gotta make room for the mongrel invasion hordes...
Posted on 03/25/2010 4:50:59 PM PDT by NYer
ROME, March 24, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A new report issued Tuesday 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.
The report was compiled by the Milan-based International Center for Family Studies that identified the reason for Italians’ reluctance to procreate as “economic reasons.” 19.5 per cent of families interviewed cited the lack of money for not having more children. 8.9 per cent said it is their inability to juggle families and jobs and 0.3 per cent blamed insufficient housing space.
An examination of the effects of the global economic crisis, however, showed that only 16.4 per cent of families could be described as “below the poverty line.” But 37.2 per cent of the respondents claimed that they had trouble making it to the end of the month, with a further 22 per cent saying they sometimes had financial trouble.
The report found that the average monthly expenditure for dependent children is 35.3 per cent of the total family expenditure.
Others cited the small size of their homes, the precariousness of their job situations and lack of available childcare. However, the statistics in the report show that a massive 57.8 per cent of childless households merely said they had no children out of “personal choice.” Reasons for this personal choice, the report said, include a general sense of uncertainty about the future and the inherent difficulties involved in raising children.
The report made several suggestions for dealing with this national crisis, including increasing government family allowances and reforming personal income tax deductions.
Speaking at the report’s presentation in Milan, Gianfranco Fini, President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, said there should be a fast-track procedure for children born in Italy of foreign parents to become Italian citizens. “Talking about a seven, ten or even 12-year wait is fine for adults but this is not acceptable for children,” he said.
Italy’s demographics show that it is following the same depopulation trends of most western countries since the 1960s. With decades of a below-replacement level birth rate, population growth in Italy has petered out, despite continued foreign immigration, with 2009 statistics showing -0.047 per cent increase.
The post-WWI economic boom saw a large part of the traditionally rural population move into the cities, but urbanization did not immediately result in a drop in the birth rate. It was not until the global “Sexual Revolution” in the 1970s, with its introduction of artificial contraceptives and, later, legalized and state-funded abortion that the fertility rate suddenly plunged below replacement.
It has only been since the introduction of millions of non-Italian immigrants that the birth rate has seen any recovery. According to government statistics, about 7.5 per cent of the population of Italy are recent immigrants.
Since joining the Euro, the personal wealth of Italians has grown, while the birth rate continues to fall and life expectancy increases. The overall average life expectancy in Italy is 80.2 years. The result, as with most western countries, has been a demographic shift towards an aging population with few young people entering the work force to support them.
Families in Italy continue to be tight-knit, with many children living with parents well into adulthood. Fewer Italians are getting married and those who do are waiting until later in life.
As of 2009, the median age for women in Italy was 44.8 years, the age at which conception is less likely.
Government efforts to stop the decline, mostly in the form of offers of cash for children, have largely failed. In 2003, Roberto Maroni, labor and welfare minister in Silvio Berlusconi's administration, offered 1000 Euros to every woman who had a second child. The bonus was paid to only 190,000 women.
When you live under socialism who can afford to have children?
In a high tax welfare state the people who wait until they can afford it on their own are delayed in reproduction. The people who rely on government can have children at an earlier age.
“Another possibility is to outlaw The Pill. It’s been an unbelievably destructive force in Western society.”
YOU, YOU, BEAST!!!!!!!!! How can you attack women’s rights like that. You animal, you bastard.
Ok, got that out of the way. You have an excellent point...but I don’t see that happening - and abortion will easily cover the need for contraception.
Instead, the West must own up to today’s society. The bottom line is that having kids is no different for a woman than, say, being a lawyer. Either one is a career choice. So, you pay women to have kids, and pay them a LOT of money. Maybe $20k (minimum) for the first kid, and $10k per kid after that. If you have 5 kids, you ‘make’ $60k PER YEAR. Skip the tax deductions and credits and simply pay them. It will send the liberals into orbit, but that’s fine. For countries like Italy, you stipulate that one has to show lineage to 1900 or so, so as to keep the Muzzies from cashing in.
If the West wants ANY chance to survive into the future, they MUST do that. The only other option is the Islamic approach, where you enslave women (even before puberty) to be illiterate wives and baby machines, and nothing more...and I don’t see that happening.
It is our choice...and it is PROVEN that once women have options, enough will chose no kids (or 1 kid), so as to send their society into a DEMOGRAPHIC DEATH SPIRAL. There really is no choice.
People are being taxed so much they can’t even have a normal human life including kids. It is the biggest abridgement of our freedoms... the ridiculously high taxes that people in the world pay.
Instead, the West must own up to today’s society. The bottom line is that having kids is no different for a woman than, say, being a lawyer. Either one is a career choice. So, you pay women to have kids, and pay them a LOT of money. Maybe $20k (minimum) for the first kid, and $10k per kid after that. If you have 5 kids, you ‘make’ $60k PER YEAR. Skip the tax deductions and credits and simply pay them. It will send the liberals into orbit, but that’s fine. For countries like Italy, you stipulate that one has to show lineage to 1900 or so, so as to keep the Muzzies from cashing in. If the West wants ANY chance to survive into the future, they MUST do that. The only other option is the Islamic approach, where you enslave women (even before puberty) to be illiterate wives and baby machines, and nothing more...and I don’t see that happening. It is our choice...and it is PROVEN that once women have options, enough will chose no kids (or 1 kid), so as to send their society into a DEMOGRAPHIC DEATH SPIRAL. There really is no choice.
You seem to love your government regulation.
Re your post 16, you are generalizing (and all generalities are wrong—including this one). Seriously, though, I take issue with your statement that people choose to not have children because they are materialistic.
This may play a role in a few cases but I submit that that is a tiny minority viewpoint. I think that a majority of the decisions to not have children is that the would-be parents do not see their society as being worthwhile in which to bring up children. Would you want to bring a child into this world at this red-hot minute, knowing that the child would grow up in a likely socialistic society, with all the limitations on being able to prosper, the poor health care that is just over the horizon, and other problems inherent in such a society? Long sentence, I’m afraid. Sorry.
Anyway, don’t assume that because someone doesn’t want children, that they are selfish bastards. People have their reasons.
gotta make room for the mongrel invasion hordes...
“You seem to love your government regulation.”
It’s called SURVIVAL. The other option is to ignore the issue...in that case WE ARE DEAD AS A SOCIETY IN ONE GENERATION.
What’s your preference?
The third option is to outlaw birth control and abortion (i.e., follow the Muslim pattern) - but then that sounds like a lot of GOVERNMENT REGULATION.
Now you’re making assumptions.
I am a college professor and talk to many, many young people. I cannot recall hearing a single young person say that the world is a rotten place to bring kids into (or any variation thereof). What I DO hear, are students saying they don’t want kids because its too much money, trouble, and they want to focus on their careers and enjoy life. Granted, some students still say they want to get married and start a family, but they appear to be in the minority.
Who is to pay for these ‘baby factories’ that you propose? I just envisioned a whole lot of dollar signs in the eyes of current welfare recipients.
“Who is to pay for these ‘baby factories’ that you propose? I just envisioned a whole lot of dollar signs in the eyes of current welfare recipients.”
You have a point...but you HAVE to get the ‘career women’ out of the job market or your society is DOOMED.
The reason Italians aren’t having children is because all those children are Italian!
(/s sort of.... our exchange student from hell was Italian)
We’re both using personal information as our basis.
It seems to me, at first blush, that your students have not really made a decision. They are explaining why they are putting off a decision.
Those interested in the big picture could try to find some information on just why people ultimately choose to not have children. As I recall, there is some national group of people who chose to not have children. Those—among others—are the folks one needs to question to find out why they did as they did (or didn’t). Of course, many who made their own decision have not joined this group. It sure is complicated, seems to me.
Even in the absence of definitive information, I deplore attributing such a decision to selfishness.
Is my society not your society, as you imply?
“Is my society not your society, as you imply?”
I guess not...I want my kids to have the same country as I have...you must think differently. There is NO OTHER OPTION.
You really have to read Mark Steyn’s book “America Alone” to see what’s ahead. To summarize, you can get away with one generation without kids...and then your society is doomed. I wouldn’t support such extreme measures, except that much of the West has used up that free generation.
This is what you get in a society where half the men live at home with their parents until Mamma dies and they inherit the house, living the rest of their lives alone.
My husband and I have nine children. We have a comfortable life - flush toilets and all, computers - on a salary around $100,000. Others could have larger families, if they chose to. It’s not “circumstances” creating childless families - it’s priorities.
There also seems to be a very extended adolescence in most western countries including ours. Too much importance put on fun and personal freedom.
It all comes down to what you value most in life.
Some people value family and children, and others value money, spare time, and personal freedom.
I have many single friends who travel all over the world, on business and cool vacations, and are childless.
I have struggled all my life to raise a family. Would I like to vacation in Greece or Spain? You bet. Would I trade my grandchildren for that? Never.
By the way, those single people are all liberals.
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.