The Demographic Cliff: How will our society survive as it becomes older and numbers become fewer?

Lost within the tsunami of campaign reporting was a study released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on October 3, 2012. The report, titled "Births: Preliminary Data for 2011," passed through the 24-hour news cycle with hardly a mention. The only reason I heard about it was due to a short blurb carried by a local outlet, which reported a significant drop in teenage births. This news item was, of course, reported as positive. But the full report and its tables of statistics reveals nothing positive whatsoever.

According to the CDC numbers, 2011 was a banner year. It recorded the lowest birthrate in our national history.

In March of 2011 I penned a short essay for American Thinker, "Where Have All the Children Gone?" which considered the worldwide trend of falling birthrates. This essay will cover the recent declining birthrates inside the United States, as well as economic repercussion that fall entails. According to the report, the General Fertility Rate (GFR) for the U.S. in 2011 was 63 births per 1000 females (ages 15-44). This was a 1 percent drop from 2010. The decline among Hispanic American females was 6%; the decline among non-Hispanic blacks was 1%, and there was no change among non-Hispanic whites.

Nineteen states saw drops in live births, including both Blue states (California, Illinois, and New York) and Red states (Texas, North Carolina, Utah, and North Carolina). Among the different age cohorts, the number of births dropped 10% for females 15-19, 5% for females 20-24 (the lowest number of births ever recorded for that cohort). For females 25-29 the birthrate declined just a tad under 1 percent. The birthrate for females 30-34 remained unchanged, while the age group 35-39 saw a 3% increase in their birthrate. The birthrate for females 40-44 remained essentially unchanged.

“2.1 is replacement level.”

In the developed world, sure. Not in the developing world.
Remember that death rates are higher in the developing world. Higher death rates require a higher birthrate.

I expect to see in a few years, a worldwide birth cohort smaller than the previous year’s birth cohort.

“The world’s population will continue to increase by about 50 million a year until at least 2050.”

Mostly due to the fact that people are living longer than previous.

“And the US will not have a population problem as long as it continues to take in huge numbers of immigrants.”

The immigrants simply won’t be there in 20 years. The US will not have a population problem because it is replacing itself. People are not going to leave countries where there is a population shortage. That is why the US doesn’t get much immigration from Europe.

Immigration from Asia is going to start choosing China over the US, and possibly Japan, if they change their laws. That is the only thing that will deter the coming collapse in both China and Japan, and even if you take the excess for all of Asia - it barely meets the workforce shortfall in China.

“I am more concerned about too many people than too little.”

You are shortsighted. Obama is trying to do everything he can to destroy this nation and cut it off from a prosperous future as THE world power when all the other european nations have collapsed.

“We are bankrupt and taking in more poor people every year can not be sustained.”

Nonsense. The US is bankrupt because it spends more per person than Europe. Cut the spending and the problem will be solved.

In the developed world, sure. Not in the developing world. Remember that death rates are higher in the developing world. Higher death rates require a higher birthrate. I expect to see in a few years, a worldwide birth cohort smaller than the previous year’s birth cohort.

S what. The global fertility rate is still way above replacement level at 2.47. The population will continue to increase.

UNITED NATIONS, 3MAY – The current world population of close to 7 billion is projected to reach 10.1 billion in the next ninety years, reaching 9.3 billion by the middle of this century, according to the medium variant of the 2010 Revision of World Population Prospects, the official United Nations population projections prepared by the Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, which is being launched today. Much of this increase is projected to come from the high-fertility countries, which comprise 39 countries in Africa, nine in Asia, six in Oceania and four in Latin America.

Today, 42 per cent of the world’s population lives in low-fertility countries, that is, countries where women are not having enough children to ensure that, on average, each woman is replaced by a daughter who survives to the age of procreation. Another 40 per cent lives in intermediate-fertility countries where each woman is having, on average, between 1 and 1.5 daughters, and the remaining 18 per cent lives in high-fertility countries where the average woman has more than 1.5 daughters.

Mostly due to the fact that people are living longer than previous.

I wouldn't say mostly yet, but there is no doubt that as fertility rates decline in the poorer countries due to increased life spans and lower infant mortality rates, the populations will continue to rise. China has a fertility rate well below replacement levels but its population continues to rise for that reason.

