Posted on 12/17/2012 4:28:04 AM PST by Kaslin
FERTILITY IN AMERICA has been declining for years. According to the Pew Research Center, the nation's birth rate hit an all-time low in 2011 – just 63 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age. It was almost twice as high – 123 births per 1,000 women – at the peak of the Baby Boom in 1957.
As babies and children disappear from a society, what takes their place? One answer, as journalist Jonathan V. Last observes in a forthcoming book, "What to Expect When No One's Expecting," is pets.
In surveys taken from the 1940s to the 1980s, fewer than half of Americans said they owned a pet. Today America's 300 million humans own 360 million pets. Last puts that in perspective: "American pets now outnumber American children by more than four to one." Often those pets are pampered to a degree that quite recently would have been thought eccentric. The average dog-owning household's spending on pet grooming aids, for example, more than doubled between 1998 and 2006. Last notes that when a kids' clothing store in the suburban Washington neighborhood where he used to live went out of business, it was replaced by a doggie spa – leaving the neighborhood "with six luxury pet stores and only two shops dedicated to clothing children."
A mania for pets isn't all that materializes when the birth rate sinks. So do economic stagnation, dwindling innovation, a declining lifestyle, the exploding health and pension costs of an aging population, and the ever-heavier taxes needed to maintain the government safety net when there are fewer workers and entrepreneurs. Optimism, booming markets, and technological dynamism recede, supplanted by intergenerational conflict and loneliness.
Many people, it's true, are still in the grip of the Malthusian fallacy. The superstition that that the Earth is already too full, and that more human beings will mean more hunger, misery, and environmental despoliation, is a popular one. But serious demographers, economists, and others have been warning for years that declining populations lead to shortages, misery, and upheaval.
"If you think that population decline is going to be a net boon to society," Megan McArdle writes in the Daily Beast, "take a long hard look at Greece. That's what a country looks like when it becomes inevitable that the future will be poorer than the past: social breakdown, political breakdown, economic catastrophe."
If so, Greece will have plenty of company. Fertility rates are falling everywhere. The median age in many countries is already over 40, well above the prime childbearing years. In some places, plummeting fertility can be attributed to dictatorial coercion: To enforce its "One-Child" policy, China has employed methods ranging from steep fines and loss of employment to compulsory sterilization and abortions. The results have been brutal: Hundreds of millions of births have been prevented, China's median age is at 36 and rising, and the Chinese fertility rate is now 1.54 – well below the rate of 2.1 needed to maintain a steady population.
But as Last points out, the fertility rate for white, college-educated American women – a proxy for the US middle class – is 1.6. "In other words, America has created its very own 'One-Child' policy. It's soft and unintentional, the result of accidents of history and thousands of little choices. But it has been just as effective."
It is hard to overstate the demographic and social transformation this represents. It wasn't that long ago that getting married and having children were life goals shared by nearly every American. For most of the 20th century, well over 90 percent of US adults married at some point in their lives – at one point the percentage went as high as 98.3 percent. Now,according to Pew, barely half of all adults in the United States – a record low – are married. And nearly 4 in 10 Americans say marriage is becoming obsolete.
And as more people choose not to marry, more of them retreat from childrearing. For decades Gallup has asked Americans what they consider the "ideal family size." From the 1940s to the 1960s, roughly 70 percent said that three or more children would be best. But beginning in the late 1960s, the American "ideal" fell sharply. Today only 33 percent of Americans regard three or more kids as desirable. And in practice, one in five American women now have no children at all.
What happens to a society that increasingly turns its back on marriage and babies? In which singlehood becomes standard, and pets outnumber kids by four to one? Ready or not, America is going to find out.
Contraception is killing this country.
Would you coerce women to have children? What about people who know they have genetic issues? Maturity issues? Sanity issues? Economic issues?
All the homosexuals will re-populate for us.
—a whole flock of rugrats are much less attractive when you don’t need them for subsistence agricultural help or to replace those lost in the hunter-gatherer culture-—
“But as Last points out, the fertility rate for white, college-educated American women – a proxy for the US middle class – is 1.6. “In other words, America has created its very own ‘One-Child’ policy. It’s soft and unintentional, the result of accidents of history and thousands of little choices. But it has been just as effective.””
Very well stated, and applies to EVERY country that does it. The bottom line is that if women are given the choice of kids or lots of money, but not both, many will go the money route - typically by either not having kids, not having as many kids, and (almost always) delaying whatever kids they have.
It’s all good and well to say that’s fine and if that’s what a free country allows - but countries do not exist simply as a place for the present generation to get old and die off, they also are intended to last a bit longer than that. And with what we have, along with Western and Central Europe and much of Asia, there won’t be much left in a couple of generations.
Oh yea, we can laugh as the idiot Muslim countries for being backwards, but they have figured this out and use their own means (however brutal) to assure continued population growth.
There are options available to Western countries to address the problem...but they’re likely gone too far politically to have the stomach for it.
Yep, declining birth rate is an inevitable result of children becoming an economic burden rather than benefit.
We’re not going to be going back to an unmechanized agriculture society anytime soon.
Any attempt to drastically shift tax burdens from families to the childless more than they already are is going to be political suicide for the party that attempts it, as it will enrage the childless.
And some sort of religious theocracy that bans the pill would also be futile. Nothing would be easier to sneak across the border.
People with children are statistically more likely to shop at Walmart and The Salvation Army than at specialty boutiques.
Maybe we could just import some African Muslims?
We can no longer deal with anything but ME. I want what I want, when I want it. It takes compassion and patience to raise kids and we don’t have it. If you are tied of a pet, just take it to a pet daycare for weeks on end or to the local rescue. Narcissism at its finest.
That “pack of rugrats” is the only way to perpetuate your culture. Imports from Mexico or Somalia may fill schools and take jobs, but bring enough of them and you won’t have America anymore — you’ll have Mexico and Somalia on formerly-American soil.
We welcomed our 12th grandchild to the world last Tuesday —a 9 lb, 1 oz baby boy, my daughter in law’s 5th child.
Bucking the trend.
Congratulations! That’s a very substantial baby!
Yes, and my DIL is a wisp of a woman. The baby is adorable! I had a 9 lb er and they look like they are a month old when they are newborns.
You are doing more than you part too at replacing the population. Congrats to you too.
For the young very wealthy, four or more children are the ultimate status symbol. For the very poor, such fecundity is the source of great government benefits.
For the in-between, kids are by usually—though not universally—wanted, and they are a major cost and a big drag on lifestyle until the grandparenting years.
As has been noted by others, when the completion of grad school is considered prudent before settling down, there are far fewer peak years of fertility before pregnancy and birth become significant medical challenges.
Kids that we do have are living with single mothers, taking anti-depressants and shooting up our schools.
When our kids have it pounded into their heads by the education system that people and Americans in particular are the problem, is it any wonder that they aren’t enthusiastic about starting families?
My wife and I have 4 children and stopped at the age of 38 with our last child. However, being 43 we have witnessed a lot of our friends still having children. I would say the average number of children amonst my friends has to be at least 3 because quite a few of our friends have 5 and a good many have 4. Very few of my friends have 2 children and I don’t know any that have zero. Could this be a media distortion of what is going on??? I mean they always have an agenda.
-- the USA as it was intended to be is done and gone---
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Thanks! One of my boys was 9 lbs. It was a surprise to see such a big baby!
Most of the people I know with large families also have pets, so it’s not one or the other, as the author writes. We currently have “only” six pets (two cats, four lizards), but we’ve had as many as 11 at one time.
It could mean that your circle of friends aren’t guilt ridden whacked out liberals.
Congratulations!
Narcissism at its finest.
**
Amen
It could mean that your circle of friends aren’t guilt ridden whacked out liberals.
That definitely has something to do with it. However, in my parents circle which included only Christian Republicans they were only having two children for the most part...My parents are 67 years old. My parents did have 3 but was looked on as “a lot”. My friends are mostly conservative but I have a few RINO friends amongst them. They vote Republican but are not near as conservative as my wife and I are.
Well, not intentionally, anyway, but it is the unintended consequences which could make that a reality.
Doggy ping list and Kitty ping list if you know who has that.
Thank you much!
That was my thought when reading that post -
a “subsistence agrarian society” is EXACTLY what we’re “going back to soon”.
Or it could be that after a couple generations of no fault divorce, a divorce rate of over 50% which has created a vast public/private divorce industry and a “family court” system that is very hostile to fathers, many men are saying no when it comes to playing this game. The risk/reward math no longer pencils out.
If the drop in birthrate were limited to societies in which those circumstances prevailed, then the, shall we say, “male crisis” might be considered causative. However, below-replacement birthrates are found in countries with a wide variety of legal and social systems.
Yes..and abortion! There will be great hell to pay.
It began striking me not long ago in any large public gathering (concert, sporting event, church service) how few pregnant women I was actually seeing. Just by the sheer law of averages common sense was telling me I should have been seeing many more.
Is it better to have unexpected babies?
Demographically, when a nation reaches a particular economic plateau unique to them, suddenly its birthrate drops from strong growth to just a “maintenance” birthrate of 2.1 to 2.3 children per family.
The most recent of these drops has happened in Mexico and much of the Arab world.
Importantly, government and culture are almost incapable of increasing the birthrate, but they can drive it down even further rather easily.
Only once has this situation been reversed, in the post-WWII baby boom in the US, which came about because of a unique set of conditions.
To start with, during the war there was a long period of “delayed sexuality”, in which many men and women who otherwise would have had sex for pleasure instead of procreation, could not. This meant that when the men came home, the emphasis for sex had shifted strongly to procreation. This abstinence meant that they had a great abundance, a surplus of energy, to make and raise children.
The next factor was the explosive growth of cities with suburbs across the US. Suburbia is far better for having and raising children than are high density urban areas. And along with these new cities and suburbs there was a huge demand for high wage employment.
Importantly, these jobs were for men, but with relatively low taxes, a single breadwinner could support his family, with his wife at home to raise their children. While many more women were educated, being left at home and bored was a good motivation to have children.
Another factor was how these boom towns had few adult entertainments, and were designed with a family orientation, that is, plenty of churches, schools, children’s recreation, shopping malls, etc.
There is also a long list of the things government and the culture did to dampen down the baby boom, and to drive the birthrate down strongly after this period; and most of these restraints still exist today.
Declining birth rate is the way we're locking in economic decline.
Just watched a program on the “Black Death”.
After burning itself out in the wake of killing nearly 50% of the population of Europe, the Plague actually caused a Baby Boom.
Good grief...I hope we don’t need something like THAT to adjust the American Birthrate!
One major issue for women is what I call, “The Great Lie.”
We’re taught that we’re supposed to ‘have it all’. A great career and a well-adjusted family. This is the goal of most girls. (Although this is what they feel they *should* do, not what they really want. I read a study last year that showed that the majority of young women would choose to be SAHMs.)
So girls hold off on marriage and child-bearing. Not realizing that fertility begins to drop at age 28 and plunges rapidly after that.
A girl who marries under 22 without a college degree is scorned. A woman who gets her degree, then marries and stays home with the children is considered to be ‘wasting her degree’. Add to that the student loan burden she’s now carrying into her marriage and you’ve got instant financial problems.
The fact is that it takes time and energy to raise children. Working moms feel horrible guilt for having someone else raise her kids, but doesn’t feel like she has much of a choice.
Add to all of that the difficulty of finding a man who’s willing to marry and support a wife and children and it gets harder still. (Heck, in this economy, it’s hard to find a guy who CAN support a wife and children.) The high divorce rate gives her a sense of insecurity. She knows that she can find herself on her own - with small children depending on her alone - any time.
So women wait too long or they limit the size of their family to what they can realistically manage while working.
And one more thing: Modern parenting is insane. The expectations that your little darlings will NEVER be unattended or get into the smallest bit of trouble is daunting. Even a 14 year old getting hurt when left at home raises eyebrows. “Why weren’t you watching him?” G-d forbid your son falls out of a tree and breaks his arm.
When my 15 year old daughter fell while rollerblading and broke her arm, they called in social services. It happened in a public place with a hundred witnesses and that’s what saved our butts.
The constant threat of child abuse accusations keep every parent on edge. Lord help you if you’re homeschooling.
I have three children, and two cats, they are not mutually exclusive.
You love your kids, but your pets love you.
I never said or thought otherwise.
Although I msut admit to liking my dogs better than several of my nieces and nephews.
I never said or thought otherwise.
Although I msut admit to liking my dogs better than several of my nieces and nephews.
You can take obedience classes there--and they're not too rigorous but they are effective and fun and a social happening. On weekends Petsmart is a regular dog show. I particularly love the poodle-mixes of the politically AKC incorrect that show up. (Breeders detest mixes like labradoodles and peekapoos...it is an offense to them that people breed dogs just because...they want to!!)
And have you ever seen a shnoodle, a poodle schnauzer mix? Wow. Serious adorability.
And there are vets in many stores, a groomer that's probably a lot more convenient than your neighborhood groomer. Lots of toys and friendly people, and they have shelter giveaway programs.
Have done quite nicely with my petsmart stock, too.
You nurture a pet...and get affection and loyalty in return!! What a great deal.
You can nurture children and get contempt and indifference for your efforts. You can devote yourself to a spouse, and only get the brunt of their neuroticism. All the investments we make in people are fraught with risk, we just don't know it. We expect a return, and often don't get it. And sometimes we get dumped by the spouse for someone younger and hotter, or have our children blow our heads off. (Thinking of Adam Lanza's mom...BTW, do we ever learn about her ex husband and Adam's dad?)
So maybe our young people are looking at the divorces, the childbearing disasters, the expense and the trouble--and the potential lack of reward at the end of it all, and adopt some pets who are happy to see you when you come home.
Now, we have 4 boys ages 25 to 20 (we are a blended family)... 3 are married. I have 2 d.i.l. that "get" it... the oldest's wife is homeschooling our first grandson while pregnant with our second. Our third oldest (in Afghanistan right now) is married to his high school sweetheart.. they have no children, nor do they want any.
Our second oldest married a girl from New Jersey and they have a 1 year old daughter. When they moved down here to Texas she had A LOT to learn.. first and foremost to cover her heavy cleavage and tramp stamp in mixed company! If I've told her once I've told her a thousand times "DO NOT expect your husband to work all day long and come home and tend to the baby! That is YOUR job as a stay at home mother!" Needless to say, it's been pretty rough on her as she apparently grew up around libs and has a really hard time understanding that no, around here women take care of the home, not husbands.... I don't go to their house anymore... the filth unnerves me.
All that being said... when our youngest went to live with his dad after high school for a while and empty nest set in, I got a dog (first one ever for me).. he was a rescue. I fell in love with him and having him to "take care of" definitely made the empty nest easier. Then a few months later we got him a companion (female puppy) and now they are inseparable. Yes, I do dress her in cute little outfits and spoil them and love them dearly - they are a lot of fun! People in the neighborhood stop and look and say "hi" or laugh when we are out walking if they have on their rain boots or coats or if the female is wearing one of her little dresses or if she's in the stroller (she has heat related issues and passes out if it's hot) while the other is walking. I fashioned them up little lights for their harnesses so when we are walking in the dark they can be seen by cars and so I can find the female.. she's black after all. I really think it's a toss up as to whether or not they think I'm crazy or just enjoy seeing two spoiled dogs.
And to think I used to make fun of "those" kind of dog owners.... now I'm one too.
Not saying it was the only cause in this country but it’s still a big one. And you won’t see it discussed in the media because to do so would be admitting that they helped the establishment use children as pawns and cannon fodder and that women were manipulated to play their part.
You could watch a teevee in the 90’s for 30 minutes without hearing the words “deadbeat dad” five times so they could railroad their child support database into federal law. That the one everyone goes into in order to get a job, even if you never had kids. The same system was the blueprint romney care used to enforce their insurance mandate.
I'd want to see international comparative data before I considered that a statistically significant cause. I'm not saying it isn't, but given the percentage of children born to never-married mothers these days, the change from marital to non-marital births may be your outcome, rather than an absolute decline in births.
It takes a lot of individual decisions to drop a whole population's birthrate. We've reached below replacement in the US despite the fact that, among my friends, six or more children is common and ten is unremarkable. We and all the other religious families (Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Moslem) are not significantly affecting the nationwide number.
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.