3 ms·

Collapsing demography due to the Black Death didn't trigger either demographic collapse or lower fertility rates: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Sam

Collapsing demography due to the Black Death didn't trigger either demographic collapse or lower fertility rates: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Samways/publication/325659204/figure/fig4/AS:635568841035778@1528542828608/European-Population-at-the-time-of-the-Great-Plague-from-Langer-1964.png https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Samways/publicati... Tell you what, how about I tackle sustainable ethical Eloi husbandry, and you tackle the fertility crisis? If you have a uterus, this should be no problem: you're not covered by Jockey Club rules, so AI is an option, and if you prefer live cover, you probably don't even need to pay for the jumps. If you don't have a uterus, it'll be slightly more difficult, but I get 13m ghits for tradwife, so you ought to be able to find someone with a uterus who can be convinced to have 4-12 children? Then there's always the A Boy and his Dog (1975) repopulation solution...

somenameforme 3y ago
The reason we handled the Black Death (and world wars, Spanish Flu, and so on) so relatively comfortably is precisely because we had healthy fertility rates. Now we no longer do. In a place like Japan any such occurrence would now likely be an extinction level event. And Japan is largely just a window to the future for Western society at large. Fertility rates lag disaster by about 60 years. That's the time it takes for the first generation (give or take 20 years) with poor fertility rates to start dying off. Japan's fertility rate only collapsed about 40 years ago, so today is still the good times for them. Our fertility rate is only collapsing quite recently, so we still have a good number of decades ahead. It's like watching a train wreck unfold at a snail's pace, yet people nonetheless failing to move out of the way. Just to visually elaborate upon this all, here [1] is Japan's population pyramid. You can see that right now it still looks at least somewhat reasonable, even though they're already having horrible outcomes. Now imagine what it will look like in ~20-30 years when it goes from a sort of vase shape to an outright upside down pyramid. You should be able to see that it means the population will start declining at an exponential rate. And that's what awaits the entire Western world if current trends aren't sharply reversed. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/File:Japan_Population_Pyramid.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/F...
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  I guess you could try the russian approach to fertility: make music videos encouraging the populace to get knocked up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuSf1UcFRq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuSf1UcFRq0
  - somenameforme 3y ago
    Hahaha, you know - it seems pretty funny, but I think it's not a bad idea at all! They are also doing other things like offering substantial payments to married couples have who have children. They have an abnormal fertility issue going on thanks to the 90s. When the USSR collapsed Russia economically collapsed and fell into borderline anarchy, to say nothing of rampant alcoholism and drug use, which sent fertility rates plummeting even below Japan. It's getting much better now, but they lost the better part of a generation, and they're still below where they should be. Their population pyramid is here [1] where you can see it all too clearly. That huge gaping maw that peaks at around 28 years old is due to fertility collapse in the 90s. I think it's also reasonable evidence for my 'vicious cycle' hypothesis. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media/File:Russia_Population_Pyramid.svg https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media...
    - 082349872349872 3y ago
      The trough at 80 must be WWII, but I wonder what the trough at 57 might be? Rampant alcoholism would easily explain the gender imbalance at the older end: male and alcoholic tends to end poorly, especially if tobacco is involved on top.
      - somenameforme 3y ago
        Really interesting point on the trough at 57. I have no idea! That's really quite visible, and would've been around 1967. But there were, to my knowledge, no particularly major events around then, in the USSR, that could easily explain it. On the gender imbalance, men just tend to die younger than women. As a funny (?) factoid, evolution/nature also somehow optimizes for this. There's about 107 boys born for every 100 girls. [1] But after we get done getting ourselves killed in all sorts of creative ways, you end up with a sex ratio that's almost exactly 50:50 across all ages; at older ages you end with a sex ratio skewed towards women. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio

somenameforme 3y ago

The reason we handled the Black Death (and world wars, Spanish Flu, and so on) so relatively comfortably is precisely because we had healthy fertility rates. Now we no longer do. In a place like Japan any such occurrence would now likely be an extinction level event. And Japan is largely just a window to the future for Western society at large. Fertility rates lag disaster by about 60 years. That's the time it takes for the first generation (give or take 20 years) with poor fertility rates to start dying off. Japan's fertility rate only collapsed about 40 years ago, so today is still the good times for them. Our fertility rate is only collapsing quite recently, so we still have a good number of decades ahead. It's like watching a train wreck unfold at a snail's pace, yet people nonetheless failing to move out of the way. Just to visually elaborate upon this all, here [1] is Japan's population pyramid. You can see that right now it still looks at least somewhat reasonable, even though they're already having horrible outcomes. Now imagine what it will look like in ~20-30 years when it goes from a sort of vase shape to an outright upside down pyramid. You should be able to see that it means the population will start declining at an exponential rate. And that's what awaits the entire Western world if current trends aren't sharply reversed. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/File:Japan_Population_Pyramid.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/F...

082349872349872 3y ago
I guess you could try the russian approach to fertility: make music videos encouraging the populace to get knocked up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuSf1UcFRq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuSf1UcFRq0
- somenameforme 3y ago
  Hahaha, you know - it seems pretty funny, but I think it's not a bad idea at all! They are also doing other things like offering substantial payments to married couples have who have children. They have an abnormal fertility issue going on thanks to the 90s. When the USSR collapsed Russia economically collapsed and fell into borderline anarchy, to say nothing of rampant alcoholism and drug use, which sent fertility rates plummeting even below Japan. It's getting much better now, but they lost the better part of a generation, and they're still below where they should be. Their population pyramid is here [1] where you can see it all too clearly. That huge gaping maw that peaks at around 28 years old is due to fertility collapse in the 90s. I think it's also reasonable evidence for my 'vicious cycle' hypothesis. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media/File:Russia_Population_Pyramid.svg https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media...
  - 082349872349872 3y ago
    The trough at 80 must be WWII, but I wonder what the trough at 57 might be? Rampant alcoholism would easily explain the gender imbalance at the older end: male and alcoholic tends to end poorly, especially if tobacco is involved on top.
    - somenameforme 3y ago
      Really interesting point on the trough at 57. I have no idea! That's really quite visible, and would've been around 1967. But there were, to my knowledge, no particularly major events around then, in the USSR, that could easily explain it. On the gender imbalance, men just tend to die younger than women. As a funny (?) factoid, evolution/nature also somehow optimizes for this. There's about 107 boys born for every 100 girls. [1] But after we get done getting ourselves killed in all sorts of creative ways, you end up with a sex ratio that's almost exactly 50:50 across all ages; at older ages you end with a sex ratio skewed towards women. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio