3 ms·

We're in a situation where even discussing or proposing any realistic solution to this is considered too radical (how dare you propose controlling other peoples

We're in a situation where even discussing or proposing any realistic solution to this is considered too radical (how dare you propose controlling other peoples' lives). Yet societies will collapse because of it, or come close to collapse. The only "allowed" solution is importing people from poor countries into richer ones, but disguised as something humanitarian, taking in refugees of war or whatnot.

dalyons 2y ago
If your realistic solution is some form of forced natalism, then yeah, we shouldn’t be talking about that. It’s ethically wrong and unpalatable to the vast majority of people in developed societies, it’s not a thing that we should be entertaining.
- lazide 2y ago
  One way or another, most likely ideological, things will change. Probably in the ‘over correct once it’s too late, in some terribly traumatic fashion’ as is the norm. Eventually, likely in the direction of gun control - birth control being licensed or the like. Or being religious being a requirement again to be a ‘respected member of society’. Unlikely to be popular of course, but eventually society will change to protect its interests - or die.
  - cue_the_strings 2y ago
    Exactly. Either you opt for a timely, balanced, thought-out solution, or you have the traumatic over-correction forced upon you. I wish we could have real conversations about how to solve this issue, and not bury our heads in the sand. I'm not proposing any particular solution, just for our collective attention to the problem and liberty to discuss solutions.
    - lazide 2y ago
      I also like unicorns, rainbows, and free money. :(
- cue_the_strings 2y ago
  Not really forced, but nudged towards. The trivial approach would be something like significantly higher taxes and social contributions for each subsequent adult year of childlessness. Wouldn't be unwarranted since you're a greater burden overall to society over your lifetime and you're not contributing to the next generation. Countries could then use that money to either subsidize other people having kids (optimistic solution) or compete on attracting young people from other countries (more realistic solution). People seem to think "oh, I'm paying my social contributions, that should be enough for my retirement", but the whole formula really doesn't factor in a sharp drop in workforce we're about to experience. We're papering over the monetary deficit with credit all over the world, but that's not feasible long-term, and the "who's actually gonna do it" aspect will become much more important. Writing a check doesn't change the senior's diaper, nor anything else. As for practical solutions, first you have to make it possible for young people to obtain real estate again somehow (crucial), then to subsidize kindergartens / child care of all kinds heavily, and only then go more radical. Another radical angle could be some sort of education reform where people are somehow incentivized to do all the post-BSc education in their 30s instead of 20s. How to achieve that without horrible side effects is up to debate. Subsidies for parents on every corner and every aspect of life (including education) would probably work, but how much is the optimum and how to implement it is a serious question.

dalyons 2y ago

If your realistic solution is some form of forced natalism, then yeah, we shouldn’t be talking about that. It’s ethically wrong and unpalatable to the vast majority of people in developed societies, it’s not a thing that we should be entertaining.

lazide 2y ago
One way or another, most likely ideological, things will change. Probably in the ‘over correct once it’s too late, in some terribly traumatic fashion’ as is the norm. Eventually, likely in the direction of gun control - birth control being licensed or the like. Or being religious being a requirement again to be a ‘respected member of society’. Unlikely to be popular of course, but eventually society will change to protect its interests - or die.
- cue_the_strings 2y ago
  Exactly. Either you opt for a timely, balanced, thought-out solution, or you have the traumatic over-correction forced upon you. I wish we could have real conversations about how to solve this issue, and not bury our heads in the sand. I'm not proposing any particular solution, just for our collective attention to the problem and liberty to discuss solutions.
  - lazide 2y ago
    I also like unicorns, rainbows, and free money. :(
cue_the_strings 2y ago
Not really forced, but nudged towards. The trivial approach would be something like significantly higher taxes and social contributions for each subsequent adult year of childlessness. Wouldn't be unwarranted since you're a greater burden overall to society over your lifetime and you're not contributing to the next generation. Countries could then use that money to either subsidize other people having kids (optimistic solution) or compete on attracting young people from other countries (more realistic solution). People seem to think "oh, I'm paying my social contributions, that should be enough for my retirement", but the whole formula really doesn't factor in a sharp drop in workforce we're about to experience. We're papering over the monetary deficit with credit all over the world, but that's not feasible long-term, and the "who's actually gonna do it" aspect will become much more important. Writing a check doesn't change the senior's diaper, nor anything else. As for practical solutions, first you have to make it possible for young people to obtain real estate again somehow (crucial), then to subsidize kindergartens / child care of all kinds heavily, and only then go more radical. Another radical angle could be some sort of education reform where people are somehow incentivized to do all the post-BSc education in their 30s instead of 20s. How to achieve that without horrible side effects is up to debate. Subsidies for parents on every corner and every aspect of life (including education) would probably work, but how much is the optimum and how to implement it is a serious question.