Posted on 08/02/2020 11:48:25 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A recent BBC headline claimed the world is facing a “jaw-dropping” global crash. Not an economic crash, mind you, but a crash in the birthrate. Citing a new study by University of Washington, the BBC article claims that “Falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century.” In fact, 23 countries, including Spain, Portugal, Japan, and South Korea, could see their populations cut in half by 2100.
The same study found that, between 1950 and 2017, the global fertility rate went from 4.7 children per women to 2.4 and is expected to drop below 1.7 children per woman by 2100. For reference, a fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman is required to maintain a stable population.
A few suggested explanations for the drop, according to the BBC article, include “more women in education and work” and “greater access to contraception,” which leads “to women choosing to have fewer children.” Of course, the BBC was careful to offer the required nod to climate change, also suggesting that fewer people would result in lower carbon emissions and therefore help heal the planet.
In truth, however, the scenario is far from rosy.
“I think it’s incredibly hard to think this through and recognize how big a thing this [population crash] is,” says University of Washington Professor Christopher Murray. “It’s extraordinary, we’ll have to reorganize societies.”
In his book, What to Expect When No One Is Expecting, Weekly Standard digital editor Jonathan Last suggests that any country in which citizens aren’t having enough babies can look forward to long-term economic stagnation and social deterioration. After all, children are the economic engines of the future, both tomorrow’s labor force and tomorrow’s consumers.
Professor Murray described it this way to the BBC: “Who pays tax in a massively aged world? Who pays for healthcare for the elderly? Who looks after the elderly? Will people still be able to retire from work?”
And those are just the immediate concerns. As journalist Philip Longman explained years ago, declining populations and shrinking economies create a downwardly spiraling vicious circle: “As governments raise taxes on a dwindling working-age population to cover the growing burdens of supporting the elderly, young couples may conclude they are even less able to afford children…” This, in turn, results in the kind of graying, despairing populations we see today in places like Japan and Europe, where some governments actually pay couples to get pregnant.
At the same time, the BBC notes, the population of sub-Saharan Africa will triple by the end of the century. Developed nations will be forced to open their borders and perhaps even compete for migrant workers. Given the human propensity for tribalism and racism, let’s just say this will could create significant “social pressures.”
Writing at the Gospel Coalition, Philip Jenkins describes yet another vicious circle that entwines a civilization dealing with an increase in secularization and a decline in fertility. Increased fertility is often associated with traditional religious beliefs, but as more believers accept secular ideas about sex, family, and the purpose of life, their connection to religious institutions weakens. Shrinking religious institutions, in turn, leads to increased secularization.
Babies have this unique ability to make adults care about the future, and even think beyond their own lifetimes. Babies incline people to save, invest, sacrifice and, most importantly, defer gratification. Even when it comes to the environment, the best reason to steward the planet is so our children and grandchildren can enjoy its fruits and grandeur.
Christians should always encourage those government policies that make it easier for couples to “choose life,” but we also need to help people think more clearly about the whole issue. First, we have to debunk the over-population myth that should have died decades ago. The latest What Would You Say video tackles this question. Watch it, learn the key points, and share it with your friends and family.
Second, Christian must take the lead in taking seriously God’s never-revoked command to be fruitful and multiply, and the Psalmist’s exhortation that children are a heritage from the Lord, and Jesus’ command to let the little children come to Jesus, which means there must be children in the first place.
What greater gift can we offer this world and the world to come, other than Jesus Himself, than future generations of image bearers?
Originally posted at breakpoint.org
If these societies are reproducing, and the West isn't, ours isn't going to be the one that's left standing. I think we're witnessing the part about the meek inheriting the earth.
Relax...I was joking.
Eugenicists...softkill/hardkill murderers rejoice! Imagine the contempt they have for the unlofty, unworthy, bitter-clinger, dog-faced pony soldier, deplorable non-essentials. They’re having some yuk yuks.
“Many Muslim countries have a [greater] shortage of females than China does and it’s not sex selective abortion that is causing it.”
(pardon the edit) In both societies boys are valued much more than girls, both as heirs and progenitors. But it is Islam that actively disparages the female sex, and treats women as chattel.
A shortage of women in Muslim countries could explain why pornography is consumed in huge quantities in those places.
It’s also good news that fewer terrorist wolf cubs are being born as a result.
China’s disastrous One Child policy, even though canceled, has resulted in what I like to call the People’s Bachelor Army, for whom the prospect of finding wives is grim.
Providing access to scraps before the dogs had their fill was a huge mistake.
These things turn on a dime. There were dire warnings in the 1920s about declining population, right before France, Germany and Russia began to pump out new waves of kids.
Doesn’t matter because by 2100, it’ll be a whole new ballgame anyway.
You know what’s cool about trends?
They never change, never reverse. Once spotted and charted, the trend stays in force forever!
And, now that we’re not an early industrial or pre-industrial society anymore, we really need all those extra hands to turn those wheels and reap those crops!
That’s why we don’t have homeless bums all over our streets!
What would fix this “trend” is to throw out the foriegn invaders and beat the multi cultie cult down so hard they never get back up out of the bloody mud-puddle they’re beat into.
Many of these countries have similar and even lower birth rates than the US.
Remember, these predictions are based on “no changes in behavior” for the next 100 years, while a baby boom could ensue at anytime for unforeseen reasons.
It also thinks immigration remains unchanged and ignores the advances in robotry that is supplanting them as cheap labor.
I was responding to your point, "They may have growing populations..." (If you state that, "they may have growing populations" and state here that the "they may have similar and even lower birth rates than the US", then both statements can only be true if they are importing their own Replacement Population as well; otherwise, both statements can't be correct.)
Remember, these predictions are based on “no changes in behavior” for the next 100 years, while a baby boom could ensue at anytime for unforeseen reasons.
A lot of things could ensue at anytime for unforeseen reasons; we can do nothing more than act prudently on the information we have at hand.
That ‘projection’ of fertility rate has the same hallmarks of inaccuracy as the early WuFlu death rate projections — namely starting with the desired political statement and conclusion, and using imaginary math and pure fiction to bridge the gap between real data and the intended story.
Sure. Starting Just Right Now the fertility rate will just take a massive drop steeper than the Womyns’ Lib (and One-Child China) 70s for reasons unstated and unsupported. Cue the ‘yea right’ meme.
So ... here’s the US real data:
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/fertility-rate
(viewing 1950-2020 is kinda useful). Obviously doesn’t turn on a dime but definitely turns on a decade, and varies proportionally with prosperity.
Any coincidence the same people who want a lesser-populated planet are the same ones trying to depress us and our economy?
I did not read the entire article, but the title understates the population decline by a factor of FIVE.
Several developed modern countries have currrent reproduction rates around or just above 1.0. Reproduction rate is based on a constant of 2.0. Two people, a man and a woman, produce two children, and they will sustain the population evenly for the next generation. Given that a generation lasts 20 years, a population growth rate of 1.0 means that the population is cut in HALF every 20 years.
The growth rates of Italy and South Korea currently hover around 1.0. Meanwhile the growth rate of the Muslim world is well above 2.0. Want to know why North Africans are flooding into Europe, and the Pope is abandoning Christian values?
You have your answer.
Both can be true because their are multiple muslim countries. Qatar and UAE have low birth rates and very high sex ratio imbalance. Those with better sex ratios have higher birth rates.
They are very sick societies.
Indians, Chinese and Muslims to dominate the world population-wise even more so. The world is fscked.
Same with filthy India. A huge shortage of girls.
Most of Western and Central Europe...Japan are at the top of the list.And the US would be there too were it not for wetbacks.
Anyone who has focused on demographics knows that some countries are soon to disappear. 50 years is soon. England as an example, is dead. America is dying. The land will be there, but the people will have been wiped from the face of the Earth. Demographics control the world now.
” Many Muslim countries have a higher shortage of females than China does...”
While it would suck to be a guy living in those societies, is it really a problem for them...or for us? I can certainly think of a few advantages they have with that situation, such as not having to worry about political decisions being based on ‘emotion’...including how to treat Illegals and enemy combatants.
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.