@@kingace6186Childcare expenses should remain firmly in the hands of the employed parents and not the State and its overburdened taxpayers. Welfare is FAREWELL to individual freedom.
@@wyzemannbetter to spend more money per taxpayer on caring for an ageing population than to spend it on producing the next generation of children needed to keep the economy going.
Those countries also have way better healthcare, childcare, and education policies. If they have a bunch of resources provided by the government then of course they’re going to be more open to having children.
It also depends much on culture. For example, in france, many Arabs have two to three kids most of the time since, to them, it's considered normal, yet french people usualy have 1 to 2 kids on average since they see having too many kids as unnecessary that's at least according to what I saw
I don't know... At Israel, there are way more problems with everything in what you've said, than, let's say, Italy, and yet the average is around 3 children per woman.
@@niccolopaganinifranzliszt3556Because globally the correlation between not having formal education and having children is a lot stronger. In Europe we see a flip of this trend, since most citizens receive a minimum amount of schooling - unlike in many African countries, South East Asia, South America or the Middle East. In those countries it's normal to have between 3-4 children or more, which is pretty rare in Europe.
Portugal has a decent number of working women but a low fertility. Germany and France are swapped. In France there are less women working but more births. Germany is the opposite. To point out more problems with this data, the Czechs and Romanians are missing from the employment data. They are some of the most fertile nations according to the previous data. If they are disregarded what you are left with is a good percentage of the data being contradictory. Except for one point. The map showing subsidized childcare lines up rather nicely with the fertility map. Portugal has it and is doing better than Spain who doesn't have it. France has it and is better than Germany. All of the Scandinavians have it and are doing well fertility-wise.
Yeah when they showed the last map it was so clear they buried the lead. I guess "subsidizing children leads to more children" is less click bait-y lol
That would've been the more interesting story to me. But the Scandinavian countries are routinely touted as being among the best in the world at... Well, almost everything.
Came here for this. Another thing that is ommited is share of immigrants in the population as they tend to have more children. That said even in these metrics Czechia and Romania might still be outliers
@@zUJ7EjVD In poor countries there's no free childcare and the free healthcare is of really poor quality, nonetheless, fertility rates are significantly higher than in Europe. Again, correlation does not equal causation, as the comment said.
@@6565sebasI think you're trying to explain away a fallacy (correlations equals causation) with a fallacy here by applying a false equivalency. Comparing the birth rates of poor countries to rich counties isn't very useful considering the different health factors, such as access to birth control, infant mortality, and maternal mortality. The data sets are too dissimilar to prove anything. Comparing factors between similar rich countries can help determine whther the correlation is random or explainable.
It's not even correct for Norway for example, check their National Statistics Bureau (ssb.no), the fertility rate is closer to 1.4, not ANYWHERE near 2
Japanese society doesn't leave enough opportunities to date or to actually engage with a partner or children. It's what happens when you go all in worshiping capitalism.
In previous times, children were assets for farm work and supplanted paid labor. As urbanization and industrialization prevailed, they became dependents as opposed to assets, leading to smaller families as fewer children could be supported. Additionally, as medicine became more advanced, more people survived childhood. This meant less kids were needed to maintain a family line. This is why birth rates are so much lower today compared to centuries ago.
And even further back, before we became a farming species, birth rates would have been very low. Nomadic people who rely on a hunter-gatherer lifestyle can't support large families. So, in a way, population decline is a return to what our numbers should be. The agricultural revolution that happened thousands of years ago allowed for inflated numbers.
@@01SaltyWitchThe most I have seen per month in Germany was about 500€/month (for the highest income bracket), for low income families it was 0€/month, just food, which is capped at 100€/month in my city.
In Spain young people barely can afford to live by themselves. Let alone to have children. I'm 31 and only know two people that has kids. And that's in the "friends of a friend" circles. Housing and employment conditions are joke...