I doubt they will be going to China for a number of reasons including political and cultural reasons. The Chinese will not assimilate foreigners nor will many Asian countries including Japan and South Korea. China has to worry about the peasants moving in from the countryside to urban areas. The government influences the pattern of urbanization through the Hukou permanent residence registration system, land-sale policies, infrastructure investment and the incentives offered to local government officials. Estimations are that Chinese cities will face an influx of another 243 million migrants by 2025, taking the urban population up to nearly 1 billion people. In the medium and large cities, about half the population will be migrants, which is almost three times the current level.

You are shortsighted. Obama is trying to do everything he can to destroy this nation and cut it off from a prosperous future as THE world power when all the other european nations have collapsed.

Please be more specific about how Obama is trying to cut us off from a prosperous future as it applies to population growth.

Nonsense. The US is bankrupt because it spends more per person than Europe. Cut the spending and the problem will be solved.

LOL. Do you think that adding 130 million to our population over the next 40 years, 80% due to immigration, will reduce spending. We bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year, most of whom are poor and undeducated. 25% of the adults lack even a high school degree. We are importing poverty. 57% of immigrant headed households are welfare. They support Big Government and not less spending.

87 percent of the 1.2 million legal immigrants entering annually are minorities as defined by the U.S. Government and almost all of the illegal aliens are minorities. By 2019 half of the children 18 and under in the U.S. will be classified as minorities and by 2042, half of the residents of this country will be minorities. Generally, immigrants and minorities vote predominantly for the Democrat Party. Hence, Democrats view immigration as a never-ending source of voters that will make them the permanent majority party.

We just added another huge entitlement program--Obamacare--a few years ago. SS has been running in the red since 2010 and Medicare since 2008. We have 70 million on Medicaid and Obamacare will add another 18 million to the rolls. Right now Congress is struggling to find $1 trillion in spending cuts over a ten year period or $100 billion a year. If they can't cut $100 billion out of an annual budget of $3.7 trillion, how the hell do you expect them to cut spending? The Dems will tax more to keep the welfare state treading water for as long as they can. We will have the usual Guns vs Butter struggle that marks declining great nations and civilizations and once they eviscerate defense, they will turn to higher taxes for all, and then we will be Greece.

We can't afford to spend even European levels on welfare and entitlement programs, which represent an unfunded liability of over $60 trillion (75 year period.) Cut spending? That's a joke. Obama and the Dems don't want to talk about reforming the entitlement programs or raising taxes on the middle class. As Mark Steyn said, "Given that we're spending like Norwegians, why don't we just pay Norwegian tax rates?"

"Generally speaking, functioning societies make good-faith efforts to raise what they spend, subject to fluctuations in economic fortune: Government spending in Australia is 33.1 percent of GDP, and tax revenues are 27.1 percent. Likewise, government spending in Norway is 46.4 percent, and revenues are 41 percent – a shortfall but in the ballpark. Government spending in the United States is 42.2 percent, but revenues are 24 percent – the widest spending/taxing gulf in any major economy."

“The global fertility rate is still way above replacement level at 2.47. The population will continue to increase.”

By definition - if the cohort in 2012 is smaller than the cohort in 2011, population is actually shrinking, not growing. There will be fewer children from one year to the next. You’ll see this happen in 5 years or so.

“I wouldn’t say mostly yet”

Yeah, it is mostly. 2.47 won’t see a natural population growth rate of more than a percent.

“China has a fertility rate well below replacement levels but its population continues to rise for that reason.”

Yes, but this is just a short-term phenomenon. Long term - China’s population will crash. There is nothing they can do about it - this crash is baked in. Once the cohorts start shrinking - the global crash is baked in too. Thankfully I’ll never see the actual crash in my lifetime. But it is coming.

“I doubt they will be going to China for a number of reasons including political and cultural reasons.”

China has no choice. They need 50 million people/year, and the only area with that many people is India. If they do not get 30 million people a year, they will crash.

“Estimations are that Chinese cities will face an influx of another 243 million migrants by 2025”

It won’t be enough. 2025 is 15 years away and they need 450 million people in that span to replace those leaving the workforce. China is doomed.

“Please be more specific about how Obama is trying to cut us off from a prosperous future as it applies to population growth.”

By lowering American fertility though publicly funded abortion and contraception in Obamacare.

“Do you think that adding 130 million to our population over the next 40 years, 80% due to immigration, will reduce spending.”

We won’t get 130 million over 40 years. We’ll be lucky to see 30 million. They won’t need to come illegally, because everyone is going to be in demand for immigration. There just aren’t going to be enough people to go around.

