Posted on 07/29/2019 7:01:54 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
“And why would the population need to replace itself? We already have far too many people and all the problems associated with that. . . . crime drugs density traffic pollution loss of habitat”
My thoughts exactly! The only reason is the welfare state creating and feeding ever more irresponsible people.
We estimate that immigration between 1990 and 2017 added nearly 43 million people to the population, but had a minimal impact on the share of the population that is of working age. This is because immigration added to both the working-age population and to those outside of the working-age population in nearly equal proportions. We also find that post-1990 immigration had a somewhat larger impact on the ratio of workers to retirees. However, raising the retirement age by one year has as large an impact on the ratio as do the nearly 43 million post-1990 immigrants and their progeny.
If the retirement age were raised by just one year, assuming no immigration, the ratio of workers to retirees would be 4.1, matching the effect of post-1990 immigration. Increasing the retirement age by two years, assuming no post-1990 immigration, would have increased the worker to retiree ratio to 4.5 in 2017. It would have required doubling post-1990 immigration to nearly 86 million to match this effect.
In terms of using immigration as a way to pay for entitlement programs, it must also be pointed out that a large share of post-1990 immigrants and their children struggle, living in or near poverty and using welfare programs at relatively high rates. This makes it difficult for them to generate a fiscal surplus that can pay for social insurance programs.
In 2017, 45 percent of households headed by post-1990 immigrants or their adult children used one or more major welfare programs, compared to 26 percent of native-headed households. The rates of poverty or near poverty for post-1990 immigrants and their children were 50 to 60 percent higher than that of natives.
While this analysis is focused on all immigrants (legal and illegal), we roughly estimate that 32 percent (13.8 million) of the people immigration has added to the country since 1990 are illegal immigrants or their progeny. Since legal and illegal immigration together have a modest impact on the working-age share or the worker-to-retiree ratio, the impact of illegal immigration by itself is very small.
Yeah, that's a big liberal position.
In high schools they tell our children global warming is going to kill all of us and that responsible adults limit the children they might have.
Then the same scum of the earth ‘teachers’ turn around and support open borders so the third world can come here to be servants for liberal elites and vote in democrats to keep the money rolling...
The rational? Someone has to keep the Ponzi scheme of Social Security going so democrats can continue to steal social security money before it hits the bottom of the box.
Evil is afoot...
“And why would the population need to replace itself?”
If it doesn’t, our whole edifice of social welfare programs collapses.
If the population collapses, the ponzi schemes fail, and the GDP doesn’t keep pace with the currency inflation, so the economy collapses.
Piling on to your answer, Women are also told that they have to work outside the house, and in fact a young couple can barely get by unless both are working. I have a grandchild due in 3 weeks, and my daughter is apoplectic about the costs of daycare. It will cost almost 100% of her after tax income, but if she leaves the workforce to raise the child, then she essentially becomes unemployable when she wants to return. Trying to get by on just her husband’s income will not cut it. This is the Hobson’s choice that feminism has created. Women really don’t realize how much better they had it before equal rights.
if you want your culture and your values to exist, a population must produce children......
There is no theft of SS money. There is no need for Al Gore's lock box. SS is unsustainable due to actuarial reasons, not the theft of the money.
Lots of babysitting and my little hometown here at Fairfax California and most of the parents or your typical Marin parents about 50
The birth rate is the number of live births per 1,000 of the population each year.
The fertility rate is the average number of of children born to women of childbearing age (15-44).
This is true. I have participated in such studies. A surprisingly large percentage of college age women have poor egg quality, with less than 50% of their eggs even ready for viability when fertilized.
You might think that is still plenty. But most college age women aren’t planning to reproduce for maybe 10 years.
This is environmental.
Pesticides, plastics, pollution? Something is causing this. We need to find a way to live cleaner if we want to survive.
If she’s already trying with a good reproductive endocrinologist, at some point it will be time to ask herself, does she really want a child? Or does she only want a genetic child?
There is egg donation (expensive, but the husband will be allowed his genetics in the child) and of course embryo donation. Thousands of unwanted embryos languish in labs all over. We added to our family with this form of “adoption’ and gave life to a beautiful child who is coloring beside me right now.
Of course embryo donation is free because you cannot legally buy a human being. It only costs half an IVF cycle. If her uterus is good, she can be pregnant with a healthy baby, give birth, breastfeed, and only the parents (she and hubby) are on the birth certificate. And since I have genetic and non genetic kids, I can tell you the love is identical.
A lot of you are not addressing the issue, like you. This isn’t about birth rate. This is about fertility rate, measured by egg quality in women of child bearing age.
Maybe swallowing and injecting poison into women’s bodies is not good for them.
You should read the article - it’s about birth rate not egg quantities.
Read the actual article?!? Say what?? Well, maybe I should start doing that.
Wasn’t it about 10 years or so ago that Russia was paying couples to have children?
...so democrats can continue to steal social security money before it hits the bottom of the box.
*******************************************
Another of the legacies from LBJ in the ‘60s that has been detrimental to the USA. ...And yes, I still believe he had a hand in the JFK assassination.
Agree most a lot of the foreigners are baby factory’s and welfare junkies.
LBJ did massive damage to the country... horrible person.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