It is quite a coincidence that the same countries offer top-tier childcare support to parents who have trouble balancing the economy. And some of them also offer free education, so children in poor households still have amazing opportunities later in life. But as a proud Dane, I can testify that when working I suddenly get to urge to procreate for some reason... It might be something in the water.
And even when you don't look at statistics, it's obvious that making having children less convenient and more expensive is gonna mean that couples will be less inclined to have kids. Sure, a lot of women don't want kids, but a lot of the childless women out there DO want kids. The problem is that they realize that it wouldn't be practical to have children. If you don't have access to free and affordable healthcare, the economy is terrible, the cost of living is high, you know that you will have no one to look after your kids, and your job will make you work so many hours that you'll hardly be able to look after your children. Of course a lot of women will want to opt out of having chidlren, even if they really want to have kids. You realize that your kid will be less happy and it would be hard to afford your home and other necessities for you, your husband, and your kids.
It's healthcare + childcare, I'm from a dark blue country and it's a big political issue actually, providing adequate and affordable childcare so women can work.
@@LeviMatteo To be honest here the quality of the ''free healthcare'' between the blue countries and the gray countries here is a not a minor difference...
Meanwhile in Singapore I remember our prime minister once said that our immigrants (from less-developed countries) aren't asking for work-life balance however
i think its also related to working hours: france has a 35h work week, and scandinavian countries have average workloads around 30h a week because many mothers work part time
@@FrederikJolleThose countries have been notoriously anti immigration, Sweden, Norway, Germany, and French have been for. If you look at the fertility rate of Native Europeans in those countries, they are often times lower than Spain, Greece, and Italy. When was the last time you saw a pregnant german?
you manipulate data and ignore facts. You can clearly see that there are counties in Eastern Europe countries have high fertility rate and lower woman employment rate. You just hand pick countries for your message
One factor being omitted from this are immigrant populations, I am sure the birthdate for ethnic swedes is much lower than Somali migrants, (just as one example in Sweden)
Correlation does not imply causation! Societies with a stronger welfare system and wealthier economies allow for both higher fertility rates and higher inclusion of women in the workforce
Aren't most of the dark blue countries also pretty liberal in terms of immigration policy? Wouldn't be surprised if this contributes to the situation along with medical and childcare systems.
It's the high income and salary countries that can afford to have children, in Italy the fall in demographic is mostly due to people barely making it to the end of the month on their own, let alone by having kids.
The countries have incentives, this is not AT ALL about employment. Really bad take. Correlation, not causation. And even if mentioned in the video the overall message is still employment=higher birthrate
@@barnaby4232 to be honest almost all the developed countries have incentives to support their falling birth rates, including USA. But incentives here is much more smaller due to high immigration rates stabilizing population automatically.
I would also map the average age that people marry. In Italy, it’s unusual to get married before age 30 so cultural trends of marrying later could also impact fertility rates
Although I agree that it has a factor in high fertility, as there is one more person helping to raise income to the house, I believe that housing prices have a much more impact on the fertility rate. Because who would raise a child in a apartment with only 1, sometimes even 2 bedrooms. Even if people move to medium or small cities they will move far from their job, and from decent schools or opportunities they have on large cities, making necessary to buy a car and spend most of the money they would save on the cheap house. Its a dificult dilema, and Ive seen my sister making that question, and its not easy for her, with relatively well off finances, imagine people with already low paychecks and cramped houses.
The unemployment rate in in southern Europe isn’t actually as high as shown on the map. Keep in mind in countries such as Greece and Spain. Huge portions of the workforce work informally rather than legally. The other main factor in difference between fertility rate is economic instability. Most southern European nations are worse off than they were in 2008 economically. Meanwhile Northern European nations are generally slightly better off. Fertility in southern Europe was actually on the rise until 2008-2009.
So we leave in an age that we need to have analysts cranching numbers to see the obvious. Of course a family with more women working (thus families having more income) will have better fertility rates. I leave in Greece. Number 1 reason people don't have more than 1 kid is ALWAYS money.
