Posted on 07/29/2018 11:58:53 AM PDT by wardaddy
Feminism sold western women a massive lie, that they can have it all. Women waste their childbearing years at university, usually studying some liberal nonsense, and then another 10 years in the office, trying to “make it worth their while”. Then in their late 30s, suddenly start demanding guys “man up” and marry them, before the clock runs out.
Women should marry and have children first and THEN go to university and pursue a career, after the children are in school.
They actually say that the migrants will be their “breeders.”
Just based on the biology, and not discussion of other societal factors, child birth in her 20s seems ideal.
I think a problem is that we don’t talk about family life or people’s futures in marriage or having a family. Thsnis not just for women to think about; men also, should be thinking about their roles as fathers and husbands in their futures.
Does anyone talk to teenage girls about their futures as wives and mothers?
Does anyone talk to teenage boys, about how they can be husband and father someday?
It’s as if peoole expect that , children and families are an afterthought.
That comes up against the simple math that the more money you sock away in your 20s for retirement will allow for a much easier retirement, than if you only started to save in your 30s.
Having a family and incurring those expenses will cut into that, big time, so they believe it’s better to wait until their late 20s/early 30s to start having kids.
The importance of population growth to national survival is heavily dependant on the degree of socialism and wealth redistribution.
Socialism is a pyramid scheme in which the retirement and age related medical costs of the non-working older population must be subsidized by an ever larger working population.
As the elderly live longer and longer past retirement age, and have no incentive to defer their retirement, the young increasingly delay entry into the workforce by seeking higher and higher degrees, and have little incentive to enter the workforce early and begin saving, since retirement savings is not an issue in a socialist economy.
Because of these dynamics it takes more and more people in the work force to generate the tax revenues required to subsidize the non working population. In a socialist economy, the number of workers required to subsidize one non-worker increases with each generation. This is why the population must grow - or go bankrupt.
Without socialism and its excessive wealth redistribution, each citizen would need to save for his own retirement and elderly care, and decisions affecting his ability to save, such as age of entry into the workforce and age of retirement, would be individual economic decisions. Without socialism, a man might decide not to go for a PHD so as to enter the workforce sooner and begin saving sooner, and he might work well beyond 65, in order to save longer. Under socialism there would be no incentive to make such decisions.
Without socialism, each individual (or family unit) would be self sufficient, and population could ebb and flow naturally without dire economic consequence.
People were encouraged to have less children to avert the expected demographic disaster and young people in the educated West intentionally reduced their family size in the name of social responsibility
This leveling off of the population is actually a good thing with one exception- our generous social welfare and Social Security system is a Ponzi scheme built on the predicate that that there always would be a growing pool of producers to pay for the increasing pool Social Security recipients and the growing population of welfare dependents
The demographic population decline puts lie to the Ponzi Scheme structure of our social welfare system
Left to its own devices, the population demographics would come into alignment after the baby boom generation population bubble went through its final phase and the boomers die off
Not long ago the US population was in the 200 million people range and the country was doing just fine. - better in fact than it currently does with 320 million
Our political class was wrong about the impending population explosion a generation ago and they are just as wrong g now about the need to import illiterate third worlders to try to prop up their dying social welfare system and keep the Ponzi scheme rolling
Don’t confuse rationality with the behavior of the bottom of the intelligence chart. It is getting dumber and dumber while the upper portion of the intelligence chart is getting more intelligent. Two societies are developing here with a dangerous underclass ready to explode into violence at the drop of a hat.
Virtually every good thing in life has a positive correlation with intelligence and every bad thing has an inverse correlation. Our policies in the War on Poverty have destroyed the Black family to the extent that 80% of births are illegitimate.
That is about the worst thing that can happen to a child.
I once listened to a conservative radio host who said she and her husband didn’t kids because the modern world is a horrible place. I just think that is a terrible excus.
“One of Italy’s problems is they have a huge number of non-productive government jobs,”
One of the problems of the USA is that we have a huge number of COUNTERproductive government jobs. There are many, especially at the national level, who could be paid to golf or fish every day and we would be far better off than we are with them actually doing their “job”.
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.