[onlooker]

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-46118103

Why is the fertility rate falling?

The fall in fertility rate is not down to sperm counts or any of the things that normally come to mind when thinking of fertility.

Instead it is being put down to three key factors:

-Fewer deaths in childhood meaning women have fewer babies
-Greater access to contraception
-More women in education and work

The problem with this analysis is moving forward one must expect greater poverty and deprivation as the world is thrust into the era of contraction due to energy shortages and resource scarcity. If these countries were not able to raise living standards for most of their population before, they certainly will not be able to going forward..So the 3 reasons cited for fewer births will not be improving but getting worse as countries get poorer

[Ibon]

What is interesting is that 25 years ago nobody really saw this coming. This is no longer just Japan and a few other countries and I expect this trend to continue.

We have been discussing energy constraints and peak oil one day forcing a more steady state economic system as declining fossil fuels halt economic growth and expansion. What about this shifting demographic of aging populations and fertility rate decline?

Some countries like Japan decline from accepting immigrants to make up for their domestic drop in fertility rates. Their population will inevitably decline.

Some countries embrace immigrants as a way to offset the decline in fertility rates. Especially if economic forces compel them to continue to grow and expand.

It will be interesting to see the position of the USA in the future if we get to the point were declining fertility rates affect economic expansion. Will we turn 180 degrees and open up the borders to more immigrants or will be take the route of Japan and allow our population to decline?

The forces of capitalism that demand growth and expansion will meet the limits of a declining population and an aging population. Consumption rates fall not only because there are less consumers but because older people consume less. Housing starts fall, Iphone sales fall, all sectors of the economy except caring for the aged go into decline. Shareholders not happy with flat growth rates.

[onlooker]

"The forces of capitalism that demand growth and expansion will meet the limits of a declining population and an aging population" Not only those limits but the limits of the planet itself as overpopulation depletes non renewable resources. Even more, as we definitely are disrupting and degrading the full array of life support services with contamination, overuse , biodiversity loss and converting nature to human landscape, for all plant and animal life, leaving less for human consumption and use. Wish I had more expertise to detail all this more precisely

[KaiserJeep]

For whatever reason, the needful decline is from the present 7.7+ billion humans to something below 1 billion. That 1 billion is a popular figure but I believe with the cumulative ecological damage, optimisticly high.

I'm all in favor of a natural fertility rate decline as an alternative to an apocalyptic war over declining resources.

[EdwinSm]

I'm all in favor of a natural fertility rate decline as an alternative to an apocalyptic war over declining resources.

+ 1

I much prefer that route, but at the same time I would like to have some grandchildren.

Also the pessimist part of me feels that the decline in population due to the fertility rate decline will be too slow to cover our current situation.

[Vermillion2]

Japan no longer restricts immigration and just recently allowed a no-cap unlimited immigration policy that will bring millions.

[onlooker]

A strange thing has happened to men over the past few decades: We’ve become increasingly infertile, so much so that within a generation we may lose the ability to reproduce entirely. What’s causing this mysterious drop in sperm counts—and is there any way to reverse it before it’s too late?

So what was causing this disruption? To say there is only a single answer might be an overstatement—stress, smoking, and obesity, for example, all depress sperm counts—but there are fewer and fewer critics of the following theory: The industrial revolution happened. And the oil industry happened. And 20th-century chemistry happened. In short, humans started ingesting a whole host of compounds that affected our hormones—including, most crucially, estrogen and testosterone.

https://www.gq.com/story/sperm-count-ze ... HU9TpmDKkY

[obixman]

I'm all in favor of a natural fertility rate decline as an alternative to an apocalyptic war over declining resources.

+ 1

I much prefer that route, but at the same time I would like to have some grandchildren.

Also the pessimist part of me feels that the decline in population due to the fertility rate decline will be too slow to cover our current situation.

OK how about 2 or 3 instead of 56 as one set of my grandparents had.

I'm a grandparent and I have 6.

A great-grandparent with 2.

Increased longevity and changes in marrying ages and contraception use make extended family groups possible.

[Subjectivist]

Check this out,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

[lpetrich]

Our View: U.S. birth rate plummets as cost of children soars - Portland Press Herald
Millennials Aren't Having Kids. Here's Why That's A Problem For Baby Boomer Real Estate & Retirement
Pew Research: Why Americans are opting out of parenthood - Bizwomen

All those oh-so-righteous right-wingers who tut-tut that one should not have children that one cannot afford, where are they now? They are getting what they want, and it is resulting in low fertility rates.

[Cog]

Have the children you can afford to have. I don't want to pay for them.

[lpetrich]

Have the children you can afford to have. I don't want to pay for them.

Even if it means a low fertility rate?

[Outcast_Searcher]

Have the children you can afford to have. I don't want to pay for them.

Even if it means a low fertility rate?

In case you haven't been paying attention, the earth has FAR too many people. Overpopulation is to blame for much of the resource issues this site focuses on.

But let's pretend that the global population can be reduced significantly over time without any fertility rates declining.

If you believe in high population as the ultimate goal of humans, and to hell with the consequences, they'd already figured out where that leads in 70's dystopian science fiction.

The Movie and book "Soylent Green" comes to mind, as does Robert Silverberg's fine book "The World Inside".

[Outcast_Searcher]

All those oh-so-righteous right-wingers who tut-tut that one should not have children that one cannot afford, where are they now? They are getting what they want, and it is resulting in low fertility rates.

And who's going to pay to take care of all the children people can't afford? You?

I'm a moderate, but I realize things must be paid for, and that the far left solution of "other peoples' money" only goes so far.

[Newfie]

Japan no longer restricts immigration and just recently allowed a no-cap unlimited immigration policy that will bring millions.

Got a link for that?

[Cog]

Have the children you can afford to have. I don't want to pay for them.

Even if it means a low fertility rate?

Yes. Do we need additional cashiers at McDonald's to get my order wrong?

[Newfie]

Cog,
I get your point, I think. I would point out that it takes some work to “get it” and having had past hard conversations with ho helps me greatly in that quest.

But I’m a sympathetic ear, not everyone will hear you in the same manner.

That’s why it’s best to try to be a bit more explanatory and a bit less confrontational in your responses.

Eleswise you give folks the wrong impression, for which they can not be blamed. Then you get accused of something that wound your feelings and a needless pissing match ensues. And while it make you feel warm momentarially, it revolves into a longish chill, unpleasant.

Hopefully you can hear this in the helpful manner it is intended.

[Cog]

When I'm on the phone, I type less. But I'll go more in depth now that I'm not. We have plenty of people in the USA. Our abundance and health care system results in less people wanting to have babies. I'm fine with that. So no, the drop in the fertility rate or replacement rate bothers me not at all.

We have enough people in the USA to do the jobs that need to be done. I would actually prefer we had less population and people would do more for themselves instead of relying on cheap and illegal labor, but here we are.

[Cog]

Medicaid is the primary source of insurance in 43% of childbirths, and that percentage is much higher the younger the mother is, according to the latest numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

https://www.axios.com/medicaid-as-a-sou ... 990c2.html

Now my argument is not that we shouldn't provide Medicaid for the poorest citizens of our country, but the fact so many of the poor are having children at all is troubling to me. Without the government intervention, they could not afford to have them at all. Meanwhile, the somewhat financially successful couples are delaying or not having children. At the end of the day, someone has to pay for all of this.

[Newfie]

Yes it does sound like the plot line for a bad B movive, call it “Idiocracy”.

I too would like to see the population decline.

I have a hard time arguing young folks out of having kids. The ones who would see the point are the ones we need. The ones who don’t get it will reproduce just fine.

It’s one of the reasons for my strong stance on illegal immigration.

I firmly believe the country should have some official policy towards a max sustainable population. Fat chance.