Posted on 08/29/2026 3:40:18 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Governments around the world are increasingly offering cash payments, tax breaks, housing subsidies and childcare support in an effort to persuade citizens to have more children as birth rates fall and populations age.
Declining birth rates can strain a country's economy because there aren't enough people being born to support the aging population. That means greater strains on social programs like Social Security and Medicare in the United States since more and more people are using the programs, but not enough people are paying into them. Declining birth rates are a global problem, and a growing number of countries are rolling out increasingly generous pro-family incentives, ranging from direct payments for newborns to years of childcare assistance.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
These tax and debt slavers need to keep their investments going. Other than such tax and debt slavers, who would want to prevent a population adjustment downwards?

Paying people to have children is a bad idea.
Make old age pensions a function of your children’s FICA payments (and your school tax payments) is probably a good idea.
The moral basis of me getting Social Security is 100% a function of my school tax payments.
This can get rather complex. I haven’t worked it out.
Good! So eventually we will see no more of your filthy blog trash?
That came later.
For decades, the West has been pushing entitlement programs at the same it is promoting birth control. The most obvious question ("Who do you think is going to pay for this stuff?") has been met with nothing better than a blank stare.
I have children and grandchildren so watch out.
But I will temper my comment by noting sex with self prevented me from reaching my full procreation potential.
Looking around at my neighbors and their children, good, long-term relationships (resulting in marriage) tend to bear fruit in the form of children.
“The incentives are no longer there throughout the developed world.”
The incentives were:
1. Women limited to mostly low-level jobs.
2. Social Security was called “children”
3. Far too many college-educated women (they’re too busy ‘having fun’ when they’re hot to have kids, and after they’re washed up, men have no interest in them)
4. A legal system that makes the men almost always come out on the losing side when marriages break up...so men “go their own way” instead.
5. Tattoos (obviously)
A worldwide emp burst would reverse this trend within weeks.
Hmmm....I just might fancy becoming a world villain....hmmmm
Thanks for providing the list.
Every single country has a declining birth rate, even sub saharan Africa and muslim countries.
Many Muslim countries and former third world countries are below replacement rate. That includes India, Bangladesh, Iran, etc.
The estimated population of the world for
2000 BC: 27 million to 72 million (Average consensus is roughly 50 million)
1000 BC: 50 million to 100 million (Average consensus is roughly 72 million)
500 BC: 100 million
0 BC / 1 AD: 150 million to 330 million (Average consensus is roughly 250 million)
500 AD: 190 million to 210 million
1000 AD: 250 million to 310 million (Some models estimate up to 390 million)
1500: 450 million (estimates range from 400 to 500 million)
1600: 550 million (estimates range from 500 to 600 million)
1700: 610 million (estimates range from 600 to 700 million)
1800: 980 million to 1 billion (the world first crossed the 1 billion milestone around 1804)
1900: 1.6 billion to 1.65 billion
2000: 6.1 billion
2025: 8.19 billion

the world population will stabilize. Just as Malthus was wrong so those who straight line project population decline are wrong
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.