Birthrates Are Plummeting Worldwide. Why?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2024
- For a long time, the story about the world’s population was that it was growing too quickly. There were going to be too many humans, not enough resources, and that spelled disaster. But now the script has flipped. Fertility rates have declined dramatically, from about five children per woman 60 years ago to just over two today. About two-thirds of us (www.unfpa.org/swp2023/too-few) now live in a country or area where fertility rates are below replacement level. And that has set off a new round of alarm, especially in certain quarters on the right and in Silicon Valley, that we’re headed toward demographic catastrophe.
But when I look at these numbers, I just find it strange. Why, as societies get richer, do their fertility rates plummet?
Money makes life easier. We can give our kids better lives than our ancestors could have imagined. We don’t expect to bear the grief of burying a child. For a long time, a big, boisterous family has been associated with a joyful, fulfilled life. So why are most of us now choosing to have small ones?
I invited Jennifer D. Sciubba on the show to help me puzzle this out. She’s a demographer, a political scientist and the author of “8 Billion and Counting: How Sex, Death and Migration Shape Our World (wwnorton.com/books/9781324002703) .” She walks me through the population trends we’re seeing around the world, the different forces that seem to be driving them and why government policy, despite all kinds of efforts, seems incapable of getting people to have more kids.
Mentioned:
“Would You Have Four Kids if It Meant Never Paying Taxes Again? (www.nytimes.com/2023/02/08/op...) ” by Jessica Grose
“Are Men the Overlooked Reason for the Fertility Decline? (www.nytimes.com/2023/02/15/op...) ” by Jessica Grose
“If We Want More Babies, Our ‘Profoundly Anti-Family’ System Needs an Overhaul (www.nytimes.com/2023/03/08/op...) ” by Jessica Grose
Book Recommendations:
Extra Life (www.penguinrandomhouse.com/bo...) by Steven Johnson
The Bet (yalebooks.yale.edu/book/97803...) by Paul Sabin
Reproductive States (global.oup.com/academic/produ...) edited by Rickie Solinger and Mie Nakachi
Thoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.
You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast (www.nytimes.com/column/ezra-k...) . Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-... (www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-...) .
This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Rollin Hu. Fact checking by Michelle Harris, with Kate Sinclair and Mary Marge Locker. Mixing by Isaac Jones. Our senior editor is Claire Gordon. The show’s production team also includes Annie Galvin, Jeff Geld and Kristin Lin. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Jessica Grose and Sonia Herrero.
![Gunna - Whatsapp (Wassam) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TKRkcvu8V5M/mqdefault.jpg)
This misses something obvious, in poor countries children are an economic asset. In rich countries they’re an economic liability.
Yes! Poor countries use their kids as slave labor. Send child protective services in there and the birthrate would drop to zero.
They mentioned this.
On farms children are an asset
In urban areas they are a liability
I could never afford them…🤷♂️
No, they are still an economic asset. But to billionaires instead of you. They need a new set of everything. A new house eventually s bunch of new cars. Etc etc. child care, education, all the things children can’t do without went through the roof. Only way to win is not to play.
If you’re a single parent you’re pretty much on your own. There is no village to help. Better to stay childless.
In the internet village, not the real one lol 😂 there’s others in the neighborhood who take off the condom and have daughters who go and get married to some lovable but pudgy guy and together so far produce 2 more kids, who seem spoiled but too soon to know
And why the family became so unstable? Why there is no longer any viliage or community?
@@reuvenpolonskiy2544 are you involved in the personal lives of your neighbors? Because that's what it takes
How about pick a good man, then don't divorce him?
@@phillipm5148that’s like having another baby to take care of
I have 3 girls and two boys. We were low income, often homeless, carless, and always struggling. Today, only two of my children want and have families; the other three - "no way!" I think this may be because they don't want to struggle so much and bring children into a world which does not support democracy, equal rights, families, education, decent housing, decent jobs, and so forth.
Yep, I think it's funny that social scientists and reporters think we don't know why birthrates are falling. We absolutely do. We are living it. Obviously, there are many reasons,but the big two are:
Choice, we are no longer socially obliged to have children
Economics: we no longer have an economic incentive to have children. In the past, children were a financial burden, but were also financial help when it came to things like family farms or even working jobs, or caring for elderly parents.
Now, children aren't expected (rightfully so) to provide to the family. They are only financial burden, and society does nothing to ease the burden.
"Often homeless" That's very rare for American families. It's also odd that you chose to have 5 children, given your exigent circumstances.
I was surprised that this was not mentioned in the program. I did not have children because of that, and I am talking 50 years ago.
@@bookplateorg-ry5flIt's not mentioned in the program because that doesn't serve an agenda they're trying to push. Economic policy of the wealth in the US earnestly believes that the more you oppress people, the more they breed like rabbits. They don't think ahead enough to realize that going below subsistence means a person can't feed, clothe, and shelter themselves, let alone a child. This podcast is stuck in the 1990s idea of how Americans live. That's how insulated the upper class is, and that's why they're only going to make things worse as time goes on, particularly with the methods they (regardless of party affiliation) are using to try and force more births for child labor.
Yep! I'm a single mom of an only child and she watched me struggle to provide for her. She also said "no way!"...she does not want that responsibility. She said a cat is all the extra responsibility she wants....it's hard enough just to take care of yourself now days!
Something often overlooked is that a lot of people grow up with parents who never should have been parents. This is not an uncommon thing. Back when everybody had kids because you basically had to (boomers and older) you have huge numbers of people becoming parents who were simply not cut out to do the job well. So I think part of the drop in people having children is the understanding by younger generations that they do not want to risk ruining someone's life in the way many of their lives were adversely affected by their parents.
Agree 100%
Wow aint that the truth! Getting to a place where you can admit that your parents sucked and never should've gotten pregnant with you is a huge step in self healing. Many many people never get there and just repeat the family pattern.
I am one of those people you describe and I am over 50!
Yep definitely a pessimistic society won't have kids! I see it in my own family.
Also, the older people get the more they are aware of the advantages of not having children … society brainwashes people in wanting to have kids … but when people get older they start thinking for themselves … Being a parent isn’t like a cornflakes advert … And one better realises that before becoming a parent
Children are expensive and inconvenient for many people. As soon as women in developing countries get a cell phone they can see how everyone else lives. They can see the freedom enjoyed by single people in the West and they want that for themselves.
What they need is more cowbell. Someone call Will Ferrell.
you are dellusional , enjoy in your western ''freedom'' soon gonna be even more freedom.
Except it is the developed countries births are down.
@@Wegivesp you mean those countries which are not so ''progressive '' and ''free'' as yours .Dont worry , soon they gonna
make you high birt rate , And what was most often baby name given on new born in your democratic paradise ? It was Rendal , or was Mouhamed ??
@@Wegivesp Not really. Birth rates are below replacement in places like Brazil, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Burma, Indonesia, Iran, Mongolia, Nepal, N. Korea, Bhutan, Malaysia, Costa Rica, etc.
Why would people want to bring children into the world when it is in such a bad state and only getting worse? It's actually cruel.
Compared to what?
@@YadraVoat that's it. No need to compare
When has the world been in a better state? The 20th century? Cold War, Vietnam, segregation in the US, apartheid in South Africa? WWII? WWI? The Spanish Flu? The 19th century? Slavery still legal? Charles Dickens level poverty? The 18th century? Medieval times? Roman Republic? Han Dynasty? Bronze Age Fertile Crescent? Human prehistory?
The world has never been better than it is now. In terms of life expectancy, eradication of diseases, education levels, equality, human rights... This is the best time there's ever yet been to have kids.
Oh, woe to our kids, they'll never know the bliss of being born on a medieval fiefdom.
The Left is depressed and childless.
The Right is angry and not childless.
The future is therefore not hard to predict.
Agree 💯
i can't even afford to keep a dog anymore. kids? you are out of your mind.
For real. If someone is actually writing, for a living in new york, they are out of fucking touch with this topic.
So, you're homeless. But, have internet access. Sure.
@@kreek22 So, you're thoughtless. I didn't say I was homeless, or lacked internet access. Nice gem of a non sequiter strawman combo comment though.
People lived for thousands of years under much harsher conditions and yet brought much more kids.
@@reuvenpolonskiy2544 Those people are not us, so what point are you trying to make?
Why not a word on how inhospitable late capitalist neoliberal societies are to families and communities? How school systems are underfunded and falling apart while we spend $1 trillion per year on the military? How paying for health care is a constant worry? How employment is often precarious, and housing costs continue to skyrocket?
Good points, all!
Those are all good points (obviously), but it's still interesting, to look beyond that, imo. Because there are countries where these issues aren't nearly as severe and birthrates are just as abysmal. Or even more so.
Germany has a worse birth rate than the USA. And while we're struggling atm, for obvious reasons...we had it pretty cushy here for many decades. Many people still decided to opt out of having a family. Or at least a large family. This already happened between 1965 and 1975 btw, when birthrates dropped from 2.5-1.5 in about a decade. Ever since, we've been pretty much stable at that number. There was even a slight uptick between 2010 and 2020. Just from 1.4-1.6, but still.
So this clearly had nothing to do with economic factors or all the upheaval and change, we all have been going through these last 20 years or so.
The only people here, that have 2+ kids are immigrants and they are usually not better off financially or in any other aspect (job search, housing etc). Except maybe family support. I've thought about this a lot and continue to be puzzled by it.
The drop in the sixties would be birth control I would think
@@raraavis7782 The lowest birthrate in US history was 1.64. Also, the US birthrate declined significantly from 2010 to 2020 (1.93 to 1.64). You're also wrong about who in America has large families. Have you ever met statistics?
@@kreek22
You missed a key word in what I wrote...which is 'Germany'. I know, I know... it's hard for Americans to comprehend, that there are other countries than theirs in the world *pats head*. No go work on your reading comprehension, before you try to correct others in such an unnecessarily condescending way again.
Rich country doesn't mean richer families...... Cost of living , both parents NEED to work. The middle class is now borderline poverty. And children are expensive
Both parents to not need to work. Those who think they do are victims of marketers and other propagandists. They don't know what "need" means and don't compare their supposed needs with those of their parents or grandparents.
But, this is all to the good. The propaganda system, in effect, is discouraging people who can't think for themselves from reproducing themselves.
The question is, how can some people be literally dirt floor poor and stil have 10 kids, but someone who has access to decent housing and food feels like they can't?
@@CJ-re7bx psychology, created by culture
@@kreek22 wow, I wish I thought of that. You're a genius.
@@CJ-re7bx I know.
Easy answer is are we happy ? I mean most people? Do we even want to live or exist in this place ? Do we see a bright future ?… in the past life was by far more miserable but we didn’t have the means to compare our life with others … now the comparison is depressive … you compare yourself to the rich and you feel like you have no chance in life so you just let go
I want kids, but i can barely afford to house myself 😞
Can't we switch this around and ask why would anyone want to have kids? In high income society, having kids is a lot of unpaid work frankly. Kids do not materially contribute to the economic stability of a household. From a practical standpoint, kids are a burden.
There are going to be people that enjoy that work so they're okay with that. A lot of people do not enjoy child care or the idea of child care. It's hard just to take care of yourself and deal with the economic uncertainty of yourself. Why would you take on even more uncertainty with a child unless you really wanted to?
In the past people didn't think about it. By the time they looked up they already had three kids and a wife. I think now people have the opportunity to mature a little bit and when they actually think about having kids they make the choice that it doesn't make sense.
Business got too used to the idea that having children was immutable human nature, and that the labor force would naturally be replenished without them needing to do anything to incentivize it. They have always pursued profit by paying their employees as little as possible, and by paying as little in tax as possible. Eventually they will discover that this state of affairs is ending, and that parents require monetary compensation for the value they are creating for society.
I come from two lines of huge families. My grandmother on one side had 13-14 children, on the other she had 9, 7 surviving infanthood. My parents had a lot of kids. And then there's me, who's had 3 with one living. There's a couple things that fit what you mention (they married young, pressures kept them in said marriages, and they didn't have access or believe in most contraceptives). One big thing that's different is the cultural emphasis and beliefs around what children are. There is language around babies that emphasizes their positives more than their negatives. Children are seen as blessings and purpose. A fundamental aspect to growing and maturing. That's lost on later gens that may have already come from smaller families or having had that values transmitted to them (or did and rejected them). In my family lines, almost everyone assumes they'll have children and there's a disproportionate number who have larger than average families or are aiming for that. I believe that's strongly tied to a cultural heritage that values children and family.
Not all people can, not all people should.
You need a license to catch fish or drive.
The idea it’s a right over sovereignty of another human for 18 years with no qualification seems insane in some way too, not that I would change that.
You are somehow not doing your duty to your ilk on an organic level by not replicating if you can.
Yet thoughtlessly copulating does nothing for humanity.
I dunno. I would like to have one child but I just never grew up enough in the right way where I could see that. Maybe there’s other way to pass on what I’ve learned and benefit humanity.
Interesting stuff. I’m in Japan with a family of 2 daughters and though born in the USA, They’ve been here since kindergarten. The distribution of people is a way to help solve this issue. The society that willingly encourages others who are flexible and willing to contribute will benefit greatly by the diversity. There’s a fear of “ losing cultural identity”. What does this REALLY mean, if the society faces economic collapse 😢
I agree, without the neccerity you probably should even only have a child if you love to be a parent, including all the work as the thing you would love to do most. I wounder if people have enogh exposure to healthy loveing families who share chores for example tho, because maybe not? A lot of ppl don't seem to belive that's possible for them
Maybe people are finally hearing. Earth needs to decrease its human load and its up to us to replace our budgets to lower population. Return us to a balance of loving the earth , our only home.😊
Go look up t he 1970 book by James Lovelock "GAIA THEORY"
@@tomwirt319 & Limits to growth. 1972 book. We should have listened. We should have instead tried to have more people live well. Instead of just having ridiculous amounts of more people.
"loving the earth" is meaningless unfalsifiable garbage. The earth does not feel pain. Only individual sentient beings do.
Maybe we're doing parenting wrong? No kidding! What we think is normal has only existed for a couple generations! Moving somewhere with no support network and doing everything yourself in your little castle only works in an age of unprecedented prosperity.
Moving away from grandma, then putting the women to work is an excellent recipe for demographic decline.
The cost is simply atronmus. Just the thoght of paying in money for all the labour that wouldn't tradtionally be paied but done by the wife/support network. That's hours upon hours. In places where children can't safly play alone around the nighberhood even more money that you pay essentialy for lacking a safe community.
And every of those is taxed as a buiness and as a person themselves (the wage needs to be enogh after taxes)- just as much as the parents will be taxed. So a lot of money plus a lot of taxes on top
And the last time we had that was when?
@@StopWhining491 Probably the silent generation.
@@kreek22they demeaned woman’s roles as homemaker & mother. Exhorted them to get a job, a career. Then used them to drive down men’s wages & Cleverly made it this feminist agenda. Whereas it was a capitalist agenda. People respond to stimulus & it worked. & they got the end result too. Now 1 man working 40 hours a week in a middle class job can’t dream of bringing up a 2-4 child family in a decent house, have a car & go 1-2 holidays a year.
Woman are unhappy, men are lost. The rich get richer & they find more ways to nickel and dime us. But oh dear. We decided not to play anymore. 🤷🏻♂️
Don't have kids and have a good life, have kids and suffer
I'm 35, no kids. Before that, I'd need to actually have a partner. Before that, I'd actually need to date someone. Before that, I'd actually need to ask someone out. Before that, I'd need to move out of my parents house. Before that, I'd actually need to have an income. Before that, I'd actually need to have a job. Before that, I'd actually need to have work authorization. Before that I'd actually need my immigration status to change. 20 years and counting.
Or...you could return whence you came and embrace your heritage in the land of your ancestors. And have children.
That's waytoomany steps. I'd head home and marry a local girl; she'd probably be a better mother than anything you'll get here.
Yeah you could do all that if you're not killed or thrown to jail right from the airport upon returning to your homecountry.
Bothy husband and I were still living with our parents when we met. Go out there and start dating!
@@kreek22 The dude immigrated for a reason. I'm just going to guess, he didn't want to starve to death. Word on the street, it's an uncomfortable way to go
easy answer that doesn't need an hour of filler: it's expensive and wages are meager. Housing, groceries, utilities, debt payments, car payments, gas, etc. are all through the roof. we can barely afford to be alive and feed our humanity on the side, nevermind create and cultivate an entire human being that'll be totally dependent on us. and our society in general has also become so rigid, vacant, and alienated that it's growing more and more difficult to meet new people and form attachments. We barely have any energy and time between work shifts to be fulfilled as humans, we're often too tired or busy with domestic obligations to go out and meet someone to have a child with. And where would we go, anyhow? the third spaces that would fill those needs are disappearing and so our only options are home, work, and trips to the store where we don't typically want to be social or bothered. Capitalism is killing us.
Move to N Korea and get some good old school communism. You might lose your Y-tube access, but that's a benefit to the rest of us.
Left a comment like this on the 1st section of the page. It’s so obvious & these 2 have no idea 🤦🏻♂️
I have only heard about 10 minutes of this podcast and don’t understand how these two think most working class people have so much financial freedom & ‘time to enjoy’? Rich countries or ‘some rich people in those countries’?
"easy answer that doesn't need an hour of filler: it's expensive and wages are meager" I know, right?
It is because in the rich societies people invest too much time in their kids. I was born during Ceausescu's regime in Romania, and then the parents would not spend that much time with their kids. We were going alone to school, come back from school alone and ate what was left for us in the fridge to eat. My both parents were working including on Saturdays. If we would some sport, or take music lessons, the same, we would go alone or with our friends. We spent most our time with our friends outside, not with our parents.
What you describe was true for most American children until around 25 years ago. But, the American birthrate dropped below replacement 50 years ago.
Romania, though not rich, has had a low birthrate for 30 years.
Unions and Marxists are JUSTIFIED forms of collectivism: they fight to INCREASE equality of labor and wealth produced by that labor. Unlike nationalism or tradition or culture, which actively fight against equality of choice, freedom, when doing so goes against their nationalistic or monarchist or theocratic delusions and ideologies.
Unions and Marxists are JUSTIFIED forms of collectivism: they fight to INCREASE equality of labor and wealth produced by that labor. Unlike nationalism or tradition or culture, which actively fight against equality of choice, freedom, when doing so goes against their nationalistic or monarchist or theocratic delusions and ideologies.
FYI: far too many "Communists" turned out to be Communist in name only: fanatical fascist rightwing dictators.
Why isn't a falling population considered a good thing, at this point -- if not a miraculous blessing? For two decades now, a commonly quoted statistic is that if all 8 billion humans enjoyed Americans' material consumption levels we'd need 4 or 5 more planets to supply the resources. Needless to say, this is not going to happen -- and Indeed, our planetary resource base is rapidly declining, both in quantity and quality, and we are likely polluting our oceans, aquifers, and atmosphere beyond repair.
Why not celebrate the falling birthrate and reform our societies to support a smaller global population?
Read your last sentence, that's why
Conventional wisdom is usually dumb. There is no shortage of resources, with one possible exception--a mineral important in food production. You've probably never heard of it due to conventional wisdom entrapment. You've also failed to understand basic principles of economics, like catallaxy and automatic market-based information systems.
"Why isn't a falling population considered a good thing, at this point -- if not a miraculous blessing?"
Answer:
“The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.”
― Voltaire
Agree 💯
Because ALL these media are extremist conservative or centrist biased. OPPOSED to allowing OTHER VOICES OTHER OPINIONS be heard such as ANTINATALIST.
We live in Uganda. We love our kids and have extended family help as well as land for them to play around in. Not everyone has a big family but it's normal to have one and grandmothers expect to be very involved and live with or next to the grandchildren.
The grandmother effect is important. Without grandmothers, childcare is more expensive and lower quality.
That's one of the norms humans relied on for hundreds of thousands of years. The tribe concept is not moving away from our families of origin and getting support in child rearing. Now that so many people move far away from families, and culture is isolating more, parents don't get a break from kids and kids don't get a break from parents.
thats not the reality in USA, grandparents aren't nearly as involved, also its way more expensive here to have a family than in Uganda
Ezra Klein keeps saying things that make me believe he thinks everyone in America is like him and his friends from graduate school.
13% of Americans have a master's degree. ~3% have a doctorate. Is it possible that not everyone is like him? Is it possible that economic numbers in the US don't accurately represent the level of distribution of income and wealth? Maybe the reason why *most* people are choosing to have fewer kids is that this amazing prosperity is actually *not* equally experienced.
This is such a fundamental problem with NYT professional opinion-havers. They are a bit myopic.
I, myself, have a doctorate in what has turned out to not be a very lucrative profession. I didn't go into it thinking it would make me rich, but I wasn't prepared for this level of precarity. The idea of buying a house, saving for retirement (or just retiring in general), let alone having a kid... These are all wildly unrealistic for me. So even some of us with graduate degrees aren't doing so well.
The smart opinionators (eg, the execrable Ezra) at the Times are not myopic, they're strategic liars. But, there are some dumbos on the payroll.
Still doesn't explain why the poorest Americans have the most kids on average. Or why when Americans where much poorer we had many more kids. I grew up very poor to a mom who had 5 kids, it was perfectly fine and we all did well. She definitely didn't put much time in with us and we didn't do any of expensive activities. My best friends growing up supports his 4 kids and stay at home wife in MA on $75k no problem working construction by my brother in a city working in the media making $125k with a partner making $120k says kids are way to expensive. It's obviously not the money it's that they would have to give up ALOT of spending on travel and career progress to have kids.
You know Ezra never went to grad school, right?
@@kyber1fun164 that's very interesting. I did not know that. That makes me curious about why he actively identifies himself (in this interview) as belonging to the group of people that go to grad school? He doesn't talk about himself as a person with "only" a bachelor's degree...
"I, myself, have a doctorate in what has turned out to not be a very lucrative profession. I didn't go into it thinking it would make me rich, but I wasn't prepared for this level of precarity. The idea of buying a house, saving for retirement (or just retiring in general), let alone having a kid... These are all wildly unrealistic for me. So even some of us with graduate degrees aren't doing so well."
BINGO! SAME FOR ME! I always did "work hard, play hard", have had a singular goal, with several "backup goals" if the primary goal did not work out, that I "went for", and in some ways, still do. And going for all those goals - all those academic degrees -- was and still is THE BEST DECISION OF MY LIFE!
Nevertheless, working hard and being focussed on a goal of life is ZERO guarantee of getting all you had hoped for in return. I've gotten a LOT of what I had hoped for in return (PhD in Mathematics, BChE in chemical engineering, 2 years as a chem eng, eight published papers, have given several talks and poster presentations) but not all I had hoped for.
It is the economy. Simple as that. Low wages, High inflation , Housing too expensive... These 2 seems out of touch.
Becoming rich wasn't the cause. Not sharing and the concentration of wealth. Not spreading the wealth among the masses. Selfishness. Greed.
I dont understand how 3,7 million births a year is a low fertility rate, if anything they should be trying to make it slower.
You do not understand the meaning of the term "rate."
@@kreek22 no, what is it?
@@alejandroavendano7988 In this case it refers to the number of children produced by an average woman currently in the fertile age range. The fertility rate was 1.6 last year. The number of births was 3.7 million. A fertility rate below 2.1 causes population decline.
Agree 💯
I feel guilty for engaging in my hobbies and not spending time with my kids or leaving them to my wife.
"rich country" means NOTHING. The ONLY QUANTIFIABLE meaning of "rich" is HOW MUCH QUALITY OF LIFE (which INCLUDES access to advanced technology) do you get in exchange for HOW MUCH HARD LABOR you do. Money is just an INTERMEDIARY between what goods and services you get versus how much goods and services you produce.
rich for a few, poor for many
Sometimes I feel all this talk is corporations and companies desperate to beat that bottom line every year. We did absolutely fine with 2 billion people on the planet …only 100 years ago. This is not a finite planet. We will be just fine. Don’t let anyone scare you that more is better. It is just NOT true🌎☀️💙
Another reason for the shift in rich countries is that in most rich countries, women have access to those same opportunities. In 3rd world and developing countries, the norms are for women to only stay home and raise children. When given the choice, women want options too.
The actual problem is overconsumption by the top 10%.
Top 10% being most of us here online.
The OECD nations comprise most of this overconsumptive class, who consume >60% of the planet's annual resources, leaving only 40%, for the bottom 90% of humanity.
If we top 10% reduce our consumption back to 1950s levels, every human being could thrive on Earth.
That does mean ending Capitalism and in specific, ending ALL forms of rent extraction.
Your numbers are incorrect, probably due to ideology, possibly due to innumeracy.
As a mother of 9, whose oldest child is 51, at first had children because it was expected of me, but now, I am so grateful for the privilege of having them. They taught me much! And provide so much joy in my life.
Lots of people dont like or want kids
No duh. The question is whether that feeling has always existed, and if it hasn't, why does it exist now? If it has, why has it changed how people are actually having kids?
@@CJ-re7bx child abuse, child neglect, and child homicide as always existed. Of course everyone did not always like children. No duh!
