Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia's Birth Rate up 30% Since 2007
Moscow Times ^ | 06/20/2013 | RIA Novosti

Posted on 06/20/2013 12:25:51 AM PDT by TexGrill

The birth rate in Russia grew 30 percent since 2007, the Minister of Labor and Social Protection Maxim Topilin said on Wednesday.

In his interview with the Ekho Moskvy radio station, the minister attributed the trend in part to the introduction of the so-called "maternity capital" on January 1, 2007.

"During this period, the birth rate increased by 30 percent," Topilin said without giving the exact figures. Growth was attributed "to the introduction of the maternity capital, among other things."

In a bid to encourage families to have more than one child, all women who gave birth to their second child after January 1, 2007 are eligible for a government-issued benefit of almost 409,000 rubles (about $12,600).

The benefit is not paid in cash, but parents can spend the money to improve their housing conditions, pay for their children's education or put the money towards a pension.

(Excerpt) Read more at themoscowtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: russiaeconomy
Global business tip
1 posted on 06/20/2013 12:25:51 AM PDT by TexGrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TexGrill

One of the reasons for Russia’s low birth rate or an insight into the attitude towards children there is that the abortion rate is (I believe) the highest in the world.

It’s sad to me that the government has to provide incentives to have children, but when I’ve seen interviews from countries like South Korea and Japan, countries that also have birth rates below replacement level, their excuse is that it’s too expensive to have children.

The United States is currently below replacement level, aided by the immigrants:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323375204578270053387770718.html


2 posted on 06/20/2013 12:57:23 AM PDT by Pinkbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill
Russia is incentivizing births while obama incentivizes infanticide.

msm was just joyously proclaiming that White births are down and Whitey will be a minority ( less than 50%) by 2050.

They fortunately don't understand that paradigm can change, literally, overnight.

3 posted on 06/20/2013 12:59:25 AM PDT by Eagles6 (Valley Forge Redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pinkbell

See post #3.


4 posted on 06/20/2013 1:01:01 AM PDT by Eagles6 (Valley Forge Redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill

Moscow is 30 percent moslem. The Christian birthrate isn’t up 30 percent.


5 posted on 06/20/2013 1:46:28 AM PDT by x_plus_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pinkbell

>>>>One of the reasons for Russia’s low birth rate or an insight into the attitude towards children there is that the abortion rate is (I believe) the highest in the world.<<<<

In fact Russian abortion rates reduced six-fold since the fall of communism in 1992.


6 posted on 06/20/2013 2:17:22 AM PDT by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill
The total fertility rate in Russia went from 1.416 to 1.84.

FYI replacement rate is 2.1 and TFR among American whites is 1.9

Not much to brag about, their population is still going to decrease.

7 posted on 06/20/2013 2:24:22 AM PDT by ClaytonP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill
some_text

Russia is experiencing a "dead cat" bounce in birth rates, and it won't last.

From the above chart you can easily see: The post war baby boom ages 45-65 and then the "baby bust" valley that occurred from 1965-1980 (ages 30-45)

Then look at ages 20-30, The (echo) children of the boomers are now in their prime reproductive years. This is why you are seeing a marginal uptick in birth rates. However, the "boomer echos" are not having as many children

In 15 years most females in Russia will be beyond their reproductive phase and that is when the population pyramid gets ridiculously top heavy.

8 posted on 06/20/2013 2:24:22 AM PDT by ClaytonP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill

How many of these new babies are named Mohammed?


9 posted on 06/20/2013 3:57:07 AM PDT by Slings and Arrows (You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows
Tea Party members have a baby or better have a couple of extra.

Numbers will win.

Ready, set, breed!

10 posted on 06/20/2013 5:30:47 AM PDT by urbanpovertylawcenter (where the law and poverty collide in an urban setting and sparks fly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: urbanpovertylawcenter

Ready, set, breed!

***
Sounds like a plan.


11 posted on 06/20/2013 5:52:05 AM PDT by Bigg Red (Restore us, O God of hosts; let your face shine, that we may be saved! -Ps80)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish
Thanks for this info. Interesting that abortions plunged after the fall of Communism. Excuse my dumb question, but what does "the abortion rates reduced sixfold" mean? Does it mean that there are now 1/6 the number of abortions per year??

According to what I've read, "In 1991, the year of the fall of the Soviet Union, a record of about 3,608000 abortions were performed in Russia...Official statistics put the number at 989,000 in 2011, though Russian pro-life activists say that number is much higher." Abortion in Russia (Link)

That's quite a huge plunge (if the stats are accurate), a drop of over 70%. But how is it six-fold?

Can you help me out with a link or an explanation?

12 posted on 06/20/2013 6:16:59 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Point of information.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/02/09/russias-abortion-rate-is-rapidly-converging-with-western-europes/

There is a chart inside.


13 posted on 06/20/2013 6:29:18 AM PDT by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
Ready, set, breed!

Sounds like a potential line for guys at conservative rallies. (to replace the "high protein" line from the '60s)

14 posted on 06/20/2013 6:35:14 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pinkbell
WSJ is cherry picking the numbers.

You need to go to a consistent and comprehensive source, like the CIA Factbook. Additionally the website, Index Mundi, has accumulated many years of CIA Factbook statistics.

Most demographers don't use that same methodology on fertility rates which is based on all women of all ages and includes a fudge factor based on untimely deaths. Nobody actually knows what the untimely death rate is. They use the 0.1 as in 2.1 but it could be more or less than 0.1.

Instead, demographers use or define the fertility rate as the birth rate of women of child bearing age

And it is not just the fertility rate that is important. Russia has a negative population growth rate while the US has had a pop growth rate of O.9 to 1.0 percent per year for many years, which they achieve with a birth rate plus immigration rate minus a death rate.

Canada has the same pop growth rate as the US which they achieve with a lower birth rate than the US but a higher immigration rate than the US.

15 posted on 06/20/2013 6:53:00 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Mormons got it right! Lots of babies! The full quiver idea. Well, I read that women who have babies and breast feed their infants have fewer instances of breast cancer! Having children makes one less selfish too. Let minorities do the abortion thing!


16 posted on 06/20/2013 8:33:00 AM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish
Thanks, good chart --- still don't know where the 6-fold comes from. But I'll not quibble about it: accurate figures are hard to come by, and there's always a dozen statistical ways to slice them.

Bottom line, everybody agrees that the Russian abortion rate in, say, 1992 was atrocious, and that ---while still way higher than ours --- it has dropped dramatically since then.

17 posted on 06/20/2013 9:22:08 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." - 1 Cor. 13:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Btw, Russian health officials counts miscarriages as abortions. They are using common term ‘terminated pregnancy’. It contributes to atrocious rates a lot.


18 posted on 06/20/2013 9:31:21 AM PDT by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish

I know the figures are accordion-like, squeezed one way and tugged out to the limit in another. For instance, some EU countries (I’m thinking Holland) have High School girls go for a “menstrual extraction” if their period is late -— this is without any pregnancy test. Hence, if there was no diagnosis of pregnancy, what happened with the shoosh of the vacuum machine cannot legally be called an abortion.

Impossible to meaningfully compare stats when you don’t have uniform definitions or reporting requirements.


19 posted on 06/20/2013 10:41:31 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." - 1 Cor. 13:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClaytonP

If my wife is Han Chinese and I am Irish/English/French/German does that make our kids white or nonwhite or???


20 posted on 07/29/2013 6:34:12 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Lots of Russians seem to be coming to New England. Personally, from what I have seen of their women, I think they should bring even more over.


21 posted on 07/29/2013 6:36:43 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MSF BU

According to our government, mixed or non white. Realistically they could choose whichever on admission forms and job applications though.


22 posted on 07/29/2013 6:41:26 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TexGrill

If people are having children for money rather than actually wanting children, there will be a price to pay later on.


23 posted on 07/29/2013 6:44:06 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Yes, but I still consider it better than China’s one-child policy.


24 posted on 07/29/2013 6:47:13 PM PDT by TexGrill (Don't mess with Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ClaytonP

Russia’s increase in fertility is a huge achievement and worth bragging about. Many countries have tried to raise fertility but their successes have been minimal and temporary while most have failed.


25 posted on 07/29/2013 6:47:20 PM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

I think in that case, there are many more nonwhite/mixed people in the population. Certainly most “blacks” are in fact mixed, and I suspect the same is true of “Asians” in Hawaii and many “whites” in some southern areas. The whole system is bananas and in my opinion a means of avoiding hard issues and hard work.


26 posted on 08/05/2013 5:02:19 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

And it won’t work, either. Jonathan Last, a demographer, has a book called What to Expect When No One’s Expecting, and he gives the details of similar efforts all around the first world, and no nation has been able to get its fertility rate up by simply paying for babies. The rate will rubber band up for a minute, but then fall again and usually lower than it started. There ARE some strategies that work better than others, and I have captured them all in a post on my blog that asserts his findings should be the basis for a third pro-life party, The White Lily Blog, just google it if you’re interested. Mr. Last says that the only country that has actually rebounded apparently long term from a TFR of less than 1.5 is Georgia, and only because it had retained faith in its orthodox church, and only because that church took an active role in rebuilding the family. So. The Catholic Church? Not so much. Vatican II endorsed the false notion of over-population, quietly, by simply dropping emphasis on the ancient and good teaching.


27 posted on 08/12/2013 4:28:11 PM PDT by Jan B. (Vatican II, activism, doctrine, SSPX,doctrine drives action, Restoration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson