Posted on 11/24/2022 2:50:05 AM PST by blueplum
The problem is we have built a system where children are unnecessary.
It used to be you needed kids to help work the farm or in the shop. Now everyone works for corporations with no family ties.
It used to be you needed kids to look after you in old age. Now Uncle Sam will do that with Social Security and Medicare.
Kids are a gift, but they are also a burden. There is no reason people need to accept that burden in the modern world.
Thank you for your excellent post here.
Always we must return to the Truth:
“Have you not read what was spoken to you by God?” Matt 22:31 NASB
When I attend my local evangelical church populated by larger than average families, I can’t agree with your summary.
You should try studying global statistical data.
Your sample size is meaningless.
Isn’t South Korea one of the most-vaxxed countries? Could there be a possible correlation?
“Centuries of building social trust is gone.”
That is the history of the rise and future fall of the United States in one sentence.
Excellent post.
It is hard to decide to bring more family members into the world when we are in the midst of a depression and don’t know if there will be enough food to go around.
No one is taking care of me but me and my wife. My investments are battered but still plenty despite bidenomics and bidinflation.
I am just saying our economy is not suffering like SoKo is/will.
In the 1990 timeframe Asian societies were still male-dominated, with women being relegated pretty much to raising kids (or else having a very boring life). With that culture, the societies THRIVED economically, to the point of serious concern that Japan Inc. (as they called it) was going to buy-up America.
Rush had way to combat this. He said that the US needs to “Export Liberalism” (his words). We did. Asian societies now have equal rights and opportunities for women.
...and so many millions of women there asked a simple question: “Why do I need a man or kids in my life, when I can do just fine on my own”.
That simple.
In 100 years, it will be Middle East and Africa that will dominate the world. They’ll have to fight it out amongst themselves as to who wins. Those are the only two areas that are still having children in droves.
Homosexual marriage is a small, small small percentage that really would not affect childbearing at all. Abortion is main reason for loss of children in numbers, birth control will never be banned so get over that.
For god sake, no! Everything isn’t because of the vax. The VAX is only two years old for freak sake.
Declining population? Must be time for SK to import 3rd world savages in droves! (Like the REST of the developed world seems to think is the answer).
“Further there’s no reason population must always increase.”
Actually there is - the Ponzi schemes of Social Security and Medicare. If they had been funded properly (meaning much higher income tax rates and somewhat higher FICA rates), I’d agree with you.
“Ban contraceptives and abortion, and homosexual marriage, but otherwise provide incentives to marry, and these alone would result in a positive social revolution.”
Agree. Like it or not, having kids is a ‘career choice’. When few other choices were around, it wasn’t difficult choice. Now it has to compete and it loses way too often.
Anyone who expects “Uncle Sam” to take care of them in old age should just watch the videos of the low-wage, low-IQ workers beating elderly residents in those homes.
Very depressing.
The term is “fur babies”, and they cost a lot less than real children (in both money and emotional investment). When they get sick, you put them down; can’t do that with real children.
The freaks putting dogs in strollers/dressing them in clothes are just another segment here to whom I could never relate.
When a woman cohabitating with a man gets a dog, she may as well get a hysterectomy; she’s accepted her lot as a “dog parent”.
The idea that all people are of intrinsically equal ability and value is a fantasy. The U.S. is the U.S. because of who built it. You can't just remove those people and replace them with the descendants of third world cultures and have it remain the same country, it doesn't work that way. Immigration to the U.S. before 1950 was generally a positive, we got the best and brightest. That's completely changed now. Third world countries are dumps because they're populated by third world people, not because of where they're located. Africa is a continent rich in resources but Africans didn't even know what the wheel was until Europeans showed them in the colonial period.
You're not going to replace Americans with the descendants of third world people and still have a functioning America. You'll have the same land mass and it might be called the United States, but it won't be anything remotely resembling our country.
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.