4 ms·

It's my understanding that the northern European countries have very low immigration rates which means that their existing (mostly native) population is entirel

It's my understanding that the northern European countries have very low immigration rates which means that their existing (mostly native) population is entirely responsible for their economic growth. That population grows old and fewer and fewer young people are available to contribute to the state-funded "welfare" to support their parents retired lifestyles. So the debt accrues and the country eventually becomes a "welfare state" with young people paying 50-60% of their income to taxes.

whitemary 4y ago
Your theory fails because northern European countries have significantly higher fertility rates than the US. See: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/total-fertility-rate/country-comparison https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/total-fertility... > Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is a more direct measure of the level of fertility than the crude birth rate, since it refers to births per woman.
- refurb 4y ago
  If you're worried about population decline, it's birth rate you want to look at, not TFR.
  - whitemary 4y ago
    If you're comparing 2 different countries without the exact same populations, you need TFR. And that is the case here. I am utterly amazed at the lengths you people go to reinforce your delusions. Sorry to break it to you but libertarianism is a childish utopian fantasy.
    - refurb 4y ago
      The personal attack is unwarranted. And I'm not sure what libertarianism has to do with math. If you're worried about population decline, it's birth rate (birth per capita) that matters, not TFR. It doesn't matter if your TFR is higher, but your replacement rate is lower.
jltsiren 4y ago
It depends on the country. Sweden and Norway have a larger share of foreign-born population than the US and the UK. Netherlands is roughly on the same level as the US and the UK, while Denmark and Finland have fewer immigrants.
- pkaye 4y ago
  How much of that is refugees?
the_third_wave 4y ago
> It's my understanding that the northern European countries have very low immigration rates Your understanding is wrong, immigration is rampant in Sweden with around 150.000 people (about 1.3% of the population) coming in every year. Some 25% of the population was born outside of the country by now, this number is only growing. Germany and the Netherlands also see very high migration although the numbers are a bit lower seen relative to the population. While these newcomers do contribute to a younger population they also have made the male-female distribution quite lopsided since the vast majority of migrants is male. Sweden now has the same problems as China has there with about 116 males for every 100 females in the 16-18yo age bracket - these numbers may be off by a bit (i.e. the difference may have grown) since I last checked these statistics a few years ago. Unfortunately the employment statistics do not look good for these newcomers which have trouble getting into the Swedish labour market with its high requirements on education which actually only increases the problems the country has in keeping the welfare state up and running. Pension ages are going up to compensate for this which goes against what the population was told when they were faced with a large influx of newcomers who were supposedly 'necessary for the future of the welfare state'. Had this been the case that welfare state would be a Ponzi scheme and any newcomer who was foolish enough to fall for the lure would end up working for benefits he would be sure never to get. In reality it is those who have already worked to build up the welfare state who get to pay for a large fraction of the newcomers - e.g. Somalian immigrants to Sweden are only ~20% self-supporting with the rest depending on government benefits, 37% of migrants from Africa and the Middle East - who make up the majority of non-EU migrants coming to Sweden - were self-supporting in 2016 with the other 63% being dependent on government benefits. The Swedish welfare state will need to be reformed or it will not survive.

whitemary 4y ago

Your theory fails because northern European countries have significantly higher fertility rates than the US. See: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/total-fertility-rate/country-comparison https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/total-fertility... > Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is a more direct measure of the level of fertility than the crude birth rate, since it refers to births per woman.

refurb 4y ago
If you're worried about population decline, it's birth rate you want to look at, not TFR.
- whitemary 4y ago
  If you're comparing 2 different countries without the exact same populations, you need TFR. And that is the case here. I am utterly amazed at the lengths you people go to reinforce your delusions. Sorry to break it to you but libertarianism is a childish utopian fantasy.
  - refurb 4y ago
    The personal attack is unwarranted. And I'm not sure what libertarianism has to do with math. If you're worried about population decline, it's birth rate (birth per capita) that matters, not TFR. It doesn't matter if your TFR is higher, but your replacement rate is lower.

jltsiren 4y ago

It depends on the country. Sweden and Norway have a larger share of foreign-born population than the US and the UK. Netherlands is roughly on the same level as the US and the UK, while Denmark and Finland have fewer immigrants.

pkaye 4y ago
How much of that is refugees?

the_third_wave 4y ago

> It's my understanding that the northern European countries have very low immigration rates Your understanding is wrong, immigration is rampant in Sweden with around 150.000 people (about 1.3% of the population) coming in every year. Some 25% of the population was born outside of the country by now, this number is only growing. Germany and the Netherlands also see very high migration although the numbers are a bit lower seen relative to the population. While these newcomers do contribute to a younger population they also have made the male-female distribution quite lopsided since the vast majority of migrants is male. Sweden now has the same problems as China has there with about 116 males for every 100 females in the 16-18yo age bracket - these numbers may be off by a bit (i.e. the difference may have grown) since I last checked these statistics a few years ago. Unfortunately the employment statistics do not look good for these newcomers which have trouble getting into the Swedish labour market with its high requirements on education which actually only increases the problems the country has in keeping the welfare state up and running. Pension ages are going up to compensate for this which goes against what the population was told when they were faced with a large influx of newcomers who were supposedly 'necessary for the future of the welfare state'. Had this been the case that welfare state would be a Ponzi scheme and any newcomer who was foolish enough to fall for the lure would end up working for benefits he would be sure never to get. In reality it is those who have already worked to build up the welfare state who get to pay for a large fraction of the newcomers - e.g. Somalian immigrants to Sweden are only ~20% self-supporting with the rest depending on government benefits, 37% of migrants from Africa and the Middle East - who make up the majority of non-EU migrants coming to Sweden - were self-supporting in 2016 with the other 63% being dependent on government benefits. The Swedish welfare state will need to be reformed or it will not survive.