Far-away pollution, "Out of sight, out of mind".
Posted on 05/12/2021 5:15:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that births in the USA reached another historic low in 2020.
For the sixth consecutive year, the birth rate dropped -- this time by 4%. The average annual drop in the five previous years was 2%.
The rate at which American women are having babies is way below the rate necessary to keep the population steady-state -- that is, for the population not to shrink.
A steady-state population requires a total fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman. In 2020, it was 1.64.
Needless to say, for politicians, there is no problem that does not have a government solution, and the birth dearth is no exception.
Both President Joe Biden and Sen. Mitt Romney have plans for bolstering American families. The president's American Families Plan proposes to spend a modest $1.8 trillion. Romney is pitching his Family Security Act, which proposes per-child government payments up to $1,250 per family per month.
Romney writes in The Wall Street Journal, "Young people are marrying less and having fewer kids in part because they don't feel confident about their job prospects and financial security."
But if less marriage and fewer children are the result of today's economic stress, why is it that in 1960, the fertility rate was 3.58 -- more than double today's 1.64 -- yet today's real per capita income, per the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, is over three times higher than it was in 1960?
According to the Institute for Family Studies, in 2018, 35% of Americans ages 25 to 50 had never been married. In 1970, only 9% in this age range had never been married.
Is this because times got harder? I don't think so. Per capita income in 2018 was 2.4 times higher than it was in 1970.
I don't think our young people are avoiding marriage and children because of concerns about financial security.
I think they are avoiding marriage and children because they don't want marriage and children.
In a Pew Research survey conducted in 2019, 16% said having children is essential for a man to have a fulfilling life, and 16% said marriage is essential for a man to have a fulfilling life, while 57% said "having a job or career they enjoy" is essential for a man to have a fulfilling life.
Regarding women, 22% said having children is essential for a fulfilling life. Seventeen percent said marriage is essential for a fulfilling life. And 46% said "having a job or career they enjoy" is essential for a fulfilling life.
What does it all mean?
In 1960, 9.1% of our population was over age 65. By 2019, 16.2% of the population was over 65.
A graying population, due to fewer and fewer children, means a shrinking portion of the population that is working and producing, and increasingly large numbers of elderly and retirees whom those working must support.
Consider our Social Security system, where retirees' benefits are drawn from the payroll tax paid by working citizens. In 1945, there were 41.9 working citizens for every retiree. By 1950, this was down to 16.5 to 1. By 1990, it was 3.4 to 1. And as of 2013 (the latest data available), it was 2.8 to 1.
Trustees of Social Security report that by 2034, 13 years from now, the system will only have sufficient revenue to pay 76% of the benefits due to retirees.
Per the Kaiser Family Foundation, in 2016, those age 65 and over constituted 16% of our population yet represented 36% of all health care spending.
The collapse of marriage, family and the national birthrate is the result of the secularization of our culture. Faith and values have been displaced by materialism and egotism.
How do we turn it around? As a starter, let's have more parental choice in education so parents can get their children out of public schools and into religious schools, where they can learn values that sustain life.
Far-away pollution, "Out of sight, out of mind".
Hey, you can feel that way if you like — doesn’t bother me one bit. But, honestly, if we cared so little for the US (and our culture) we’d have moved elsewhere. If children are right for you, have at it. If not, then don’t. I won’t judge, either way.
Honestly, my wife and I are necessary. We pay our full share of taxes (believe me) yet don’t draw from, or rely on, the system. We pay property and local taxes for school systems we don’t use. We pay state and federal taxes and receive no money back (no child tax credits, etc. — not even a refund). I could go on and on about what we DON’T use or need from the system, but folks never think of it from that angle.
My point? Everyone makes a contribution, in different ways.
Well, you’re proof positive that everyone doesn’t feel the same as my wife and I, and — honestly — that’s great. It’ll always be that way — everything waxes and wanes. We may go through a period with low birth rates, but at some point that’ll tick up again.
Everyone’s cut from a different cloth, and I couldn’t be happier for you for the life you’ve had. It sounds like you have a wonderful family.
Frankly, I was pretty surprised by this number. With all the home quarantines, I expected a mini baby boom?
I do think the trend is pretty strong in the other direction.
Funny thing... All I’ve ever wanted for my children was for THEM to be happy in their own lives. Whether or not they had children was never a big thing to me. One has, one hasn’t. Have no idea if he ever will. But, that’s cool with me.
Nothing more disgusting than a Malthusian. Are you a Malthusian?
Demography is destiny. If automation is the key to national strength then why has the global leader in automation, Japan, been falling in terms of global power for 40 years. Nothing is a better sign of civilizations strength than a population that is willing to have children.
It just takes one generation to neglect to have children to enter a demographic death spiral.
Abortion and birth control.
A follower of Thomas Malthus?
No.
What’s that got to do with your position that “I like cheap stuff, even if it’s cheap because the pollution where it’s made is unimaginably bad”?
Would you be opposed to import tariffs of an appropriate amount to counteract the cost savings of rampant pollution in the faraway land?
IMO, school funding should follow the student. This would open up choices for many who otherwise don't have much of a choice in their children's education.
Young people growing up today just are not thinking about marriage and family and children in their future.
Young girls today are told that they can be astronauts, and they can be anything a man can be. How many young girls and women today are absorbing any messages that motherhood and marriage are important life goals?
How many young men grow up thinking that they want to be married and become the best husband and fathers they can be?
How many young people of either sex, think of finding a good life partner to have a family with? And think of this on the same level as their plans for a career?
“Frankly, I was pretty surprised by this number. With all the home quarantines, I expected a mini baby boom?”
I know a lot of folks were initially predicting a Covid boom, and I thought it would happen as well. Maybe people were being overly cautious, not knowing what would happen with the economy, and decided not to have children. If that’s the case it’s actually encouraging, in a way, to think the younger folks were taking that into consideration before diving in.
Younger folks are buying a lot of houses now — something they weren’t really doing before — so maybe we’ll have a post-Covid boom!
No thanks. Get government involved in subsidizing private schools and government then controls private schools.
Pollution in far away lands? FYI nothing reduces pollution faster than having a GDP per capita in excess of 5000 dollars. I am having a problem understanding your perspective and your politics persuasion.
Why did you put quotes around the pollution stuff? Did I say that? Although it sounds like something I would say I have no recollection of saying it.
I am not in theory opposed to import tariffs if they lower income tariffs. But why do you ask? And why do you phrase your question with pollution in it?
“I am having a problem understanding your perspective and your politics persuasion.”
Probably because you don’t want to understand it.
And, by your own admission, you agree with that summary.
I keep bringing up the pollution issue because one of the reasons cheap crap from China is so cheap is that their manufacturers have no pollution-control expenses.
Yeah, there should be some way of cutting the strings for stuff like this though.
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.