Posted on 11/19/2018 7:41:11 PM PST by Phillyred
I was not contesting that at all -- "my" math confirms it.
The problem comes in at the lower birth rates, such as 0.5: RWM was off by a factor of 2 for a married couple. It (0.5) is still disastrous, of course.
Oops, sorry, see post above - did not include you in recipients.
So: they focus on their careers first and sleep around. The well educated and those with in-demand technical skills become professionally and financially established. They develop high income lifestyles before pairing off and naturally try to sustain those lifestyles after marrying. This means deferring children until their late 20's or, more commonly, early to mid-30's and limiting children to one or, at most two. An increasing number remain childless.
Those who lack education and skills increasingly don't marry. They also accept the income and lifestyle-first mantra and conclude that they simply can't afford to marry. The women do eventually have children, but they do it on the welfare plan, which drives most of our social problems.
Employers need to seriously rethink work-life balance. Most are all too eager to take bright, well-educated, ambitious young people and work them relentlessly, with the willingness to put in insane hours being the standard pathway to promotion. Prior to the normalization of birth control and abortion, this was much less common, as young people paired off naturally and plans were rearranged as the babies came along. Now the babies don't come along naturally and the young people can be driven on the treadmill for years before they rebel (if they ever do). As an unintended consequence, it's a system that probably gives homosexuals of both persuasions an inherent advantage. I'm not sure how much hyperbole is involved in the suggestion that modern corporate management recognizes the necessity of breeders to maintain a customer base but regards breeders as liabilities as employees.
Perhaps corporations should consciously take work-life balance into consideration for hiring and promotion, especially at senior management levels. How about an informal rule against CEO's who aren't successfully married with at least three or four children? It might not be a bad idea if voters looked for the same in candidates for high political office.
AMERICA’S POPULATION
And what should America’s population be?
300 million?
1 billion?
100 billion?
100,000?
Funny how the Replacement Raters, 2.5 or 0.25, will NEVER say what the population SHOULD BE.
Actually population decline is a great thing.
Foreign replacement with immigrant hordes is a bad thing.
Well, I’m an average all-American boy and I have seven children, all with blue eyes.
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.