Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
14 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I have also read essays arguing that feminism itself needs to be more supportive of motherhood . [theguardian.com] , [huffingtonpost.com]
Marmion
Level 6
May 29, 2018
1
I think there are lot of reasons the birth rate is declining and this is good news!! It is too expensive, takes too much time and many people are waking up to the fact that children often contribute to stress and a broken relationship (studies have shown that a majority of parents regret having children - a previous posting of mine). This country has been at almost replacement level for over a decade. Unfortunately, the pro-growth, business mantra has painted that as a bad omen and sought ways to turn it around. A recent article in a Canadian paper titled it the "birth-dearth" and said a lot of negative things. Here's an interesting fact: [cbsnews.com] This is pure crap. The Romans, almost 2,000 years ago had the same issue and the government tried to increase birth rates, unsuccessfully. What they did was to bring in more residents from outlying lands. The maintenance of so many, non-Romans led to a strain on resources and eventually the fall of the empire. Sound familiar?
JackPedigo
Level 9
May 29, 2018
2
The political concern is that with fewer people having children and those who do have children only having one or two at most AND people living longer that the working population will be insufficient to pay for the social safety net and health care needs of the elderly population. Some people understand that in nations where this is the trend, one way to create a larger base of working people is to take on those who come from countries where there is overpopulation and more people than there is paid work available and the culture promotes greater childbearing and young marriage. The perception that white Christians need to breed and have bigger families in order to maintain their demographic advantage is part and parcel of a lot of these fundamentalist movements, such as Quiverfull.
I only had one child and it still completely derailed the career path I was following at the time, and now I am back in school in my damn 50's to rebuild something for enough years until I really can retire. Sure had no effect on my ex-husband's career trajectory at all. This is a reality many women have faced. Our society does not provide much in the way of support for women who choose deliberately to become mothers. The political climate instead seems largely interested in focusing on women who choose not to become mothers by accident. I have a friend from Finland and when she tells me what the Finnish govt. does to support the parents of newborns and infants, it's night and day. Give it a read: [finnishmythoughts.weebly.com]
seaspot_run
Level 7
May 29, 2018
4
You are spot on.....there are a couple more things in play as well. If you look at the projected population broken down by demographics for the next 50 years it becomes very apparent that the U.S. will be shrinking drastically. The fastest growth will be among the middle eastern groups - why do you think they are so busy outlawing abortion in this country? Those groups are still having large families while in the US, most families are shrinking to two children...makes some people in gov't very nervous . Our gov't wants to make sure every pregnancy goes to term - but once those children are born, they turn their backs on the ones born into poverty. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense - to me, anyway.
Japan due to various cultural biases expects a decline of up to 60% in the next century they have a plan to cope with it.
@pye-rate From what I have read , the Japanese really have it bad in that regard . < [japantimes.co.jp] , [theguardian.com] , [america.aljazeera.com] >
For those in the know, it could cost $20,000 plus for a birth, and in the US we don’t yet have universal health care.
Aikidoman
Level 3
May 29, 2018
2
Not to mention that child care costs as much as college does.
A declining birth rate is a great thing.
Kojaksmom
Level 8
May 29, 2018
5
@5082gregory however ,if the birth rate continues to drastically decline, more benefits may be given to people who choose to be parents. Although I hope that many would choose not to become parents
@Kojaksmom Overpopulation is not an American problem; it's a world problem.
On the contrary , I contend that it's not overpopulation that is at fault , but rather over concentration of wealth . [theredphoenixapl.org]
As a woman, I can say that this is NOT being missed by all the other women I know. Who the hell is missing this? Men? I guess they don't get punished for pregnancy that often, but really? Are they that blind? Discrimination of this sort is hardly a new thing, nor is it particularly rare. Aside from the obvious disdain for women, I'm okay with declining birth rates because the world is already overpopulated and that's a serious issue.
Ravensasha121
Level 5
May 28, 2018
8
Sing it sister! Really, who is unaware of this?
@kenriley Well I know a lot of old white men in that I have about 20 uncles. And they're okay. But mostly very right leaning. Family. Like, they are awesome and they love me cuz I'm their niece and they would help me if I needed it and stand up for me and literally probably die for me. But not much in common and don't necessarily want to know the details of my atheist, mom-of-gay-kid, other scandalous things life.
In the long run, a continuously growing population is actually terrible because of the space and resource requirement. Our Earth is only going to handle 50-80 billion people before it becomes an overcrowded zoo and implodes on itself.
My concern is that the people who are reproducing now are passing on regressive traits and are reproducing in an increasingly rapid rate, and how we are going to deal with this issue without making human rights violations.
The immense cost of having kids is just another symptom of a serious economic problem: the cost of living versus what a person can make.
People who favor tradition in the government are trying to make it so a person has to be in a relationship or married to survive, which is a subtle method of subverting the rights of others, and this problem needs to be fixed.
DZhukovin
Level 7
May 28, 2018
4
From what I read, 10 billion is the tipping point by about 2050. Al Bartlett also gave excellent lectures on exponential population growth and finite resources.
@Piece2YourPuzzle We have much more space for ten billion. Your source was different than mine.
You are overlooking the fact that the undercurrents fueling the anger between the races, the different cultures, between the economic classes, etc etc will inevitably lead to yet another war. Humans simply can not coexist peacefully...and that is truly sad.
@DZhukovin It's not about space. It's about exponential growth coupled with finite resources. I'm sure you can fit 10 trillion people, or whatever the astronomical number is, on the Earth shoulder to shoulder.
@Piece2YourPuzzle We're at 7.6 billion-ish, and we're nowhere near being shoulder to shoulder. Why would we be shoulder to shoulder at 10 billion? Pay attention.
Smh
It's not about being shoulder to shoulder. I never said what you just implied. Fucking hell!
I beg to differ . [nytimes.com]
Wars kill people....lots of people - men, women and children alike. In the past, we've seen a spike in the birth rate once the war is over - but given the type of wars we could potentially be looking at now that might not happen...for all the obvious reasons (effects of radiation, etc)
First let me say that I agree with your assessment about regressive traits....our gov'ts approach to family planning is going to feed into that problem as they are now consumed not only with outlawing abortions but prohibiting access to birth control.
Secondly, to your point that the earth is going to become an overcrowded zoo - I strongly believe that our propensity for aggression/war is going to occur long before we reach that point. That seems to be man's solution for overpopulation - just start another major world war.
It shouldn't be......and I'm not suggesting that anyone has ever used war as a rationale for overpopulation concerns. It just seems to me that your concern for overpopulation might come in second behind mutually assured destruction in that list of things that keeps you up at night. 
Mother nature seems to have a few tricks up her sleeve in that department too - famine? diseases like AIDS and ebola? any number of natural disasters/catastrophes?
Pretty sure nobody's missing it at all. I hear about this all the time.
memorylikeasieve
Level 7
May 28, 2018
5
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.