Why the US population boom became a bust

Reuters ^ | May 27, 2026 | Howard Schneider and Sarah Slobin

[MinorityRepublican]

U.S. residents are aging and having fewer babies, with fertility rates at a record low and trailing what’s needed for the population to replace itself, part of a widespread global trend with deep economic consequences.

With President Donald Trump’s tough limits on immigration, and his effort to deport some immigrants already in the country, the U.S. may be heading for an era when the median age continues to drift up and the population eventually starts to fall each year. That would be a first for a country built by waves of religious, economic and political refugees from around the world. Economic stress on social safety nets may follow.

For most of U.S. history, more people were born each year than died. That “natural increase” has been slowing as big generations like the post-World War Two Baby Boomers aged and the generations that followed had fewer babies.

Current projections show that by around 2030, deaths will exceed births each year. Immigration, which could offset that, has become politically fraught, falling dramatically under Trump.

Should current trends hold, overall population growth is heading to zero.

The net result: Population growth has already slowed to a crawl. Since 2020, the U.S. population has increased by an average of 0.6% per year, about a third of the pace during the 1950s, in the middle of the 1946-1964 baby boom that gave the “Boomer” generation their nickname. Most of that meager growth has come from immigration. With Trump, that has been thrown into reverse and the U.S. population is on track to flatline around 2050.

---

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS:

[pepsi_junkie]

Maybe two generations of constant messaging in every media outlet that having children was a burden that prevents women from achieving their dreams of becoming office drones like men get to do has something to do with it.

[teeman8r]

yup, along with the destruction of the erf and all too

[FlingWingFlyer]

The new younger generations are boinking same sexers who dress up like cheap carnival stuffed animals.

[escapefromboston]

Better import the third world then

[Tell It Right]

I saw nothing in the article about the left’s intentional messaging with the “population bomb” mess and other stuff to reduce the west’s population. Less civilians in the west = easier for the ruling class to rule.

[Carry_Okie]

More women getting college degrees therefore delaying marriage + both parents working, + the pill.

[T.B. Yoits]

From the article: For most of U.S. history, more people were born each year than died.

The powers to be have always obfuscated the birth/death rates because they're so damning. We've been at war for most of our history. And if it wasn't for immigration, the population would have declined from a very early date.

The real question is not the overall birthrate but "How many people born here have children?" That's the rate the power brokers wish to hide because it gives away that they're replacing Americans with foreigners.

Even with high immigration since the 1960s and relatively few deaths due to war since WW2, we've been below replacement rate since 1973:

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Maybe giving women DES, a drug that reduces fertility and causes cancer had something to do with it as well.

Oh, and the effect is multigenerational.

Your grandmother got it and your chance of having children is reduced.

But no one wants to talk about it.

I wonder why.

[Tommy Revolts]

Somehow we need to encourage marriage and family once again,
it is completely off the rails.

Right now, I don't have a lot of hope for that.

[Organic Panic]

In my lifetime the population of erf doubled. There is no shortage of humans.

Governments are complaining because their ponzu schemes will collapse soon.

[T.B. Yoits]

The world population quintupled in the last 150 years. The population explosion and migrations, to fuel global industrial work over the last century and a half, are an unnatural series of events. Expect an adjustment downwards.

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?

[MinorityRepublican]

Somehow we need to encourage marriage and family once again, it is completely off the rails.

It's all about the incentives. The incentives are not there for the natives to get married and raise families, well don't be surprised if that's not happening at all.

[MinorityRepublican]

Governments are complaining because their ponzi schemes will collapse soon.

It's not a problem if we eliminate Social Security.

[T.B. Yoits]

But let's not talk about the crushing debt...

[cymbeline]

“Should current trends hold, overall population growth is heading to zero.”

That doesn’t sound bad. Why does America need more people?

The problem of an America with too few young people is a different matter.

[MinorityRepublican]

Why does America need more people?

Social Security.

[central_va]

I am looking forward to seeing wages explode because of population shrinkage. I won’t be holding my breath.

[central_va]

I hope that is sarcasm!!

[ek_hornbeck]

These type of stories are just propaganda designed to bring in more Third World immigrants. Zero population growth or even slight population decline isn’t the chicken little “Sky is falling” scenario that we keep hearing. It will stress entitlements and social security for a while - but once the boomer generation ages out and dies it will no longer be an issue. As for reduced GDP, innovation rather than population growth can drive economic growth, and what really matters is growth per capita rather than overall growth when it comes to standard of living.