5 ms·

> Everybody is asking why birth rates plummet. It’s simple. Having a family costs a fuckton of money. It's a factor, it's not the only factor. Decrease in tee

> Everybody is asking why birth rates plummet. It’s simple. Having a family costs a fuckton of money. It's a factor, it's not the only factor. Decrease in teenage pregnancies, decrease in alcohol consumption, contraception and day after pills, higher levels of education, less socialized culture, less generational housing etc. Having a child is more than often a deliberate, calculated decision that is made by adults whereas in the old world pregnancies happened left and right with little to say about it. Support systems existed because the problem was pervasive. Now the problem is generally gone, and the support systems thereafter. No country has managed to reverse the trend of declining birth rates. The better quality of life people have, the fewer children people tend to have. It's not just about who does and who doesn't have children, it's also how many children per family. 1-2 children is the new normal. My grandpa was #7.

eru 2mo ago
> No country has managed to reverse the trend of declining birth rates. Perhaps we can learn from the past? Birthrates between the world wars were below replacement level in much of the western world. Then the trend reversed for a while.
- rcxdude 2mo ago
  Question is why was this the case? I feel a natural explanation is it's a reaction to there being less people around on account of the huge number of deaths, in which case there's probably little reason to worry: if birth rate increases as population drops then the system should tend to equalise itself. If it's something else related to a gigantic war specifically then it's a bit less certain (one very important question is was the growth just a displacement in time from all the couples who could not have a child during the war but now can?).
  - eru 2mo ago
    I am not so sure about 'lots of people' died causation. Eg I don't think we'll see a babyboom after the war in Ukraine ends. And just look at the interwar years themselves: lots and lots of people died in World War I, but that didn't trigger a babyboom. Just the opposite.
- Spartan-S63 2mo ago
  For at least half that time period between world wars, there was significant economic depression. It might simply be the economy. The vibes are bad and have been bad since the late 70s because wealth distribution is lopsided and income growth is stagnant.
  - eru 2mo ago
    > It might simply be the economy. The vibes are bad and have been bad since the late 70s because wealth distribution is lopsided and income growth is stagnant. Seems unlikely: the decrease in fertility rates is pretty universal, but what your are giving as reasons here seem pretty US specific.
woodpanel 2mo ago
> No country has managed to reverse the trend of declining birth rate May I point you to the State of Israel? Its TFR sits at 3. And if we really want to be nitpicky, and concentrating on the "reverse"-part of your statement, then even Balkan countries shine, as they literally managed to reverse the trend.
- fredrikholm 2mo ago
  > And if we really want to be nitpicky, and concentrating on the "reverse"-part of your statement, then even Balkan countries shine, as they literally managed to reverse the trend. That same bump is now reversing and the general trend of depopulation continues to accelerate. IIRC Bosnia has the lowest birth rates in all of Europe. I appreciate the push back; I was overly confident in that statement. I do think however that it's correct to state that the slow trend across all developed countries could be summarized as "aggressively downwards". Israel is literally the one exception.
- Game_Ender 2mo ago
  Israel is still declining just more slowly [0]. They do show the general point of this thread: it’s not money that is causing people to have fewer kids. It is the changing social structure and norms, in Israel they appear to tolerate kids everywhere, everyone has lots of kids adding social pressure, family and social support structures are strong making it easier. In South Korea the reports are they this is very different. Kids are not tolerated in many places, many couples have few kids, society makes it quite hard on moms as well. 0 - https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/isr/israel/fertility-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/isr/isr...
  - MrDrMcCoy 2mo ago
    Yeah, SK is right behind Japan on that front. I wonder if the war money is altering the birth rate story in North Korea...
watwut 2mo ago
> old world pregnancies happened left and right with little to say about it. Yes. > Support systems existed because the problem was pervasive. Now the problem is generally gone, and the support systems thereafter. Meh, support for single moms or pregnant teenagers was not all that great. To large extend, they were punished and suffered, they were blamed. Their kids were oftentimes blamed. You are better off being pregnant teenager is a single mom today then in 1950 or 1925 or whatever.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
boelboel 2mo ago
There's been many countries who've reversed declining birthrates to some extent. Almost all European countries and the US did so after WW2, the US had a birthrate below replacement in the 30s. Many cities in the western world had fertility rates well below 1.5 some under 1, Vienna is the most striking example with a tfr of about 0.6 about as low as South Korea right now. Besides European countries you have many of the Soviet countries who had a rebound, Kazakhstan is the greatest example, going from 1.8 to 3. Israel was mentioned by others. I also don't think the better life => less kids holds true at this point. Plenty of countries in deep troubles (e.g. Tunisia) have birthrates far below the US or some other western countries. Having a phone is enough to keep people distracted. Those who do well financially (at least relatively in their own country) get more kids, I've heard about people working for TSMC getting twice as many kids vs their non TSMC peers. If somehow everyone was able to have a stable job, could afford good housing, wasn't obsessed about the rat race you'd see birthrates close to replacement (like you see them in regions of the US where these conditions are mostly met). Sadly this isn't going to happen.

