I have a different take on the demographic “crisis” and it comes from of all places a comedian
In his bit he talked about how in the past, esp in an agrarian economy children were an asset, labor to work the farm…, early manufacturing was labor intensive
In an urban environment children become more of an expense than an asset in a purely academic thought experiment.
As the world becomes more automated, and I will add AI, though not really sure how that will all play out, do we really need to have as many people?
Many years ago it took 14 people to paint one car and it took weeks. Paint, sand, polish…. The automobile industry used to employ millions to produce cars, now it is hundreds of thousands.
A few farmers with a GPS controlled piece of farm equipment can plant and harvest hundreds of acres, sonething that would have taken dozens just a few years ago and hundreds many years ago.
I often hear the argument that we need more children to support the elderly and a consumer economy and agree to a point.
There will come a time, relatively soon when time will take care of the inverted pyramid of demographics, the elderly bubble, of which I am one, will die off. As for consumer economy the amount of goods and services needed will change, they always have. Used to be a blacksmith in the community was a necessity and there was a thriving buggy whip industry (credit to rush Limbaugh), and thousands were employed to place calls, few exist today and yet we still exist.
If populations continue to grow, and automation continues to advance, what are all these people going to do for jobs.
As an aside, looking at all the “creative” and mostly useless degrees coming out of our universities we are trying awfully hard to create something for people to do
lol, just my 2 cents
That’s why I say (sarc):
“I have a dog”: I don’t need children that get in the way of sex, career, vacation, mess up my figure, cost money, are a pain in the rear, and cause me to get committed to this nuiscense for the next 18 years.
But the real problem is that in our culture today, we advertise that mentality: Friends, Sex and the City...
No doubt she’s a beauty at 56, but she’s a perfect example:
https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/images/jennifer-aniston-attends-elle-women-in-hollywood-2025-at-news-photo-1763436886.pjpeg?resize=980:*
We socially and economically reward this way of thinking.
Those with children are basically paying for the retirement and welfare of those that have few or no children.
You can’t eat money.
If you had a mountain of 20 trillion dollars behind your house, but were the last human alive, what value other than tinder to start a fire with would that money have to you?
Money is no more than an abstract concept representing human time.
Those without children will one day be fed, housed, clothed, rolled down the hall in a wheelchair by the children of others.
But in the meantime, those with children get a $500 (that’s what it was last I checked) tax deduction. Hahahaha