It's always makes me proud to see that my country is probably one of the only, if not the only OECD state who is well above the replacement level. Israel, about 3 children per woman. At most families that I know, there are about 4-5 kids per family. It's not rare, but really not common to see families with only 1-2 kids per woman.
Has a portuguese I can say that this has nothing to do with high fertility rates. It's all about the policies to support families. South European countries (mine included) are poorer than the North European countries and because of that there is less government support to families.
Or or, just hear me out. More kids means more money to take care of the kids. Sooooooooooo if the moms work too, you can have enough money to take care of the kids.
The dumbest conclusion you could come to just by relating two statistical variables. It all comes down to parenting not producing “ quality over quantity”
This is such nonsense. I live in the Netherlands and I find that women choose either career or children. If they combine it, it's usually part time employment at best. Daycare is expensive (even when subsidized) so often that leads making choices on how much to work and how much to be home with the child. Kids are definitely expensive and it's not causation but more correlation. Also the explanation can easily be the other way around where higher fertility forces people to go work more to provide for the family. Also
Please make a longer video of this diving into all of the details like the apparent 3 years of maternal leave in czechia and the reasons why germany is lagging behind france even though there are more women in the workforce (spoilers: it‘s less state support and a worse work-life-balance).
It wasn't that long ago that more Catholic countries like Spain and Italy were preceived as having higher birth rates, and Scandinavian countries were lower. Did that flip due to economical constraints, or was that a misconception?
Correlation doesn't always mean causation. Maybe they're in the workforce and have support for those families because families have more kids not the other way around.
Or it might just be because Southern European countries have experienced worse economic conditions than Northern or Western European countries. As a Greek who just paid €6.50 for a bottle of Listerne believe me when I say it hit hard.
It could also be because a higher standard a living and just the people up in northern Europe having higher salaries to pay for kids, as well as women having a better education and knowing the reason for why things exist.
Regarding Sweden where I live there’s a 480 days parental leave for both parents. And also the government pays for the kid an amount of money from the day its born until the 18th birthday each month. And also free healthcare and education.
Yeah - if it doesn’t cost an arm and a leg to have a kid (and even if it does, if you can go to work and have a second salary), you’re more likely to have a kid
Not completely sure how subsidised childcare is defined, but I believe Finland has it too. It's a very small sum for parents who take care of their kid at home and it's only until the kid is 3yo. But daycare centres are extremely cheap and free for families with small income. Preschool is mandatory and free. Public school is free and there aren't many private schools. Monetarily suported mother's leave is 10 months but after that you can take a separate parental leave that you get a small amount of money as support. For people who have a job with good salary the mother's leave is the same or almost same as their wage, but unemployed or minimum wage parents have to survive on a lot less. Most healthcare for children is free.
Now come too think of it, women in agricultural communities also have a more flexible employment environment in which their rights to hold a job/position in a group would not be nullified simply because they have gone absent for the last few months of the pregnancy. Career breaking due to pregnancy is definitely the biggest factor in terms of urban birth rate drops.
The most common cause for low fertility rates is unaffordable nature of the second child in most places like China South Korea and others not wanting kids is kinda a non sensible reason as if people don't have to do the uphill battle all over then they r okay with having more
It's not employment that is the factor, it is the social safety net the subsidized child care, the paid maternity and paternity leave, the universal/single payer healthcare, women's clinics , less hours worked via shorter work days, and mandatory paid 1 month vacations. Also the tuition free university, the government and private sector being unionized, and quality public housing and rent control. Meaning you can AFFORD to get married younger, bring another human into this world, and not face consequences. This is what unionization, social safety nets, and public benefits via taxation of the very rich do for people.
It could also be, that these countries have the highest numbers of migrants. I would like to see how many swedes have 2.1 children and how many children migrants in sweden have.
correlation doesn’t equal causation. Higher % of women in the work force alone has minimal impact on fertility rates, healthcare and income are much bigger players, among other factors.
These issues AND (very important distinction) women in the work force indicates a thriving economy. Most of the Mediterranean have stagnant economies and low wages. IE you can't afford to have a family.
Also it did not solve the decline of natality, cause it keep thinking despite being higher than other country And it did not take in account migration policy which to resolve the lack of workforce which include population with higher fertility rates
They have the things needed to support families such as long maternity/paternity leave, daycare, childcare stipends, and healthcare. The US could never.
They have free healthcare and free childcare support
Ireland doesn't
@@chloereed2434doesn’t it
Every country in europe has free healthcare.
Since they all have it, it can't explain the difference...
@@imarockstarification The quality of the healthcare ain't the same so stop lying to yourself!
Kids are expensive. Two incomes can support more kids.
When both parents work and don't have to spend a fortune on childcare, there will be more babies to raise.
@@kingace6186Childcare expenses should remain firmly in the hands of the employed parents and not the State and its overburdened taxpayers.
Welfare is FAREWELL to individual freedom.
@CoCo-qi5nr Daycare/preschool, after the generous parental leave is over.
@@Theorimlig Who usually subsidizes those types of childcare institutions?
@@wyzemannbetter to spend more money per taxpayer on caring for an ageing population than to spend it on producing the next generation of children needed to keep the economy going.
Those countries also have way better healthcare, childcare, and education policies. If they have a bunch of resources provided by the government then of course they’re going to be more open to having children.
It also depends much on culture. For example, in france, many Arabs have two to three kids most of the time since, to them, it's considered normal, yet french people usualy have 1 to 2 kids on average since they see having too many kids as unnecessary that's at least according to what I saw
I don't know... At Israel, there are way more problems with everything in what you've said, than, let's say, Italy, and yet the average is around 3 children per woman.
@@niccolopaganinifranzliszt3556Because globally the correlation between not having formal education and having children is a lot stronger. In Europe we see a flip of this trend, since most citizens receive a minimum amount of schooling - unlike in many African countries, South East Asia, South America or the Middle East. In those countries it's normal to have between 3-4 children or more, which is pretty rare in Europe.
Portugal has a decent number of working women but a low fertility.
Germany and France are swapped. In France there are less women working but more births. Germany is the opposite.
To point out more problems with this data, the Czechs and Romanians are missing from the employment data. They are some of the most fertile nations according to the previous data. If they are disregarded what you are left with is a good percentage of the data being contradictory. Except for one point.
The map showing subsidized childcare lines up rather nicely with the fertility map. Portugal has it and is doing better than Spain who doesn't have it. France has it and is better than Germany. All of the Scandinavians have it and are doing well fertility-wise.
Yeah when they showed the last map it was so clear they buried the lead. I guess "subsidizing children leads to more children" is less click bait-y lol
That would've been the more interesting story to me. But the Scandinavian countries are routinely touted as being among the best in the world at... Well, almost everything.
Scandinavian countries have higher birth rate because of immigration
Immigrants.
Came here for this. Another thing that is ommited is share of immigrants in the population as they tend to have more children.
That said even in these metrics Czechia and Romania might still be outliers
Correlation does not equal causation
The correlation is strong enough to support the claim
@@zUJ7EjVD In poor countries there's no free childcare and the free healthcare is of really poor quality, nonetheless, fertility rates are significantly higher than in Europe. Again, correlation does not equal causation, as the comment said.
Exactly. Employment does not incentivize having kids. Quiet the opposite in fact.
@@6565sebasI think you're trying to explain away a fallacy (correlations equals causation) with a fallacy here by applying a false equivalency. Comparing the birth rates of poor countries to rich counties isn't very useful considering the different health factors, such as access to birth control, infant mortality, and maternal mortality. The data sets are too dissimilar to prove anything. Comparing factors between similar rich countries can help determine whther the correlation is random or explainable.
@@zUJ7EjVD the free healthcare part is more important than employment in this case.
In the Czech Republic mothers have 3 years of maternity leave. That's the reason.
Also love how they didn't mention it at all.
"i love how they didnt mention the entire EU policy at all in 1 minute short"
@@ckhpersonal670 ?
@@elipren thanks for your comment! 3yrs maternity leave definitely sounds like the cause.
The max is 1.8 on the map. How is that close to 2.1????
It isn't. 1.8 would still leave you with an increasingly aging country if births were the only source of population growth.
It's not even correct for Norway for example, check their National Statistics Bureau (ssb.no), the fertility rate is closer to 1.4, not ANYWHERE near 2
@@zanderhenriksen6776same for Germany, we have 1.something average children.
Not that surprising but Japan is probably doing the Pikachu face rn
Japanese society doesn't leave enough opportunities to date or to actually engage with a partner or children. It's what happens when you go all in worshiping capitalism.
this?
∩_∩
Japan actually has the highest fertility rate in its region. That meme has long since not matched reality.
@korakys stop lying
@@korakys Japan's fertility rate as of 2023 is still 1.27-1.36 births per woman. On top of this, Japan has the oldest population in the world.
In previous times, children were assets for farm work and supplanted paid labor. As urbanization and industrialization prevailed, they became dependents as opposed to assets, leading to smaller families as fewer children could be supported. Additionally, as medicine became more advanced, more people survived childhood. This meant less kids were needed to maintain a family line. This is why birth rates are so much lower today compared to centuries ago.
BINGO! 👍
And even further back, before we became a farming species, birth rates would have been very low. Nomadic people who rely on a hunter-gatherer lifestyle can't support large families.
So, in a way, population decline is a return to what our numbers should be. The agricultural revolution that happened thousands of years ago allowed for inflated numbers.
Hmm… if both parents work, that would mean twice the income, or at the very least more income, so couples can afford to have more children. Right?
Except that both parents working outside the home means childcare, which is insanely expensive
@@01SaltyWitchMaybe where you are from, but childcare in my country is subsidised. The less you earn, the higher the subsidy.
@@01SaltyWitchThe most I have seen per month in Germany was about 500€/month (for the highest income bracket), for low income families it was 0€/month, just food, which is capped at 100€/month in my city.
Who knew financial stability and access to services would allowed women to feel safe and comfortable enough to reproduce?
nobody cares
Immigrants having kids.
In Spain young people barely can afford to live by themselves. Let alone to have children. I'm 31 and only know two people that has kids. And that's in the "friends of a friend" circles. Housing and employment conditions are joke...
It is quite a coincidence that the same countries offer top-tier childcare support to parents who have trouble balancing the economy. And some of them also offer free education, so children in poor households still have amazing opportunities later in life.
But as a proud Dane, I can testify that when working I suddenly get to urge to procreate for some reason... It might be something in the water.
And even when you don't look at statistics, it's obvious that making having children less convenient and more expensive is gonna mean that couples will be less inclined to have kids.
Sure, a lot of women don't want kids, but a lot of the childless women out there DO want kids. The problem is that they realize that it wouldn't be practical to have children. If you don't have access to free and affordable healthcare, the economy is terrible, the cost of living is high, you know that you will have no one to look after your kids, and your job will make you work so many hours that you'll hardly be able to look after your children.
Of course a lot of women will want to opt out of having chidlren, even if they really want to have kids. You realize that your kid will be less happy and it would be hard to afford your home and other necessities for you, your husband, and your kids.
The Netherlands has one of the highest rates of women in the workforce, but not as high of a fertility rate
the subsidized healthcare part is the most significant factor tbh
No, because Southern Europe has good and free healthcare too...
It's healthcare + childcare, I'm from a dark blue country and it's a big political issue actually, providing adequate and affordable childcare so women can work.
@@LeviMatteo To be honest here the quality of the ''free healthcare'' between the blue countries and the gray countries here is a not a minor difference...
Spain has one of the best healthcare in europe tho
Have you heard of the phrase "Correlation doesn't mean causation"?
Not Republicans. Use this ammo in a debate anyway lol
It's a very strong positive correlation tho
Higher immigration
@@shonenjumpmagnetoWell said Brandon. May the woke be with you.
@@user-221i 3yr maternity leave sounds like a better cause.
Lol when 1.8 is your max fertility rate you know wassup
A good work life balance and sustainable income does wonders
Meanwhile in Singapore I remember our prime minister once said that our immigrants (from less-developed countries) aren't asking for work-life balance however
i think its also related to working hours: france has a 35h work week, and scandinavian countries have average workloads around 30h a week because many mothers work part time
It's about affordability.
Let’s be honest this is also likely due to higher immigrant populations
Alot of factors go into it if it was based on immigration only spain greece and italy would have a better fertility rate
In that case this should be reversed, southern European countries like Spain, Italy and Greece have a large influx of immigrant populations
My mother is Spanish and I know first hand that Spain is full of immigrants. Im sure they controlled for this in the study
@@FrederikJolleThose countries have been notoriously anti immigration, Sweden, Norway, Germany, and French have been for. If you look at the fertility rate of Native Europeans in those countries, they are often times lower than Spain, Greece, and Italy. When was the last time you saw a pregnant german?
@@joseaguirre744 idk I don't see many Germans when was the last time you saw a pregnant lizard?
you manipulate data and ignore facts. You can clearly see that there are counties in Eastern Europe countries have high fertility rate and lower woman employment rate. You just hand pick countries for your message
One factor being omitted from this are immigrant populations, I am sure the birthdate for ethnic swedes is much lower than Somali migrants, (just as one example in Sweden)
This is actually wrong. Norway has a fertilitet rate of 1.48 according to our national statistic bank.
Correlation does not imply causation!
Societies with a stronger welfare system and wealthier economies allow for both higher fertility rates and higher inclusion of women in the workforce
Yeah let's forget a big fact on those countries... 😂
Immigrants
@@Kayser-i-Rum1453How many immigrants do you see in Romania
@@k.umquat8604 I mean western and northern Europe. In Romania it's due to poverty.
@@Kayser-i-Rum1453 still proves my point
Aren't most of the dark blue countries also pretty liberal in terms of immigration policy? Wouldn't be surprised if this contributes to the situation along with medical and childcare systems.
thats the ticket
Czechia and Romania don't take immigrants,but ithey also have higher fertility rates than Germany with lots of immigrants
It's the high income and salary countries that can afford to have children, in Italy the fall in demographic is mostly due to people barely making it to the end of the month on their own, let alone by having kids.
The countries have incentives, this is not AT ALL about employment.
Really bad take.
Correlation, not causation.
And even if mentioned in the video the overall message is still employment=higher birthrate
What is bad about this message?
All of the countries have incentives what’s your point?
@@Feralfoundry the video says "we should have higher women employment rate because this will drive up the birth rate"
@@iulioh and? Those are both good things
@@barnaby4232 to be honest almost all the developed countries have incentives to support their falling birth rates, including USA. But incentives here is much more smaller due to high immigration rates stabilizing population automatically.
Make a whole video on this! Very interesting, but very complex issue!
it’s almost like not being hostile towards women is a good thing!
More women work, more money. More money means you can rise a child. That's why Greece has a low fertility rate, bad economy
Because they also have best health care and maternity benefits
The occupation map correlates much more with GDP which probably also explains the low fertility rate
I would also map the average age that people marry. In Italy, it’s unusual to get married before age 30 so cultural trends of marrying later could also impact fertility rates
They have immigrants who pop out 7 children each also...
Because.... kids cost a lot of money to raise and 2 incomes gets you more money which allows you to raise more kids??
they don't want 2 incomes they want independence.
Why does the blue scale max at 1.8 when the replacement rate is 2.1?
I wouldn't call 1.8 "close" to 2.1
Although I agree that it has a factor in high fertility, as there is one more person helping to raise income to the house, I believe that housing prices have a much more impact on the fertility rate. Because who would raise a child in a apartment with only 1, sometimes even 2 bedrooms. Even if people move to medium or small cities they will move far from their job, and from decent schools or opportunities they have on large cities, making necessary to buy a car and spend most of the money they would save on the cheap house. Its a dificult dilema, and Ive seen my sister making that question, and its not easy for her, with relatively well off finances, imagine people with already low paychecks and cramped houses.
