Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Population expert sees dangers as U.S. birthrate falls below replacement
cna ^ | April 8, 2010

Posted on 04/08/2010 6:56:47 AM PDT by NYer

Washington D.C., Apr 8, 2010 / 06:37 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The U.S. birthrate fell from 2007 to 2008 and is now below replacement rate. One population expert, noting that children are the “only future a country has,” warns that a scarcity of children condemns a country to stagnation, bankruptcy and eventually death.

The U.S. National Vital Statistics Report for April 2010 shows that the U.S. birthrate fell two percent from 2007 to 2008. It is a drop below the replacement fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman.

In 2008 there were 41.5 births per 1,000 teens aged 15 to 19, also a two percent drop. The report also indicates that more U.S. children are being born out of wedlock than ever before.

According to the Washington Post, an October survey by the Pew Research Center said that 14 percent of Americans ages 18 to 34 and eight percent of those aged 35 to 44 said they postponed having a child because of the recession.

CNA discussed the report in a Wednesday e-mail interview with Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (PRI).

Asked whether the drop in births could be attributed to the economic downturn, he replied:

“Children are an expression of hope in the future. With the downturn in housing prices, and the upswing in the unemployment rate, it is not surprising that many couples decided to defer having children until the economic downturn had corrected itself. We will, I predict, see a bigger drop in the birthrate in 2009, when the unemployment rate closed in on 10 percent, 9.3 percent according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

He said birth rates have fallen in Europe and other developed countries, “for the same reason.”

CNA asked whether an increase in the abortion rate could have been a factor in the falling birth rate.

Mosher said “anecdotal evidence” suggests Americans are “increasingly aborting babies who were unfortunate enough to be conceived during this economic recession.”

He reported that more men and women are having themselves sterilized and contraceptive use is also up.

Asked about the broader consequences for a country below a replacement birth rate, Mosher commented:

“Look at present-day Greece, which is going over a demographic cliff because of a scarcity of children. Too few young people are entering the work force to replace retiring workers, entitlement spending is increasing at the same time that tax revenues are leveling off, and the government is technically bankrupt.

“Children are the only future a country has, and countries that fail to provide for the future in the most fundamental way--by providing the future generation--are condemned to stagnation, bankruptcy, and death.”


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: population; populationcontrol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-126 next last
To: Biggirl
China will end up paying dearly, look at the fact they have “extra males” around. Armed forces materal.

If China and India had not instituted a “one couple, one child” policies decades ago, the populations of both China and India would probably be hitting 2 billion each by now. Remember, China was a really poor country at the time. They just didn't have enough resources to fully support such huge populations. In India the poor were not using birth control enough back in the day, and just kept pumping out children.
It makes sense that every couple practice birth control(condoms etc) and have children when they can afford to give the child a good start in life.

61 posted on 04/08/2010 7:26:22 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NYer

This is hilarious! White people as a whole are only interested in having maybe 1 to 4 children. Leftists only are having none to 1, maybe 2. Conservatives are having maybe 2 to 3 children on average. Third worlders about 4 to 5 on average.

If Conservatives want to win this fight the only way to do is through both quantity and quality. Make it a goal to have 5 children and make sure you teach them a conservative way of life.


62 posted on 04/08/2010 7:30:32 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Global warming is a joke - this IS the issue we will face 20 - 50 years in the future.
I’ve done my homework there are some scary facts.
The current white replacement rate is WELL below 2.1 in the USA more like 1.8 (say goodbye to our culture here.) The Hispanic population used to raise it to level replacement rates, and now that isn’t even enough.
Programs and dependency on youth is very much in danger, as well as the future of our country because of liberal mindset of entitlements - all based on the working class paying for Soc Sec., Medicare, Schools, and the list goes on.
Liberal idiots continue to pedal “overpopulation” which, like AGW, is simply a pipeline to institute global governance. This, along with immigration are two huge issues the USA is facing, yet unwilling to address.
Muslims will soon reach 50% population in some European countries because they are having many more children then non-immigrants. Birth rates in EVERY European country are well below replacement rate when immigrants are removed from the equation, some, like Germany, are below 1.5.
Muslims only need to be patient, and continue the status quo, and Sharia will soon be reality in the west.


63 posted on 04/08/2010 7:31:40 AM PDT by No_More_Harkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

You said it!


64 posted on 04/08/2010 7:35:06 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!=^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe
China has had a one child policy in place for decades, and in that period, they have gone from a backward third world country, to one of the strongest economies on the planet, even while amassing vast foreign reserves, and becoming one of the biggest creditor nations of America. Mindlessly pumping out children never helped any country to go from poverty to rich country status.

Keep in mind that the "one child policy" is often not adhered to in the Chinese countryside, where it is common to have many "off the books" children. Some estimates suggest that the figures we have for China's population are actually 10-20% too low.

Also, I would call into question some of your other assertions. China's is not necessarily "one of the strongest economies on the planet." It is, in fact, quite fragile, and dependent upon foreign exports and an influx of foreign capital to take advantage of...drum roll please...it's large supply of cheap, expendable labour. Indigenous Chinese capital development has been very slow in coming, outside of a few "showcase" cities like Shanghai.

The Chinese economic picture is a lot like that of the Soviet Union in the 1930-1950s. Back then, informed opinion was convinced that the Soviets were the wave of the future since, hey, their economy was growing 10% a year. Of course, it really all boiled down to a matter of perspective - when you start with little, you don't have to do all that much to rack up some impressive numbers. Stalin's program of enforced industrialisation actually was successful in creating a large-scale industrial base where one had not previously existed. The Soviets saw huge numbers because they were basically taking what England and the USA had done over the course of a hundred years, and squeezing it into 30.

That's what China has been doing. They've been rapidly industrialising, so their numbers look good on paper. However, they're enduring all the same issues of environmental devastation, rapid urban influx of a previously rural population, and social instabilities that come with enforced industrialisation over a short period of time. The Soviets dealt with troublemakers by shooting them, thereby suppressing the tendencies in their situation. The Chinese, despite their reputation, don't seem to do that quite so much, and therefore have had more openly manifested social strife, despite the efforts of the state media to ignore it.

China's situation is delicate, and I am not at all convinced that China is destined to be the next superpower, nor am I convinced that the PRC is as monolithically stable as it is reputed. I'm not saying it'll fall apart into another Warring States-type period, but i would expect trends towards local autonomy to accelerate as the central government fails to deal with the many local grievances against the Party that continue to crop up.

FWIW, my money would be on India as the next Asian colossus. It has a huge population, cheap labour pool, rapid industrialisation,and growing military power as well. It also has something China does not - a reasonably free, consensual government that allows citizens to "blow off steam" via the electoral process, and which more readily allows for the exercise of personal liberties that are necessary for true entrepreneurialism and the emergence of a broad-based middle class that are necessary for a truly sound economy.

65 posted on 04/08/2010 7:35:09 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (We bury Democrats face down so that when they scratch, they get closer to home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Funniest line in the whole damn movie [as Clevon marches out from the stadium with 4 cheerleaders] “I’m gonna @$%K all y’all!” Then the ‘family tree’ starts madly popping out new branches...funny.


66 posted on 04/08/2010 7:36:40 AM PDT by Gaffer ("Profling: The only profile I need is a chalk outline around their dead ass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aberaussie
Correlation does not equal causation.

True.

There have been some other changes in China that have affected their economy.”

Of course. But then not having every couple pop out 5 or 6 children definitely helped China's economy grow faster. The government didn't have to build all these huge numbers of new schools, hospitals etc for the extra maybe 600 million people they would have had by now if they hadn't launched campaign to get couples to have fewer children

Having too many men for the number of women is going to be a problem - not just for China,”

I never said I supported abortions, ever. We are talking preventive birth control, whereby the couple take steps not to get pregnant till they can afford to look after their child properly.

control but for the rest of the world. Imagine a rich China with plenty of single men to serve in the military.”

Look, as countries get richer, they have fewer children anyway, maybe because they have other things to entertain them apart from sex. China's gender gap will work itself out in the next few decades.

67 posted on 04/08/2010 7:36:48 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

Plus there is a lot of corruption in China as well. They also have problems with their Muslims as well.


68 posted on 04/08/2010 7:37:36 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!=^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ConjunctionJunction
But we’re continually being told that we have an OVERpopulation problem. So which is it?

Click on the link to PRI posted above. They provide solid statistics. Overpopulation is a myth, just like global warming, dreamed up to justify abortion.

69 posted on 04/08/2010 7:37:46 AM PDT by NYer ("Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
China will end up paying dearly, look at the fact they have “extra males” around. Armed forces materal.

Well, it's not so much China that will pay dearly for this as it is the other countries around China who may.

70 posted on 04/08/2010 7:38:27 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (We bury Democrats face down so that when they scratch, they get closer to home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

Christian homeschooling families usually have more than 4 children (most I know have at least 6, with some in the 13 range),

this would be both your “quantity” and “quality”.


71 posted on 04/08/2010 7:39:36 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I know of one pastor up in CT who has 14 kids.


72 posted on 04/08/2010 7:40:27 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (We bury Democrats face down so that when they scratch, they get closer to home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Gotta watch “Idiocracy.”


73 posted on 04/08/2010 7:41:39 AM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

Don’t fall for the “overpopulation is China/India’s problem”.

It’s not. If they had a free society based on Judeo-Christian values, such huge populations would be a HUGE ASSET.

Imagine all those people working freely to better themselves and raising everyone else’s standard of living along with them.


74 posted on 04/08/2010 7:41:40 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: kabar
We bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year. Population decline is the least of our worries.

This is the same false argument used by many European nations. For example, a new report issued in March has revealed that 53.4 per cent of Italian families have no children. The report said that 21.9 per cent of households have only one child and just 19 per cent have two. While mass immigration contributes to Italy’s population growth, the country’s rock-bottom fertility rate of 1.31 children born per woman has resulted in a largely childless and aging nation.

Up until recently, the US was holding its own. That is no longer the case and my reason for posting this thread.

75 posted on 04/08/2010 7:42:18 AM PDT by NYer ("Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

A man that I had been dating come from a family of 4.


76 posted on 04/08/2010 7:42:24 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!=^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I know, I was just trying to put a little humor into some of this. Hence the Goldilocks reference.

:-)


77 posted on 04/08/2010 7:42:58 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction (LOLcat sez: "ObamaCare: Do Not Want!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Cacique

That is not likely to be the case, Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood, have made Hispanics and Blacks their target.

Illegal aliens is another matter altogether read this article on the Social Security’s ,Earning Suspense File.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/02/ss_secret_stash.html


78 posted on 04/08/2010 7:43:15 AM PDT by pennboricua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: PGR88
Hope comes from faith and family. Attack both and you turn into Eastern Europe.

You are absolutely right! And what was once true for Eastern Europe is now the situation in Western Europe. A recent report has revealed that 53.4 per cent of Italian families have no children. The report said that 21.9 per cent of households have only one child and just 19 per cent have two. While mass immigration contributes to Italy’s population growth, the country’s rock-bottom fertility rate of 1.31 children born per woman has resulted in a largely childless and aging nation.

79 posted on 04/08/2010 7:43:55 AM PDT by NYer ("Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Well most of us can't afford kids, because:

1) We're working too hard to pay for kids being had by the lazy and shiftless, not to mention illegal aliens, we don't have time to raise them.

2) We can't afford to have kids, especially when that idiot in the White House is trying to bump our tax burden up to about 75%.

3) Who would want to bring kids into a world where it is dominated by marxists who will have them under his control for the extent of their lives.



I'm sure there are many other reasons too. By the time obama gets done with America, our kids will be like those little sad kids with the big eyes on the "Save the Children" commercials and we'll be begging the world for donations so they can eat.

Medical care will be out the window, so they will surely succumb to some pandemic before they are grown.

By the time the kenyan is done, we'll all be living inside the cities, commune-like, so we're more easily corralled and controlled and our children will be "bred" only for the next generation of "workers" (read: slaves) for the state.

And finally, I think America aborts enough babies each year to fill several states' population quotas, so that sort of cuts into the count.
80 posted on 04/08/2010 7:44:05 AM PDT by FrankR (Those of us who love AMERICA far outnumber those who love obama - your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-126 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson