American fertility plummets to all time low

interesting, I was born in 1960. Wonder what they put in the water?

 

Most couples in their 20's and early 30's will tell you point blank without hesitation. They aren't having kids because they cost a lot of money. Lots of couples that would love to have kids aren't having them, because they know there is no way they will be able to afford them. They can barely afford themselves. Let alone a baby.

 

As exiled pointed out, this happens in all basically industrialized countries. It’s almost like a law, where developing countries have high birth and death rates, and then as progress, their death rates drop and then their birth rates drop. One of the popular hypotheses regarding the cause is that people in wealthy nations start to value quality over quantity in offspring. Instead of having 8 wild and poor kids on a farm like little house on the prairie, today’s parents want one or two kids that have all kinds of extracurriculars and get into the best schools. This hypothesis is basically the opposite of not wanting to bring kids into an uncertain world. It’s wanting to bring only excellent children into the world because it is so certain to be a competitive one.

 

I was talking about the spike in 1960, not the trend

 

Ah right, that was a fertile period indeed. Latex shortage maybe? That’s also the year Psycho came out, which showed how devoted children can be to their parents.

 

most?
What’s your evidence?

 

Nope. You don't get to 'both sides' this. Take this somewhere else.

Last time I checked there was a party presidential nominee who had almost 100 felony charges against him. Who had sat happily watching while the violent element of his conspiracy to overturn an election played out.

So, no. You don't even get to type that without it being rebutted.

 

We're gonna need immigration. Would be great if the dumbass nativists would start to get that.

 

i don't think i'd describe it that way.

 

Of course, there is more to it than just pure cost. It's the uncertainty and instability. When you look at the start of the baby boomer generation.. we had just been through the Great Depression. Then WW2. All the men left. And then Japan surrendered and all was right with the world. America was never more wealthy per capita. The war had brought prosperity, a new era of dominance and everybody knew it and felt it. So it made sense to make babies.

Contrast that with today. Costs, uncertainty, instability.. those are your factors. And yes, I've had tons of younger people lament that they are too afraid of having a kid because they can't afford one. They are very much worth it, but they are not cheap. Unless you want them to be the poorest kid in the class.

Here's what it's not: something in the water. A societal evolution that was inevitable. Abortion law, lol.

 

Why?
Why exactly does the population need to expand?
With the advent of AI and more automation should that mean less workers needed?

Is it because a consumption based economy needs more consumers?

Please explain this theory that keeps getting put out there.

 

You're assuming that AI and automation can replace younger workers. There's no guarantee that happens. An aging populace without a sufficient younger generation to replace them in the workforce is a massive problem.

So stop obstructing immigration. It is a net positive for our country and our economy. Just because your generation won't have to deal with the consequences doesn't mean my generation should get screwed over.

 

Funny do you have any idea what generation I’m in?

The workforce is constantly changing, AI will make some jobs obsolete as will increased automation, sorry you can’t see that.

How am I obstructing immigration?
Overall we are allowing more immigrants in than almost ever before.

I asked a serious question and that’s your response.

I expected better from you.

 

We've been automating for centuries. There will always be new needs that arise. But I don't necessarily think we must continue exponentiating the Earth's population either. In fact, that's probably led to some of the instability people are feeling. Or maybe it's our open borders policy. IDK..

 

I think you're both right.

You're right in the short term - in the current economic structure. Which means you're correct without massive structural changes.

Pa is right in the long run - he's right to be asking why we need continued population growth. Continued and indefinite growth is likely unsustainable. Instead we need to find other routes to bring stability and prosperity to a greater percentage of people. We currently require population growth to fuel the capitalist growth that has helped so many, but that's not tenable in the long run.

What that answer is, I don't know, but it's something that will need to embe found.

 

That's fair. I don't know what generation you're in. My assumption is Boomer or older Gen X. I doubt you're a millennial. But hey, maybe I'm wrong.

I see that just fine. Automation isn't new. But when automation and AI make some jobs obsolete, they also create new jobs. I am skeptical that we're going to reach a point where we suddenly no longer need a robust workforce, especially as our population starts to age.

My man, you are a Republican. Look at your party's platform, objectives, and actions. When you vote for Republicans, you're voting for nativism.

 

That's a separate point. I'm not arguing for or against population growth. I'm arguing with birth rates not meeting the replacement rate, we need to use immigration to make up the difference.

 

I don’t see how this is separate from exiled’s point. If you are arguing that we can’t go below the replacement rate, you are arguing against negative population growth. Why? I’m guessing it has to do with the reason exiled gave, that our current economic structure is based on a growing population with more young people than old ones.

But indeed this is unsustainable, even with immigration. It is likely that central and South America’s fertility rate will also fall below replacement at some point, and then immigration will become a zero sum game where reducing our age structure imbalance will just exacerbate theirs.

And I’m not against immigration, but I don’t think we should be justifying it by appealing to population growth. No persons should ever be viewed a means to keep comfortable others. Plus, if we did have a high fertility rate, would that justify closing the borders? Some amount of immigration is the right thing to do for its own sake. Meanwhile, we do need to adapt to a stable/declining population either today or tomorrow.