The unemployment rate in in southern Europe isn’t actually as high as shown on the map. Keep in mind in countries such as Greece and Spain. Huge portions of the workforce work informally rather than legally. The other main factor in difference between fertility rate is economic instability. Most southern European nations are worse off than they were in 2008 economically. Meanwhile Northern European nations are generally slightly better off. Fertility in southern Europe was actually on the rise until 2008-2009.
Notice how the high birth rate in this chart is still below the replacement rate of 2.0-2.1
So we leave in an age that we need to have analysts cranching numbers to see the obvious. Of course a family with more women working (thus families having more income) will have better fertility rates. I leave in Greece. Number 1 reason people don't have more than 1 kid is ALWAYS money.
They may be a correlation, but nobody in Europe is anywhere close to reaching a replacement level birth rate.
It's always makes me proud to see that my country is probably one of the only, if not the only OECD state who is well above the replacement level. Israel, about 3 children per woman. At most families that I know, there are about 4-5 kids per family. It's not rare, but really not common to see families with only 1-2 kids per woman.
Has a portuguese I can say that this has nothing to do with high fertility rates. It's all about the policies to support families. South European countries (mine included) are poorer than the North European countries and because of that there is less government support to families.
But the support in Portugal is better than in Spain, so that proves the point even just within the Iberian peninsula.
it's so weird that they aren't including poorer countries.
“Weird”
*Japan frantically taking notes*
Subsidized child care in the form of just get the grandparents to do it for free.
How come African countries has lower employment rates,but they have a booming population ?
Or or, just hear me out. More kids means more money to take care of the kids. Sooooooooooo if the moms work too, you can have enough money to take care of the kids.
The dumbest conclusion you could come to just by relating two statistical variables. It all comes down to parenting not producing “ quality over quantity”
It’s giving … eugenics
these have no correlation stop waffling
Correlation does not lead to causality. the more probable explanation is income. northern countries are richer than southern countries.
This is such nonsense. I live in the Netherlands and I find that women choose either career or children. If they combine it, it's usually part time employment at best. Daycare is expensive (even when subsidized) so often that leads making choices on how much to work and how much to be home with the child.
Kids are definitely expensive and it's not causation but more correlation.
Also the explanation can easily be the other way around where higher fertility forces people to go work more to provide for the family.
Also
Please make a longer video of this diving into all of the details like the apparent 3 years of maternal leave in czechia and the reasons why germany is lagging behind france even though there are more women in the workforce (spoilers: it‘s less state support and a worse work-life-balance).
It wasn't that long ago that more Catholic countries like Spain and Italy were preceived as having higher birth rates, and Scandinavian countries were lower. Did that flip due to economical constraints, or was that a misconception?
Southern europe has no economy. Don't you think there is a correlation between economic hardship and low fertility in europe?
@@Dimitris_Half they are going off correlation only, so i am sticking to the rules
There is literally little to no correlation as the only countries dark blue in both is Sweden and Denmark
Correlation doesn't always mean causation.
Maybe they're in the workforce and have support for those families because families have more kids not the other way around.
Or it might just be because Southern European countries have experienced worse economic conditions than Northern or Western European countries. As a Greek who just paid €6.50 for a bottle of Listerne believe me when I say it hit hard.
It could also be because a higher standard a living and just the people up in northern Europe having higher salaries to pay for kids, as well as women having a better education and knowing the reason for why things exist.
Regarding Sweden where I live there’s a 480 days parental leave for both parents. And also the government pays for the kid an amount of money from the day its born until the 18th birthday each month. And also free healthcare and education.
Still surprised its lower than the USA.
I'd like to think that happy people means more people willing to raise and birth children.
people without children would argue they're happy without them, so no.
Yeah - if it doesn’t cost an arm and a leg to have a kid (and even if it does, if you can go to work and have a second salary), you’re more likely to have a kid
correlation not causation. Having a job nowadays is a requirement. Having kids depend on the contry maternity law and expenses.
This has to do greatly because of low income couples that feel that they cannot afford to have children.
Not completely sure how subsidised childcare is defined, but I believe Finland has it too.
It's a very small sum for parents who take care of their kid at home and it's only until the kid is 3yo. But daycare centres are extremely cheap and free for families with small income. Preschool is mandatory and free. Public school is free and there aren't many private schools.
Monetarily suported mother's leave is 10 months but after that you can take a separate parental leave that you get a small amount of money as support.
For people who have a job with good salary the mother's leave is the same or almost same as their wage, but unemployed or minimum wage parents have to survive on a lot less.
Most healthcare for children is free.
Now come too think of it, women in agricultural communities also have a more flexible employment environment in which their rights to hold a job/position in a group would not be nullified simply because they have gone absent for the last few months of the pregnancy. Career breaking due to pregnancy is definitely the biggest factor in terms of urban birth rate drops.
Correlation ≠ causation
@@Dimitris_Half it always does when it supports your opinion
@@Dimitris_Half sure. That's why the high natality rate in France is in majority explained by the 10% lower classes
Wow *shock* helping people will their children will cause people to have more children *absolute shock*
And where is the question what immigrant group has the highest rate.
Correlation is not causation
Its more than a correlation tho
Correlation doesnt mean causation.
The most common cause for low fertility rates is unaffordable nature of the second child in most places like China South Korea and others not wanting kids is kinda a non sensible reason as if people don't have to do the uphill battle all over then they r okay with having more
It's not employment that is the factor, it is the social safety net the subsidized child care, the paid maternity and paternity leave, the universal/single payer healthcare, women's clinics , less hours worked via shorter work days, and mandatory paid 1 month vacations. Also the tuition free university, the government and private sector being unionized, and quality public housing and rent control. Meaning you can AFFORD to get married younger, bring another human into this world, and not face consequences. This is what unionization, social safety nets, and public benefits via taxation of the very rich do for people.
It's all wealth there's no trends, just that these countries are richer
There are also more women in the workforce than not, so of course they are going to appear to have higher fertility rates.
Very cool, but this would be easier to see with a traditional x-y graph and more data points (like the rest of the world).
For the Netherland specifically that's because so many women here work part time. Which is nowhere near as common in other areas of Europe
Well, Spain has a lot if unemployment, so this happens on both sides
It could also be, that these countries have the highest numbers of migrants. I would like to see how many swedes have 2.1 children and how many children migrants in sweden have.
For those who say "women shouldn't work if we want bigger families..."
correlation doesn’t equal causation. Higher % of women in the work force alone has minimal impact on fertility rates, healthcare and income are much bigger players, among other factors.
It’s almost like helping people access what they need to live helps society as a whole.
These issues AND (very important distinction) women in the work force indicates a thriving economy. Most of the Mediterranean have stagnant economies and low wages. IE you can't afford to have a family.
Couldn’t even see Italy in the second map😂🥲
There's a difference between correlation and cause.
Correlation doesn’t equal causation. Also check out the fertility rate for any developing country
Basically all your saying is that they have more general implicit confidence that they can manage a family.
It's the stay at home immigrant women that causing the high birth rate not the high employment rate in women lol y'all tripping
Quick: Do Africa too!
Every country in Europe is in crisis
Welfares for parents and free healthcare is what makes a country rich
Correlation does not equal causation. The northern European countries also generally have better healthcare and leave policy.
Then again every time I step out in England there’s either a roadman or a pregnant 15 year old
Also it did not solve the decline of natality, cause it keep thinking despite being higher than other country
And it did not take in account migration policy which to resolve the lack of workforce which include population with higher fertility rates
They have the things needed to support families such as long maternity/paternity leave, daycare, childcare stipends, and healthcare. The US could never.
Some individual states have similar things, just not as generous.
The U.S. has a much higher fertility rate than anywhere shown on this map.