eru 2mo ago

> No country has managed to reverse the trend of declining birth rates. Perhaps we can learn from the past? Birthrates between the world wars were below replacement level in much of the western world. Then the trend reversed for a while.

rcxdude 2mo ago
Question is why was this the case? I feel a natural explanation is it's a reaction to there being less people around on account of the huge number of deaths, in which case there's probably little reason to worry: if birth rate increases as population drops then the system should tend to equalise itself. If it's something else related to a gigantic war specifically then it's a bit less certain (one very important question is was the growth just a displacement in time from all the couples who could not have a child during the war but now can?).
- eru 2mo ago
  I am not so sure about 'lots of people' died causation. Eg I don't think we'll see a babyboom after the war in Ukraine ends. And just look at the interwar years themselves: lots and lots of people died in World War I, but that didn't trigger a babyboom. Just the opposite.
Spartan-S63 2mo ago
For at least half that time period between world wars, there was significant economic depression. It might simply be the economy. The vibes are bad and have been bad since the late 70s because wealth distribution is lopsided and income growth is stagnant.
- eru 2mo ago
  > It might simply be the economy. The vibes are bad and have been bad since the late 70s because wealth distribution is lopsided and income growth is stagnant. Seems unlikely: the decrease in fertility rates is pretty universal, but what your are giving as reasons here seem pretty US specific.

woodpanel 2mo ago

> No country has managed to reverse the trend of declining birth rate May I point you to the State of Israel? Its TFR sits at 3. And if we really want to be nitpicky, and concentrating on the "reverse"-part of your statement, then even Balkan countries shine, as they literally managed to reverse the trend.

fredrikholm 2mo ago
> And if we really want to be nitpicky, and concentrating on the "reverse"-part of your statement, then even Balkan countries shine, as they literally managed to reverse the trend. That same bump is now reversing and the general trend of depopulation continues to accelerate. IIRC Bosnia has the lowest birth rates in all of Europe. I appreciate the push back; I was overly confident in that statement. I do think however that it's correct to state that the slow trend across all developed countries could be summarized as "aggressively downwards". Israel is literally the one exception.
Game_Ender 2mo ago
Israel is still declining just more slowly [0]. They do show the general point of this thread: it’s not money that is causing people to have fewer kids. It is the changing social structure and norms, in Israel they appear to tolerate kids everywhere, everyone has lots of kids adding social pressure, family and social support structures are strong making it easier. In South Korea the reports are they this is very different. Kids are not tolerated in many places, many couples have few kids, society makes it quite hard on moms as well. 0 - https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/isr/israel/fertility-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/isr/isr...
- MrDrMcCoy 2mo ago
  Yeah, SK is right behind Japan on that front. I wonder if the war money is altering the birth rate story in North Korea...

watwut 2mo ago

> old world pregnancies happened left and right with little to say about it. Yes. > Support systems existed because the problem was pervasive. Now the problem is generally gone, and the support systems thereafter. Meh, support for single moms or pregnant teenagers was not all that great. To large extend, they were punished and suffered, they were blamed. Their kids were oftentimes blamed. You are better off being pregnant teenager is a single mom today then in 1950 or 1925 or whatever.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

boelboel 2mo ago

There's been many countries who've reversed declining birthrates to some extent. Almost all European countries and the US did so after WW2, the US had a birthrate below replacement in the 30s. Many cities in the western world had fertility rates well below 1.5 some under 1, Vienna is the most striking example with a tfr of about 0.6 about as low as South Korea right now. Besides European countries you have many of the Soviet countries who had a rebound, Kazakhstan is the greatest example, going from 1.8 to 3. Israel was mentioned by others. I also don't think the better life => less kids holds true at this point. Plenty of countries in deep troubles (e.g. Tunisia) have birthrates far below the US or some other western countries. Having a phone is enough to keep people distracted. Those who do well financially (at least relatively in their own country) get more kids, I've heard about people working for TSMC getting twice as many kids vs their non TSMC peers. If somehow everyone was able to have a stable job, could afford good housing, wasn't obsessed about the rat race you'd see birthrates close to replacement (like you see them in regions of the US where these conditions are mostly met). Sadly this isn't going to happen.