4 ms·

> What exactly is the problem with a declining population anyways? Federal social programs are all pyramids schemes. They depend on having a large tax base en

> What exactly is the problem with a declining population anyways? Federal social programs are all pyramids schemes. They depend on having a large tax base entering the bottom, either immigrants or young people, to constantly keep them funded. The less people at the bottom, the less funding, and now you have austerity programs that have to take effect to prevent the programs from running out of money.

izzydata 4y ago
I'm pretty sure the entire economy is a pyramid scheme for the same reason. We've gotten ourselves into a situation where growth is a necessity.
bryanlarsen 4y ago
At a societal level, money & taxes are a measure of capacity. If you don't have enough nurses to care for the elderly, it doesn't matter how much taxes and funding you have. Money is a worthless piece of paper if you can't buy what you need with it. This framing is important. People think we need austerity because social programs are running out of money. But austerity makes the problem worse. A big pile of money is useless if it can't buy what it needs. In the long run the best way to balance the books is to borrow money and spend it on childcare and child tax credits to encourage having children, spending it on nurse training, et cetera.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  > In the long run the best way to balance the books is to borrow money and spend it on childcare and child tax credits to encourage having children, spending it on nurse training, et cetera. I do not know that this is possible without sufficiently high taxes and policies such that a life without kids is seen as undesirable relative to a life with kids. And that is going to be very, very politically unpopular because it is a lot of pain in the short term for long term gains unattributable to the individual. Quite an interesting problem, and I have no idea how this shakes out for my kids and their potential kids.
  - rs999gti 4y ago
    > life without kids is seen as undesirable relative to a life with kids This is a hard one to solve. Some modern westerners see child free life as good and fill their lives with other time sinks that children would otherwise fill. But I don't think you can lay the child free lifestyle blame all at the costs of having children. Poor people, religious groups (Mormons, Muslims, etc.), and immigrants who come to western countries all seem to have no problems having children. Even the Koreans mentioned in the article have huge families when moving overseas.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      It is not exactly the nominal costs of having children, but the whole package. For example, now that it is completely within a couple's control to have or not have children the decision to have children might go like 1) will we be secure in our housing, at a certain minimum sq ft per person? 2) will we be secure in our access to healthcare (I guess this is a US concern)? 3) will we be living in an acceptable neighborhood with access to acceptable schools? 4) will we be living in an region experiencing economic growth, or at least not economic decline, so as to reduce the probability of becoming destitute due to job loss, etc? 5) will we have friends/family nearby to help with children in case of emergencies (a problem for many who move away from economically declining areas to economically growing areas)? All of these are not a concern if you choose to not have children. At least you will be able to spend a coupe hours watching TV or browsing on your phone, but you will not be stressed out trying to make ends meet while also trying to meet the expected quality of life you want for your children. >Poor people, religious groups (Mormons, Muslims, etc.), and immigrants who come to western countries all seem to have no problems having children. There are a few tribes that have women who do not believe in (or have access to) birth control or do not worry as much about the future, or they have different expectations of quality of life for their kids. But outside these specific examples, my armchair analysis seems to indicate that most women with independence start thinking about various tradeoffs in life, which can make having children (or as many children) seem not worth it. >Even the Koreans mentioned in the article have huge families when moving overseas. I do not see this mentioned in the article.
mafribe 4y ago
There is a simple and obvious solution, rise the age of retirement. When pension schemes were invented (or instiutionalised) at the end of the 19th century, the delta between retirement age (65) and expected age of death was small. This is different now, since people tend to retire before 65 and live to their mid to late 80s on average.
- etrautmann 4y ago
  This only seems like a temporary bandaid?

izzydata 4y ago

I'm pretty sure the entire economy is a pyramid scheme for the same reason. We've gotten ourselves into a situation where growth is a necessity.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

At a societal level, money & taxes are a measure of capacity. If you don't have enough nurses to care for the elderly, it doesn't matter how much taxes and funding you have. Money is a worthless piece of paper if you can't buy what you need with it. This framing is important. People think we need austerity because social programs are running out of money. But austerity makes the problem worse. A big pile of money is useless if it can't buy what it needs. In the long run the best way to balance the books is to borrow money and spend it on childcare and child tax credits to encourage having children, spending it on nurse training, et cetera.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
> In the long run the best way to balance the books is to borrow money and spend it on childcare and child tax credits to encourage having children, spending it on nurse training, et cetera. I do not know that this is possible without sufficiently high taxes and policies such that a life without kids is seen as undesirable relative to a life with kids. And that is going to be very, very politically unpopular because it is a lot of pain in the short term for long term gains unattributable to the individual. Quite an interesting problem, and I have no idea how this shakes out for my kids and their potential kids.
- rs999gti 4y ago
  > life without kids is seen as undesirable relative to a life with kids This is a hard one to solve. Some modern westerners see child free life as good and fill their lives with other time sinks that children would otherwise fill. But I don't think you can lay the child free lifestyle blame all at the costs of having children. Poor people, religious groups (Mormons, Muslims, etc.), and immigrants who come to western countries all seem to have no problems having children. Even the Koreans mentioned in the article have huge families when moving overseas.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    It is not exactly the nominal costs of having children, but the whole package. For example, now that it is completely within a couple's control to have or not have children the decision to have children might go like 1) will we be secure in our housing, at a certain minimum sq ft per person? 2) will we be secure in our access to healthcare (I guess this is a US concern)? 3) will we be living in an acceptable neighborhood with access to acceptable schools? 4) will we be living in an region experiencing economic growth, or at least not economic decline, so as to reduce the probability of becoming destitute due to job loss, etc? 5) will we have friends/family nearby to help with children in case of emergencies (a problem for many who move away from economically declining areas to economically growing areas)? All of these are not a concern if you choose to not have children. At least you will be able to spend a coupe hours watching TV or browsing on your phone, but you will not be stressed out trying to make ends meet while also trying to meet the expected quality of life you want for your children. >Poor people, religious groups (Mormons, Muslims, etc.), and immigrants who come to western countries all seem to have no problems having children. There are a few tribes that have women who do not believe in (or have access to) birth control or do not worry as much about the future, or they have different expectations of quality of life for their kids. But outside these specific examples, my armchair analysis seems to indicate that most women with independence start thinking about various tradeoffs in life, which can make having children (or as many children) seem not worth it. >Even the Koreans mentioned in the article have huge families when moving overseas. I do not see this mentioned in the article.

mafribe 4y ago

There is a simple and obvious solution, rise the age of retirement. When pension schemes were invented (or instiutionalised) at the end of the 19th century, the delta between retirement age (65) and expected age of death was small. This is different now, since people tend to retire before 65 and live to their mid to late 80s on average.

etrautmann 4y ago
This only seems like a temporary bandaid?