and smaller by definition it is dying. And not dying is the first imperative of life.
- inetknght 4y ago
  > Worse problems than a dying population? I don’t think so. What worth is it to have a population who don't feel they're valued? Forcing others to have children just because you're concerned about population ignores the truly human element. You should instead focus on wanting to help people be happy and feel secure in their economy and self such that they want to have children. Abolishing contraceptives is not the right way to do that. It is utterly disrespectful to the people.
  - nicodjimenez 4y ago
    The human element? Humans like kids naturally especially their own. A lot of women will have kids when they hit 30 and wish they’d started earlier and recognize the incredibly disrespectful attitudes towards women who want to continue human civilization.
    - inetknght 4y ago
      > Humans like kids naturally especially their own. I personally do not like children. I know a lot of unnatural humans then; a lot of humans who neither like kids nor ever want kids of their own. And there's many (!!!) anecdotes of people who had children they do not like or want. And that's on top of the responsible adults who realize that they can't afford to give a child a healthy loving home when they can't even afford to properly take care of themselves.

mcv 4y ago

> The only solution is to ban condoms. Will solve so many problems. Is that a serious comment, or sarcasm? Because banning condoms will not solve any problems, it will create more. If you want people to have more kids, make sure they can afford more kids: pay young families more, give them the ability to buy a house big enough to raise children in, provide affordable childcare, and offer better healthcare to pregnant women, instead of worse.

nicodjimenez 4y ago
People can’t afford enough kids because there isn’t enough economic growth, because there’s not enough young people, the only solution is more people. Banning condoms - or banning premarital sex as Indonesia has done recently - are sort of the only ways out of this mess. You’ll know I am right if you live long enough - another 30 to 40 years and it will be obvious to anyone how catastrophic low birth rates can be.
- mcv 4y ago
  For the next 30-40 years, the world's population will continue to grow. And banning condoms or sex is a bit of a weird take. I've got the feeling you're not really talking about population growth, but simply about sex you disapprove of.
  - nicodjimenez 4y ago
    It’s not about morality it’s about pragmatism. I don’t want to live in a dying country like Japan with suicide forests and old people committing crimes so they can go to jail and actually have human contact, I want to live in a young and vibrant and growing country. A big part why people are so lonely in USA these days is because of birth rate collapse, people have less siblings and young people are heavily outnumbered by the old, which means that after college they are a minority wherever they go.
    - mcv 4y ago
      I understand that, but I also don't want to live in a country where people have children they can't afford to raise. Simply forcing people to have kids they don't want is going to create more problems. You have to address why people don't want kids in the first place. Japan, even more so than the US, is an extremely work-centric country. People there live for work, rather than for their family. Work is their family. If you don't give people time with their actual families and children, why would they have any? People need to work less, and be financially secure enough to raise a family.