“We just added another huge entitlement program—Obamacare—a few years ago.”

And it needs to be cut. The problem is spending, and we need to dump Obamacare. We cannot afford Obamacare.

“If they can’t cut $100 billion out of an annual budget of $3.7 trillion, how the hell do you expect them to cut spending?”

Cuts are inevitable at this point.

“The Dems will tax more to keep the welfare state treading water for as long as they can.”

They will attempt to, but spending cuts are inevitable at this point.

“We can’t afford to spend even European levels on welfare and entitlement programs”

There’s just no way. Europe can’t afford what they are spending, let alone the US which is wealthier. Spending has to be cut to get the fiscal house of the US in order.

“Cut spending? That’s a joke.”

It’s going to happen. Either now, or later. Might have to wait for all the boomers to die off so that they’ve got theirs, but we’ll fix it.

“Given that we’re spending like Norwegians, why don’t we just pay Norwegian tax rates?”

Because we aren’t Norwegians? Cut spending. That is the only way out of this mess. Taxing more will reduce, not increase government revenues and will just make things collapse sooner.

What kind of tortured reasoning is that? I live in the real world where the global population is increasing .096% a year--not shrinking. The only time the population starts shrinking globally is when we go below replacement level. That is some time off. The rate of increase will shrink if the current trends hold. Still, the population of the globe is expected to hit 10.1 billion in the next 90 years and 9.3 billion by 2050 up from the current 7 billion.

Yeah, it is mostly. 2.47 won’t see a natural population growth rate of more than a percent.

It is less than a percent now.

China has no choice. They need 50 million people/year, and the only area with that many people is India. If they do not get 30 million people a year, they will crash.

They have enough people. China's problem is stopping the flow of people from rural areas into the cities. It is the reason why they have laws to control this process. They need people for food production, but those numbers can be reduced significantly thru mechanization to make their farmers more productive.

It won’t be enough. 2025 is 15 years away and they need 450 million people in that span to replace those leaving the workforce. China is doomed.

Where did you come up with that number? And China is far from doomed. Its economy will soon surpass the US in terms of size. China's problems are many, some of them self-inflicted like the one-child policy, but they are no more doomed than we are. With 1.3 billion people they can adjust and adapt as circumstances warrant. One of the main challenges will be to stimulate domestic consumption so they don't depend on exports.

By lowering American fertility though publicly funded abortion and contraception in Obamacare.

If Obama is successful in passing an amnesty, you will see a flood of people entering this country. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.

LOL. When is all this going to start happening? There are probably 4 billion people in the world who would love to get into the US. We bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants now and could easily double or triple number by just increasing the numbers. Of course, these people will be a net drain on our society. You are living in a fantasy world.

FYI: The 130 million increase in our population projected by the Census Bureau over the next 40 years is due to births and immigration. Right now we are adding net one person every 15 seconds to our population. The projection doesn't include an amnesty. I have no idea as to when you think we are going to have a people shortage. I do know that we have added 113 million to our population since 1970 including 34 million since 2000. The decade ending in 2010 saw the largest number of immigrants in our history--13.9 million.

There’s just no way. Europe can’t afford what they are spending, let alone the US which is wealthier. Spending has to be cut to get the fiscal house of the US in order.

Spending is the problem, but there is no political will to cut spending. We have known for decades that the welfare state is unsustainable. People don't want the pain that spending cuts will have. We have 54 million on SS, 47 million on Medicare, 70 million on Medicaid, 47 million on food stamps, etc. and those numbers will go up as 10,000 people a day retire. By 2030, one in five in this country will be 65 or older--twice what it is now and we will have two workers for every retiree.

I don't see Obama and Boehner coming up with any real spending cuts, just a promise, if that to reduce the rate of growth of spending. We are going to hit the wall eventually. Spending will be cut the same way it was in Greece. And we will have people in the streets demanding that government live up to its promises. This will happen long before we have a people shortage.

And it needs to be cut. The problem is spending, and we need to dump Obamacare. We cannot afford Obamacare.

Not going to happen as long as Obama is in the WH. In fact, it is digging deep roots as it is implemented. There is no way the Dems will let this signature piece of legislation get dumped. Saying something doesn't make it happen. Again, I live in the real world.

It’s going to happen. Either now, or later. Might have to wait for all the boomers to die off so that they’ve got theirs, but we’ll fix it.

If we have to wait that long, the country will be finished. We already have $16 trillion in debt and annual deficits of $1 trillion for a long time to come. Add over $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities plus another huge entitlement program, Obamacare, that will add even more to the debt. Financial collapse and civil unrest will make a comeback very difficult. Add to that the changed demography of this country that will see the eclipse of non-Hispanic whites by minorities that generally will be less educated and more dependent upon government. With out of wedlock birthrates of 50% for Hispanics and 71% for blacks and school drop out rates approaching 50% for those groups, the fastest growing in our country and you have a recipe for disaster. Demography is destiny.

Because we aren’t Norwegians? Cut spending. That is the only way out of this mess. Taxing more will reduce, not increase government revenues and will just make things collapse sooner.

It just won't happen. Collapse will come first. And that could take a while as the statists do everything they can to keep the welfare state afloat a little longer. Again, I live in the real world.

“What kind of tortured reasoning is that?”

The same reasoning that produced the baby boom.

“The only time the population starts shrinking globally is when we go below replacement level.”

Given that we are very close to replacement level now, any significant drop in the cohort will shrink the population.

“It is less than a percent now.”

Which is not very much at all. Population has essentially levelled off.

“They have enough people.”

No, they don’t have enough people to keep their workforce going. Their workforce is shrinking and the average chinese person is older than in the US.

“China’s problem is stopping the flow of people from rural areas into the cities.”

China is going to need all the workers they can get. Internal migration will help them stave off the workforce problem. The less mobile the population, the greater the problems they will experience as local shortages arise.

“They need people for food production, but those numbers can be reduced significantly thru mechanization to make their farmers more productive.”

The problem is that they are still too poor and they are already too old to really implement mechanization to the same degree as the west.

“Where did you come up with that number?”

TFR now as a proportion of replacement TFR. They have a 50 percent shortfall and their total birthrate will give you about 30-50 million depending on their immigration.

“Its economy will soon surpass the US in terms of size.”

Nope, not going to happen. They’ve crested, probably in 2008 with Beijing.

“they are no more doomed than we are.”

The US does not have a 50 percent gap in their workforce coming as a result of the one child policy. They’ve had it running for 30 years, so their shortage will really start to bite now.

“One of the main challenges will be to stimulate domestic consumption so they don’t depend on exports.”

True, but they won’t have the money to do it.

No commentary on Obamacare lowering American fertility?

“LOL. When is all this going to start happening?”

It’s already happening, at least with Mexican immigration.

TFR in Mexico is 2.27. That means just 8 percent of the 2012 cohort would be interested in leaving Mexico. That works out to 175k a year from Mexico, in 20 years time.

That works out to a demand of 7 million immigrants total from Mexico between now and then.

“There are probably 4 billion people in the world who would love to get into the US.”

Then why doesn’t all the UK pack up and leave? A better estimation of Immigration (and fwiw, I don’t know anyone else who does it this way), is to take TFR over replacement and calculate out the proportion of the cohort who would be willing to leave.

“You are living in a fantasy world.”

No, you are.

“I have no idea as to when you think we are going to have a people shortage.”

Hopefully we never experience one due to native population growth. But we will start seeing immigration peter out in about 20 years time.

“People don’t want the pain”

Pain is coming.

“I don’t see Obama and Boehner coming up with any real spending cuts, just a promise, if that to reduce the rate of growth of spending.”

Cuts are going to have to be made.

“This will happen long before we have a people shortage.”

True, at least in America. But in Europe the problem is being felt and Russia has already collapsed. You’ll see the fiscal collapse in another 8 years.

“Saying something doesn’t make it happen. Again, I live in the real world.”

And the real world will intervene to gut Obamacare.

“It just won’t happen. Collapse will come first. And that could take a while as the statists do everything they can to keep the welfare state afloat a little longer. Again, I live in the real world.”

Yeah, I agree with that. Collapse is not yet inevitable, it can still be avoided. But cutbacks cannot.

The same reasoning that produced the baby boom.

Are you on drugs?

Given that we are very close to replacement level now, any significant drop in the cohort will shrink the population.

So you don't believe that the global population will go over 9 billion by midcentury? We are adding 50 million people a year to the global population. You seem to rely on emotion rather than facts. We do know that there were 6.1 billion people in 2000 and 6.9 billion in 2010. The UN and the US Census Bureau estimate that there will be 7.6 billion in 2020; 8.3 billion in 2030; 8.8 billion in 2040; and 9.3 billion in 2050. What are your estimates by decade?

Which is not very much at all. Population has essentially levelled off.

Do you have a source for that assertion? It is patently absurd.

No, they don’t have enough people to keep their workforce going. Their workforce is shrinking and the average chinese person is older than in the US.

Why do you make these things up when you know that there are easily obtainable data out there? For example, the average person in China is younger than in the US. The Chinese don't lack people to fill jobs. It is the other way around. They must generate 15 million new jobs a year just to keep growing.

Median age in China

total: 35.9 years

male: 35.2 years

female: 36.6 years (2012 est.)

Median age in US

total: 37.1 years

male: 35.8 years

female: 38.5 years (2012 est.)

Nope, not going to happen. They’ve [China] crested, probably in 2008 with Beijing.

I guess you don't need no stinkin' facts. What an absurd statement. Where do you come up with such nonsense? In 2010, China's GDP was valued at $5.87 trillion, surpassed Japan's $5.47 trillion, and became the world's second largest economy after the U.S. China could become the world's largest economy (by nominal GDP) sometime as early as 2020. China is the largest creditor nation in the world and owns approximately 20.8% of all foreign-owned US Treasury securities.

TFR in Mexico is 2.27. That means just 8 percent of the 2012 cohort would be interested in leaving Mexico. That works out to 175k a year from Mexico, in 20 years time. That works out to a demand of 7 million immigrants total from Mexico between now and then.

Demand from Mexico? We have 23 million Americans looking for full time employment. We have no shortage of labor. And immigration from the entire world can fill our needs in the future should we lack specific skills. If you look at the facts, immigration is increasing from South Asia and elsewhere. We don't need Mexico and never did.

Those four billion live mostly in the developing world, not the developed world. We have no shortage of people who want to come to the US. It is why we set quotas and limits. It is why people enter illegally.

Hopefully we never experience one due to native population growth. But we will start seeing immigration peter out in about 20 years time.

Peter out? Why?

Cuts are going to have to be made.

Duh, that is obvious. The question is will they be made by Congress in a reasoned fashion or will the situation become so dire that we will have a fiscal crisis that will force such cuts. I think the later will happen, which will plunge this country into civil unrest similar to what is going on in Greece.

True, at least in America. But in Europe the problem is being felt and Russia has already collapsed. You’ll see the fiscal collapse in another 8 years.

Russia has collapsed? Again, are you on drugs?

And the real world will intervene to gut Obamacare.

Intervene how? Deus ex machina?

“So you don’t believe that the global population will go over 9 billion by midcentury?”

Nope. The low UN estimate is optimistic. It assumes that nations with sub-replacement fertility will magically rise to replacement.

“What are your estimates by decade?”

About half that population should crest about 2025 or so at about 8 billion.

“Do you have a source for that assertion? It is patently absurd.”

Growth under 1 percent is pretty close to level.

“Why do you make these things up when you know that there are easily obtainable data out there?”

As of 2012, average age in China is 35.9 years old, a little more than a year under that of the United States. That will rather quickly change.

“The Chinese don’t lack people to fill jobs.”

Yes, they do. Starting now. They have already crested.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/chinas-workforce-is-expected-to-start-shrinking-in-next-few-years/2011/05/02/AGrVKmFH_story.html

“What an absurd statement. Where do you come up with such nonsense? In 2010, China’s GDP was valued at $5.87 trillion, surpassed Japan’s $5.47 trillion, and became the world’s second largest economy after the U.S. China could become the world’s largest economy (by nominal GDP) sometime as early as 2020.”

Could, but won’t. They’ve already crested. :)

“China is the largest creditor nation in the world and owns approximately 20.8% of all foreign-owned US Treasury securities.”

As their workforce shrinks and ages they will lose their competitive advantage, and this will reverse. They’ll need every dollar they can hang onto.

“And immigration from the entire world can fill our needs in the future should we lack specific skills.”

Once their birthrates drop, there isn’t going to be immigration from these places. The only area that has stable emigration patterns with the US (Mexico is in a decline), is the Philippines.

“We have no shortage of people who want to come to the US.”

At present yes? In the future? No.

“Peter out? Why?”

Because world population will crest and start to decline.

“Russia has collapsed? Again, are you on drugs?”

Yes, it has. It’s still in freefall. They used to be a superpower on par with the United States, and now they are a second grade regional power, on par with Germany and France.

“Intervene how? Deus ex machina?”

National bankruptcy.

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.