Birth Dearth About Values, Not Economics

Townhall.com ^ | May 12, 2021 | Star Parker

[impimp]

You don’t understand population momentum. Population still climbs for decades after TFR drops below replacement level

[kabar]

Understand it very well. We don’t have a population problem. There is no shortage of labor. In fact, we need to reduce legal immigration. By 2026 one in seven in this country will be foreign born, the highest in our history.

[impimp]

Yes or no - do you think US birthdate needs to be higher or lower or the same as current levels to maximize long term American strength.

[kabar]

Yes or no - do you think US birthdate (sic) needs to be higher or lower or the same as current levels to maximize long term American strength.

I will answer your question despite your refusal to answer mine.

The birth rate is only one component of our population growth. Your post #2 recognizes that immigration can make up the shortfall. If we had a merit based immigration system that brought in the best and the brightest, then there is little reason for concern.

The US has a net migration of 3.03 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2021 est.) compared to 7.49 for Australia and 5.55 for Canada. We have a kinship system of immigration while Australia and Canada have a merit based system. Australia has a fertility rate of 1.74 children born/woman (2021 est.). Canada has a fertility rate of 1.57 children born/woman (2021 est.). We have a 1.84 fertility rate. Australia and Canada are not countries in decline.

France has a total fertility rate of 2.04 children born/woman (2021 est.), almost replacement level. But most of the births are attributed to the Muslim portion of the population. Higher birth rates don't guarantee strength. In fact, the countries with the highest birth rates are the poorest countries in the world. Wealth and affluence lower birth rates.

When you compare the US population pyramid with Japan and Germany, it is apparent that we are in better shape.

A stable population will have an impact economically. We have been used to an ever increasing population to generate growth and GDP increases. Our current immigration policies import poverty. More than 50% of immigrant headed families use at least one major welfare program. They tend to have higher birth rates.

[impimp]

Have you heard of the demographic dividend? ALL countries prosper enormously after they stop having children and embrace abortion and contraception - for about 30-50 years. Then the decline starts.

You are confusing strength now with long term strength. Yes some African countries seem weak now but their relative strength will be higher in 50 years, relative to countries that love to not have kids.

[kabar]

You create a phony straw man. I have not advocated stop having children. But unlimited population growth is not a strength. If you value a high standard of living where all citizens prosper, it is necessary to reach some stable level of population.

China undertook its one child policy as a draconian measure to reduce population growth. More people require more food, roads, water, housing, energy, jobs, healthcare, etc. And as they grow old, a system to allow them to live their last days with dignity.

If you think that Niger, Uganda, etc. are going to be better off with the highest birth rates in the world, you are sadly mistaken. Their citizens are voting with their feet leaving in droves towards the developed world. Have you ever lived in a third world country? I have. Corruption, tyranny, extreme poverty, etc. condemn these countries to failure regardless of how many children they have. In fact, massive population growth ion the developing world is fueling an enormous migration into the developed world.

[impimp]

Massive population growth is what led to UK being the superpower of the 18th and 19th century. Massive baby boom led to US dominance for the past 40 years. Don’t be naive - African baby boom will pay off, just as it has for every nation who had a baby boom in the past.

[kabar]

Don’t be naive - African baby boom will pay off, just as it has for every nation who had a baby boom in the past.

Don't be ridiculous. Comparing the UK and the US to corrupt, tyrannical third world countries is beyond stupid. Concepts like the rule of law, inalienable rights, free and fair elections, property rights, peaceful transfer of power, etc. are what made the UK and the US exceptional.

Take Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, 186 million people in 2016 projected to reach 392 million in 2050, becoming the world’s fourth most populous country. The median age is 18.6 years. Life expectancy 61 years old. Fertility rate 4.67 children born/woman (2021 est.). Real GDP per capita $5,136 (2019 est.). 40% below the poverty line. How the Hell can Nigeria get a pay off from a rapidly increasing population?

CIA analysis: "Nigeria needs to harness the potential of its burgeoning youth population in order to boost economic development, reduce widespread poverty, and channel large numbers of unemployed youth into productive activities and away from ongoing religious and ethnic violence. While most movement of Nigerians is internal, significant emigration regionally and to the West provides an outlet for Nigerians looking for economic opportunities, seeking asylum, and increasingly pursuing higher education. Immigration largely of West Africans continues to be insufficient to offset emigration and the loss of highly skilled workers. Nigeria also is a major source, transit, and destination country for forced labor and sex trafficking."