Skip to comments.
Elon Musk faces another massive blow as new study confirms his worst fear
The Daily Mail ^
| 30 Apr 2025
| XANTHA LEATHAM and ELLYN LAPOINTE
Posted on 04/30/2025 4:29:16 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
To: MinorityRepublican
Ok men, Iβm on it! I take one for the teamβ¦ ππππππ
2
posted on
04/30/2025 4:34:21 PM PDT
by
Lockbox
(politicians, they all seemed like game show host to me.... Sting)
To: MinorityRepublican
We have 5 children! Now 8 grandchildren and counting
To: MinorityRepublican
The U.S. rate has been below replacement rate since 1973.
To: MinorityRepublican
Musk, who boasts of ‘always banging the baby drum,’
So THATβs what itβs called.
I always thought it was the cervix.
(Ducks!)
5
posted on
04/30/2025 4:37:34 PM PDT
by
Uncle Miltie
(My Bearded Lady neighbor is an "Intimacy Coach" from the shed w/ Palestinian & Gay flags.)
To: T.B. Yoits
The U.S. rate has been below replacement rate since 1973.Why did it improve slightly in the '90s and early '00s?
To: MinorityRepublican
Everything I hear about today’s dating scene and financial status of Gen Z tells me that we face an inevitable demographic crash. Young men seem to feel that most young women are insufferable, and they are just walking away. Young women seem to feel that most young men are losers and the women are all actively chasing the top 10% of men (who enjoy the fun but don’t want to start families with insufferable women).
I do not see this situation getting better. Technology of various kinds are actively working against any future improvement.
To: MinorityRepublican
Why did it improve slightly in the '90s and early '00s?
YO!
To: MinorityRepublican
Read the article and have no idea what “massive blow” he faces. Just another article trying to minimize Musk.
9
posted on
04/30/2025 4:43:00 PM PDT
by
GMThrust
To: MinorityRepublican
Why did it improve slightly in the '90s and early '00s? Likely due to immigrants having children.
To: ClearCase_guy
I do not see this situation getting better. Technology of various kinds are actively working against any future improvement.There's a void. Naturally, Islam will exploit what's happening around the world.
To: MinorityRepublican
My give-a-damn meter doesn’t even register.
12
posted on
04/30/2025 4:47:18 PM PDT
by
A Navy Vet
(USA Birth Certificate - 1787. Death Certificate - 2021? )
To: MinorityRepublican
Worthless clickbait title...
13
posted on
04/30/2025 4:48:09 PM PDT
by
SuperLuminal
(Where is rabble-rising Sam Adams now that we need him? Is his name Trump, now?)
To: MinorityRepublican
No problemo.
14
posted on
04/30/2025 4:48:50 PM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Democrats are the Party of anger, hate and violence.)
To: MinorityRepublican
They don't want the population of tax slaves to drop to a sustainable level for the tax slaves because it means the slave masters will be deprived of things they want without enough tax slaves to keep the systems going.
...and, what they really don't want - the slave masters will turn on each other as they fight for the declining outputs of the tax slaves.
Make no mistake; they were quite willing to replace tax slaves with foreign tax slaves because they really believed anyone could do these jobs. Now that reality has smacked them in the face, they're desperate.
To: MinorityRepublican
Developed nations have lower birth rates than developing nations, which is a sort of inverse relationship than you’d think would be expected.
People with less-material resources per person, where life is harder than with people with plentiful material resources, have more babies in spite of the ecoonomic difficulties supporting more kids. While wealthier folks who could more easily take care of more kids have fewer. For example, China and India both had greater birth rates when they were more “poor” than they do today. Africa today, which is the least developed area has some of the highest birth rates.
16
posted on
04/30/2025 4:51:36 PM PDT
by
Wuli
(.)
To: MinorityRepublican
The consensus was that countries needed a fertility rate of 2.1 children per one woman to continue growing
Everybody just accepts the idea that we need to keep growing, that we need more and more people. But why? As far as I can see, the only reason that we need constant population growth is because the-powers-that-be set up this country (and most other countries) as a giant pyramid scheme for them to profit from, and they need the peasantry to keep pumping out more debt slaves.
I actually think that a USA with about 150-200 million people would be nice and relaxing.
17
posted on
04/30/2025 4:52:30 PM PDT
by
fr_freak
(So foul a sky clears not without a storm.)
To: MinorityRepublican
In the United States around 1800, the average woman had about 7-8 children during her reproductive years.
18
posted on
04/30/2025 4:53:26 PM PDT
by
daniel1212
(Turn 2 the Lord Jesus who saves damned+destitute sinners on His acct, believe, b baptized+follow HIM)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
The graphic is interesting but there are not 4 DeathToAmericaWomen available for each and every JihadMan.
To: MinorityRepublican
I failed to see the massive blow. Did I miss something?
20
posted on
04/30/2025 4:56:33 PM PDT
by
skr
(1 Peter 1:15 - But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson