Posted on 04/16/2026 9:48:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A graph of the U.S. fertility rate since 1909 recently appeared under the headline, “The U.S. fertility rate reached an all-time low in 2023.” While that statement is true, it understates what is most striking about the data. At a glance, the graph shows that fertility has been relatively stable since about 1970. Before that, however, the pattern was far more dramatic: a steep decline from roughly 1920 to 1933, a strong rebound from about 1941 to 1960, and then another sharp fall from 1960 to 1975, after which the rate leveled off (see figure below). The question is what cultural, economic, and technological forces may have shaped those swings.
Consider first the decline from 1920 to 1933. The 1920s, often remembered as the Roaring Twenties, are widely seen as the beginning of the modern age. Radio and movies transformed mass culture, while the automobile expanded personal mobility and independence. The era is associated with Prohibition, organized crime, speculative wealth, and the emergence of the “flapper” as a symbol of youthful freedom and defiance of convention.
At the same time, the country was moving away from traditional rural life and toward a more urban, modern society. Individual freedom and personal autonomy gained prestige, often at the expense of older expectations rooted in family obligation. The extended family, once a central social institution, was giving way to a more individualized and fragmented way of life. Women were also gaining greater independence, entering higher education and paid work in larger numbers.
In such a setting, it is not surprising that fertility declined. When the Great Depression arrived, it reinforced and prolonged that decline, as economic uncertainty made family expansion less attractive and more difficult.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
For most of human history, the female fertility question was mainly a matter of keeping ahead of infant mortality.
I think I can see the correlation.
Lazy bitches don’t want the work of raising children with peer groups that don’t respect the role.
Did you just assume its gender?!!!
A rise in GDP per capita generally correlates with lower birthrates, a phenomenon often described as the “demographic transition” or fertility-income paradox. As countries become wealthier, they tend to experience higher urbanization, increased education for women, and better access to contraception, all of which reduce family size.
Would you rather live in a third world country with high birth rates or in a modern country with lower birth rates?
The Pill flattened the curve.
“Lazy bitches don’t want the work of raising children with peer groups that don’t respect the role.”
Huh, I think I see part of the problem.
This is artificial birth control. Early 1960s to now.
That’s not a period in history. That was revolutionary.
And it is opening up the west to Islamic invasion among many other detriments as a result of defying natural law and God
That critter is hideous.
I choose option C: a modern country that loves people, including family. We used to have that.
The Pill flattened the curve.
Perhaps the most significant development of the 20th century for humanity.
It has done more to destroy society than any nuclear bomb could.
That doesn’t seem to follow the graph though.
GDP per capita dropped in the 20’s while this chart shows fertility ALSO dropping. Then when GDP started increasing in the mid 30’s and 40’s, the fertility rate increased with it.
GDP per capita increased slowly from the 60s to the 80’s when the graph shows a drastic drop in fertility. Then when GDP had a drastic rise from the 80’s to the present, fertility leveled off.
I’m not sure how you could look at this graph and say that GDP per capita and fertility are linked let alone inversely correlated.
“I choose option C: a modern country that loves people, including family. We used to have that.”
That means family-values Mexican immigrants.
Females as a sex are followers.
The left owns the culture/government social programs and is shaping behavior for the female sex and bringing out the worst of the female instinct to think of themselves first above all else, indulge self today with little concept of a distant future for nation, peoples, or humanity, females (as a sex) mostly go with the dominate flow, and today this is the flow they see and join, they are a surface experiencing sex.
You must not know anything about Mexicans, it was Mexican immigration that wiped out California and gave the immoral left so much power.
The main problem I see here is the infant mortality. That is really controllable, but it has gone wrong for a long time in my opinion. Of course with advent of mothers working out of the home, that made a big difference, too. It seems that as more & more women are successful in the work/business world, the less they become interested in the home, especially if they are making good money. By the time the work is starting to become a chore, the women may be getting a little old as well.
would love to see this compared to our obesity rates.
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.