5 ms·

In terms of replacement birth rate? The world is already heading towards some catastrophic consequences. We need more babies not less.

• ASalazarMX 4y ago
  Do we actually need birth replacement at our current numbers? 8,000,000,000 is a mind boggling number of humans, it's a good thing it's slowing down. The more people there is, the more conflicts for lack of resources we'll have.
  • s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I think it is as simple as total population in terms of conflict. Imagine overall numbers are going down, country X is increasing, while it's neighbors are decreasing. Also imagine country Y has seen a century of improvement powered by population growth dry up. Now it is looking at stagnation and decline as the population ages. This is a recipe for social unrest.
    • vidarh 4y ago
      For starters, this paragraph springs to mind: "The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilisation. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate." (Communist Manifesto) Whatever one thinks about Marx, the conflict between the continuation of economic growth and resistance to immigration is real. And in the face of a threat of population decline, resistance to immigration will become economic suicide, and so anti-immigrant populists and the economic elites will come to increasingly face off against each other.
      • s1artibartfast 4y ago
        That is a fair point and it is playing out in economies across the world. The biggest examples are contrasting the US and China. Both China and the US have similar fertility rates, well below replacement. However, the US augments and stabilizes the population growth with immigration. Immigrants both add to the total, and have many more children than native born individuals. China on the other hand has net migration out of the country, and fewer immigrants to stabilize the population and rate. Because of this, China is much more vulnerable to the impacts of a population bust.
        • vidarh 4y ago
          Indeed, and while China is an obvious one because their fertility rate is now so low and their immigration policy has been very strict, a whole lot of countries are going to have to figure this out very rapidly. With respect to immigrants having more children, that's true to some extent, but with the caveat that 1) immigrants tends to have children at similar rates as where they come from, and that means you'll see immigrants from fewer and fewer places are likely to have a fertility rate above replacement, and 2) fertility rates among people of immigrant background tends to normalise to their surrounding environment within a generation or two, so it's a short term boost. But back to China, it will be very interesting to see how they react to this. Odds are there'll be increased pressure to have more kids, coupled with carrots, but that they still won't be able to avoid allowing increased immigration. Then that raises the question of this means they'll start making paths to permanent residency or citizenship easier, or if they'll go the gulf state route of importing a near indentured servant class. The latter might be hard to sustain once other countries also start competing for the same labour sources.
  • vidarh 4y ago
    It's not so much that we "need" replacement as that a too rapid decline would cause immense upheaval unless we first reach a level of automation very far in excess of where we are. Consider that the faster a population is declining, the more people will live of the productive work of each working age adult.
    • oco101 4y ago
      We'll not reach that level of automation on time.Anyway we look at it, we are doomed sooner or later. Some country already reach the point of non return. China for instance, they have 1.18 baby per woman. To sustain the actual population it need to be to 2.3 children per women. China will soon lack enough working adults to sustain the massive aging population. By 2035 the percentage of population older then 60 year old is expected to rise to 30%, or more than 400 million people.The working population simply can't sustain the aging people. This will cause unprecedented upheaval . This is just one exemple, Russia is not far off. In fact except a few countries the following decades the very social and political structure of the world will change dramatically and not in a good way . Yes we humans we are not producing enough babies and it is only getting worst.Brace yourself for a changing world.
      • vidarh 4y ago
        Population growth under current projections will continue for another 80-100 years, so any country facing upheaval over the coming century will do so because they refuse to increase immigration, not because it's inevitable.
        • oco101 4y ago
          Yes, but this is happening only because life expectancy is increasing and underdeveloped countries are experiencing population growth. 8 out of 10 countries that are expected to experience population growth are in Africa. So, most of the world will lose population. The main issue here is how to sustain the aging population, not so much how much the population will increase over time. If you have 60% of people over the age of 60, it is impossible for the rest to sustain it. Immigration for those that are accepting will help, but this is most likely not enough.