US Birth Rates Plummet To 40-Year Low

davey said:
the continuous development and growth of any given society is dependant on the production of children - approx 2 per family minimum - otherwise no future workforce ; no assistance for health care systems for the elderly - unless paid for and imported from abroad - the end result the collapse of any given society - simple mathematics not rocket science!
Click to expand...

the future of the world is dependant on not continuing over population - so, no , not 2 children per family minimum - 2 children per family average - ie ZPG
 
rgp said:
When ya think about it, why should taxpayers support the cost of raising children ? IMO, if a couple chooses to have children , then they should , and only they should pay to raise them.

Just on school tax alone , my prop-tax would drop near $2000 p/year if I did not have that included in my tax. I never had any children , again, why should I be paying for others ? Answer , because so many people just do not want to take responsibility for their choices/actions . Instead, they will do their level best to make someone else pay for them.
Click to expand...


Because we live in society, not as individuals.

I never go camping, why should I pay for upkeep of national parks, I never use libraries, why should I pay for other people to borrow books etc etc.

Because these things benifit society as does education of children
 

Unfortunately the world populations are not and probably never can be distributed evenly to 2.2 per family and therefore in many less developed countries the number of children per family can remain large causing hardship on the family whilst in so called developed country it can be less than 2 children per family falling to zero and producing insufficient numbers of children to provide an adequate workforce?
 
This population decrease will have significant effects on our society.

A smaller working-age population can strain social security systems and healthcare services and fewer young people entering the workforce can impact economic productivity and growth.

A shrinking workforce affects industries like healthcare, manufacturing, and technology. Companies may struggle to find skilled workers.

Fewer births mean fewer consumers in the future. Consumer spending drives economic activity.

With fewer young people, the burden on social services (such as elder care) increases.

An aging population requires more healthcare services, straining healthcare systems.

Smaller families impact family dynamics, caregiving responsibilities, and intergenerational relationships.

Women delaying motherhood due to education and career aspirations reshape traditional gender roles.
 
gruntlabor said:
There is a risk of Down syndrome when women delay motherhood due to education and career aspirations.
Click to expand...
It isn't just that either, not by a long shot.

Infant corrective surgeries are way up. Forms of conditions often placed under the "autism" umbrella are also way up. Female infertility interventions are way up.

A great deal of that can be placed squarely on delayed exit from adolescence. Waiting until your 30s to take on adult responsibilities can easily push the age of childbearing to 40 and beyond.
 
January said:
the future of the world is dependant on not continuing over population - so, no , not 2 children per family minimum - 2 children per family average - ie ZPG
Click to expand...
:) Got it. So, two children per family, and 'euthanasia', and abortions are the means by which we can begin to achieve zero population growth, right January? Anything else we can do? War? Increased mass murder by way of open borders and drugging up of the population? Maybe sabotage a couple bridges and planes? But, oops, I think we're already doing all that.
 
This as a problem might be corrected by the influx of Illegals. IMO the potential for pregnancy by those here illegally to have a child or children born in America with automatic citizenship would alleviate the problem.
 
Knight said:
This as a problem might be corrected by the influx of Illegals. IMO the potential for pregnancy by those here illegally to have a child or children born in America with automatic citizenship would alleviate the problem.
Click to expand...
So is that a vote for a servant underclass?
 
dilettante said:
So is that a vote for a servant underclass?
Click to expand...
That's not how it works in America........start low, aim high, achieve........your kids will break the mold and set you free...........or it least, that is how it used to work. I think it still will.
 
Knight said:
This as a problem might be corrected by the influx of Illegals. IMO the potential for pregnancy by those here illegally to have a child or children born in America with automatic citizenship would alleviate the problem.
Click to expand...
I like your thinkin Knight - like it - could just work out fine!!
 
dilettante said:
It isn't just that either, not by a long shot.

Infant corrective surgeries are way up. Forms of conditions often placed under the "autism" umbrella are also way up. Female infertility interventions are way up.

A great deal of that can be placed squarely on delayed exit from adolescence. Waiting until your 30s to take on adult responsibilities can easily push the age of childbearing to 40 and beyond.
Click to expand...
The jury is out on causation of many of these issues. To start with though, kids who were known as difficult wiggle-worms or mentally retarded in school are now more specifically diagnosed as ADHD, autistic, neurodivergent, et al, and given appropriate support.

The rampant pollution of our environment is suspected to be affecting human infertility and issues with our offspring. The neurodiverse children (some now adults) were born to women during their 20s - mid-30s.
 
gruntlabor said:
:) Got it. So, two children per family, and 'euthanasia', and abortions are the means by which we can begin to achieve zero population growth, right January? Anything else we can do? War? Increased mass murder by way of open borders and drugging up of the population? Maybe sabotage a couple bridges and planes? But, oops, I think we're already doing all that.
Click to expand...
..
Click to expand...

Got what?? How did you get any of that from what I posted??? o_O

I said nothing about abortion, euthanasia, open borders etc.

Just made the simple statement that the planet is overpopulated so i n the long run it is better for the world if families have, on average, 2 children, to create ZPG
 
Paco Dennis said:
This population decrease will have significant effects on our society.

A smaller working-age population can strain social security systems and healthcare services and fewer young people entering the workforce can impact economic productivity and growth.

A shrinking workforce affects industries like healthcare, manufacturing, and technology. Companies may struggle to find skilled workers.

Fewer births mean fewer consumers in the future. Consumer spending drives economic activity.

With fewer young people, the burden on social services (such as elder care) increases.

An aging population requires more healthcare services, straining healthcare systems.

Smaller families impact family dynamics, caregiving responsibilities, and intergenerational relationships.

Women delaying motherhood due to education and career aspirations reshape traditional gender roles.
Click to expand...
Exactly - hear hear!!
 
January said:
Because we live in society, not as individuals.

I never go camping, why should I pay for upkeep of national parks, I never use libraries, why should I pay for other people to borrow books etc etc.

Because these things benifit society as does education of children
Click to expand...
Wrong ! We live as individuals [within] society. And as individuals we should take personal responsibility for what we do ..... what we choose to do. Having babies certainly falls in that category .
 
I disagree.

As a society we support financially many things which benifit society as a whole - which therefore includes ourselves overall.

Public education falls into that.
 
January said:
I disagree.

As a society we support financially many things which benifit society as a whole - which therefore includes ourselves overall.

Public education falls into that.
Click to expand...
Well, again I disagree ...... If ya want children, you pay for them. Cradle to grave if you choose , but leave me out of it.

For the most part, most people that argue for your view , are those that have children. And since [reports say] that child birth is dropping , so too will the support for them . Which will IMO, in the long run put the question of support right back where it belongs ....... with the parents.
 
No- I think most people, whether they have children or not, recognise public education, child vaccination programs etc as being a society responsibility

Just like, in my examples of things I do not use myself - I recognise upkeep of National Parks and libraries to be society responsibility, not something I shouldn't contribute to because I do not directly use them myself.
 
January said:
No- I think most people, whether they have children or not, recognise public education, child vaccination programs etc as being a society responsibility

Just like, in my examples of things I do not use myself - I recognise upkeep of National Parks and libraries to be society responsibility, not something I shouldn't contribute to because I do not directly use them myself.
Click to expand...

Well like i said, most folks that I have known / groups I have been around , that argue in favor of public education etc. Are those folks that have kids. They had them , and just want someone else to pay for them.

Just like the student loan BS, if one wants/chooses to attend college, then they should pay their own way. As i have said before, student loans should be made through private banks, just like any other loan. Auto, boat, RV .. whatever. If one applies for a loan, and is granted the loan, it's a loan ..... pay it back.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top