S
Sarcelle
Guest
I suggest you look at what happened to Romania when people were essentially coerced by the government to have four or more children.
Hint: It didn’t end well especially for the children.
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Should the ChildFree lifestyle or Birthstrike become common, what is the response of Goverment and us?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Hint: It didn’t end well especially for the children.
G
GEddie
Guest
If the new country allows birth citizenship, there would be no problem long term. The children would know no other country and would be attached to the place they were born.
That was the case for the USA before hyphenation and identity politics became the norm.
That was the case for the USA before hyphenation and identity politics became the norm.
L
Londoner
Guest
Hyphenation? Of surnames? What does that have to do with whether the children of immigrants feel attached to the country in which they are born?That was the case for the USA before hyphenation and identity politics became the norm.
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
No. Unable to bear children means different vocation and source of blessing. The pagans or even Christians who don’t have children by choice rob themselves of blessings that were meant for them. And of course if they use birth control they heap sin on top of it.
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
Hungary is doing it much better
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
Can that bell be un-rung?That was the case for the USA before hyphenation and identity politics became the norm.
Mexican-AmericanHyphenation? Of surnames? What does that have to do with whether the children of immigrants feel attached to the country in which they are born?
African-American
Asian-American
Native-American
American (European/British/Irish)
Last edited:
G
GEddie
Guest
Of course you can’t stuff the mushroom cloud back into the nice uranium cylinder.
I don’t know how we can get the old sense of America back; maybe it’s well too late. But we can avoid making the breakdown final, by ignoring the call by some to rescind birth citizenship.
ICXC NIKA
I don’t know how we can get the old sense of America back; maybe it’s well too late. But we can avoid making the breakdown final, by ignoring the call by some to rescind birth citizenship.
ICXC NIKA
H
HumbleIOughtToBe
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)the old sense of America back
“Trump believed in the green light, the orgiastic American economy and political sphere that year by year recedes before us. It eledued us then, but that’s no matter - tomorrow we will campaign harder, stretch out our arms farther… So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
“Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can…”’
J
JimG
Guest
We can only hope that the decline will reverse itself. I have not yet read the Bricker and Ibbitson book, but from the reviews it seems that they have done a lot of research. Other demographers have said that population decline, once begun, is difficult or impossible to reverse. But even at the beginning stages, which these two expect to begin by mid-century, there will be dramatic shifts in economics. Instead of continued growth of economies, we can expect decline and perhaps deflation. Pensions and entitlement programs will become unsustainable. Index investing may enter a bear market.I don’t think a steep decline in birthrates necessarily leads to extinction. There were once very few humans, now there are billions!
Even if our birthrates decrease, if at some point in the future they increase, we would not become extinct.
It won’t be a problem for me. but kids now under ten will find very different conditiions as they enter their 30’s and beyond. On the plus side, at least between now and 2050, retirement homes and funeral homes should do a booming business.
A
Annie
Guest
Well, yes, unless something changes the situation which led to the decline, so that makes sense.Other demographers have said that population decline, once begun, is difficult or impossible to reverse.
But I think most of this type of decline has been within certain cultures, so it may be a different matter when it comes to the entire species if humanity.
Oh definitely.there will be dramatic shifts in economics.
Consider the Black Death, which had a huge part of the European population die within a short time. Major changes resulted from that.
Buy we also had a major shift in economics with the Industrial Revolution, so it’s not like it hasn’t happened before.
T
TK421
Guest
Nothing ever becomes exactly the same or should become exactly the same, but there are some signs of places with collapsed birthrates recovering at least somewhat. Pretty much all of the developed world is in a free fall (Japan is advanced enough that there are millions of homes that were occupied by families and the laughter of children in decades past that now sit empty and deteriorating. It’s almost eerie) but Russia has rebounded to where it was in 1990. It’s still below replacement levels but it’s better than what it was.
I know I’m probably going to make people uncomfortable but with the likely upcoming development of things such as an artificial uterus I think that might make birth rates go back up along with making the pro-choice platform a lot more difficult to support. At any rate the world is always changing.
I know I’m probably going to make people uncomfortable but with the likely upcoming development of things such as an artificial uterus I think that might make birth rates go back up along with making the pro-choice platform a lot more difficult to support. At any rate the world is always changing.
Last edited:
L
Le_Cracquere
Guest
What in God’s name could you meaningfully do? If someone doesn’t want children (rightly or wrongly), is it your place or any legal system’s place to see that they have them regardless?
T
TK421
Guest
I don’t see anywhere here where a person recommended such a thing, but if you’re just being hypothetical: Peter Maurin (who worked with Dorothy Day) had a pretty practical idea, which was to create a society where it is easier to do good.What in God’s name could you meaningfully do? If someone doesn’t want children (rightly or wrongly), is it your place or any legal system’s place to see that they have them regardless?
So, no, forcibly making people have children would obviously be silly along with gravely evil. But governments can play a part in making it easier for people to want to have families versus making it more difficult.
Last edited:
H
HumbleIOughtToBe
Guest
News articles:entitlement
Darn millennial’s are to entitled → Darn millennial’s will receive no entitlement programs.
R
RCIAGraduate
Guest
Why not enact the following; universal child care from 0-5, after school, summer and maybe weekend options for working parents but those programs can also be a help for at risk and disadvantaged young people, paid family leave like a year for both parents, child allowances and as well as having spacious and affordable housing options including family friendly communities for families as well as grants to help local governments become more friendly and accommodating to families? Easier said than done.
That said, I remember hearing a book called Our Kids by the man who wrote Bowling Alone and he wrote about a gap between kids from more disadvantaged situations like low income, single parent homes vs more beneficial situations, educated, higher income and married families, wouldn’t enacting programs like universal child care and expanded after school be a boon for those struggling families and help break the cycle of poverty?
At the same, would a lower birth rate be that bad, wouldn’t that give an incentive for society to care for her more disadvantaged children like poor children and foster children?
That said, I remember hearing a book called Our Kids by the man who wrote Bowling Alone and he wrote about a gap between kids from more disadvantaged situations like low income, single parent homes vs more beneficial situations, educated, higher income and married families, wouldn’t enacting programs like universal child care and expanded after school be a boon for those struggling families and help break the cycle of poverty?
At the same, would a lower birth rate be that bad, wouldn’t that give an incentive for society to care for her more disadvantaged children like poor children and foster children?
Last edited:
L
lelinator
Guest
At first blush this sounds like a good starting point for discussion. But I think that society would need to reach a tipping point wherein society as a whole recognizes the value of children, and I don’t think that we’re anywhere near that point yet.Why not enact the following; universal child care from 0-5, after school, summer and maybe weekend options for working parents but those programs can also be a help for at risk and disadvantaged young people, paid family leave like a year for both parents, child allowances and as well as having spacious and affordable housing options including family friendly communities for families as well as grants to help local governments become more friendly and accommodating to families? Easier said than done.
That said, I remember hearing a book called Our Kids by the man who wrote Bowling Alone and he wrote about a gap between kids from more disadvantaged situations like low income, single parent homes vs more beneficial situations, educated, higher income and married families, wouldn’t enacting programs like universal child care and expanded after school be a boon for those struggling families and help break the cycle of poverty?
At the same, would a lower birth rate be that bad, wouldn’t that give an incentive for society to care for her more disadvantaged children like poor children and foster children?
J
JimG
Guest
All those entitlement programs might help families. But of course the funding for those programs must come from other families. When population decline gets underway, there will be fewer workers to support a growing elderly population. Eventually the bulge of elderly population dies off, and the new normal is a shrinking population. The tipping point where global population peaks and begins to decline is around mid century. Total fertility levels have been declining to below replacement rate for some decades, so when the tipping point is reached, the momentum toward declining population will accelerate.
In the U.S. at least, note that the young people reaching maturity near mid century will already be faced with a legacy of trillions of dollarrs in unpaid federal debt.
In the U.S. at least, note that the young people reaching maturity near mid century will already be faced with a legacy of trillions of dollarrs in unpaid federal debt.
H
HumbleIOughtToBe
Guest
{Debt has not been a problem for us now. The past results indicate future conditions.} OR {Modern Monetary Theory}legacy of trillions of dollarrs in unpaid federal debt.
G
GEddie
Guest
There’s no evidence that population decline is biological rather than sociological in origin.
If the former (as in “Children of Men,” ) then we human beings are, collectively, toast.
If the latter, then the demographics will recover once the sociological conditions that have led to decline have faded.
It seems to me that the latter is more likely. Decline is far more pronounced in Western and modernist Asian nations. World P is still rising, and some Asian, African and South American nations are not declining at all.
ICXC NIKA
If the former (as in “Children of Men,” ) then we human beings are, collectively, toast.
If the latter, then the demographics will recover once the sociological conditions that have led to decline have faded.
It seems to me that the latter is more likely. Decline is far more pronounced in Western and modernist Asian nations. World P is still rising, and some Asian, African and South American nations are not declining at all.
ICXC NIKA
U
Usagi
Guest
Dude, visit any old and large U.S. city. “Hyphenization and identity politics” didn’t start recently. Sure, previous generations of immigrants were eventually accepted as generically American, but we still know where the Irish, Italian, Jewish, etc., neighborhoods were (and sometimes still are). These communities exist not because they still have any real allegiance to foreign countries (though there was some doubt about that as late as the World Wars and even JFK’s election) but because there are, and always have been, cultures and traditions passed on even in a new home. Our Catholic immigrant ancestors built their own parallel school system to avoid being overly assimilated into the Protestant-leaning dominant culture. Jewish folks often had much the same, and now Muslims often do (much to some people’s horror).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.