The fertility rate of women who have children is about 2.6. It was roughly 2.6 in 1972. The difference is 5-6 times as many women are not having children now vs 1972. I wish the demographer could have discussed this point. Disappointing interview over all because she did not say anything that was particularly insightful.
Real estate prices are part of the problem. It's too expensive to find a house someplace you can hope to find a job (a city or large town) I posit America simply doesn't have enough cash to have a bunch of kids.
I also ask the question, what if successful women were willing to marry less successful men, who (are you sitting down?) are willing to stay home with the kids until they start high school, say? You know, that bank manager being willing to marry that handsome bartender?
I'd posit these two factors have a lot to do with why people aren't having more kids.
For everyone claiming that it's too expensive or inconvenient to have children - ask yourself this - exactly where in the world do people still have many children and a positive birthrate? Is it somewhere wealthy and comfortable?
I find it curious that there is no mention of chemicals that are causing fertility problems. Perhaps these effects are more in the future? Has Shanna Swan's research been proven incorrect? I do agree with what is presented here but it seems incomplete.
Good point. Why are sperm counts and testosterone levels dropping?
An excellent conversation. As a Canadian certainly childcare and maternity leave being offered at a reasonable amount is so important to make having not only the first but additional children being possible. It's never easy but support is so important in an expensive world. Doing volunteer work like a Guide or Scout leader is important work for the community but tough when both parents are overworked and overwhelmed
Because the loss exceeds the gains
Natural selection never stops selecting, regardless of how the selection environment shifts.
@@kreek22 true, ive thought about this concept from time to time.
Not a bad thing. Capitalism is way depressing.
Agree 💯
soon they gonna change in techno feudalism with fashism.
Most women don't live on farms where they used to be equated with the livestock.
46:05 I have memories of waiting outside of San Francisco restaurants that didn't take reservations when I was a kid. We were expected to wait. We brought a book. It was fine.
I have memories of growing up in Oklahoma when it was a natural paradise with a billion fewer fences
@@garyjohnson8327 OK hasn't been a natural paradise since the buffalo roamed.
im missing the point, are we just sharing our memories here, I remember when Golden Eye came out on Nintendo 64 in 1999, best game especially for inviting friends over to play
Peter Zeihan says it's urbanization:"on the farm, kids are free labor, in the city, they're expensive furniture, adults aren't stupid, so the have fewer". It's a little more complicated. On farms, particularly non mechanized subsistence farms, parents can combine child care with work, and kids really are free labor, and they're also your retirement plan. When people move to cities to take jobs, living space is at a premium, and they have to find child care because you can't take watch your kids while you work in the factory or the office (both because modern jobs require deep focus of attention, and because offices and factories don't typically welcome kids, and may not be safe for them). Plus urbanites have investment options for retirement. Incentives shift, because of the practical realities of economic developement.
Putting women to work caused more decline than urbanization. And that wasn't economic development, it was political planning.
@@kreek22 Many people disregard or are even ignorant of how different life was for women in the USA in those times (during and after WWII). Remember, a woman couldn't open a bank account or get a credit card (once they were made available) without her husband's consent. There was no such thing as no-fault divorce. Birth control ("the Pill") was not as readily available as it is now, and women generally, with some exceptions, did not get higher education and if they did, they were somehow un-feminine. And that femininity was everything, absolutely everything, to a gal. Without it, we had no social lives, no husbands -- and if we liked girls we better hide it. Rape victims often weren't believed and nearly always bore the guilt of having 'caused' it somehow. I could go on and on (and often do) but you get the drift.
Putting women to work -- women being encouraged to work -- was a blessing. The empowerment it gave us is undeniable. Our society is still changing in powerful and positive ways because of this fundamental shift. The diminished part that women played 'back then' is sad, and thank all the forgotten gods we WILL NOT GO BACK to that.
We must create a new society, one that doesn't disenfranchise anyone. It may take time to work all the kinks out but there is no other path forward.
It is not just ''cultural'' The problems are that housing has become insanely expensive in most developed countries. Unnecessarily so and also jobs have become less secure. Rules on the Job market has changed, but even more so the job culture has changed. We now have what I would call a ''hire and fire'' culture where employers try to find '' the perfect'' employee and if it turns out they are somehow human and not perfect then they are fired, instead of investing in the employees and letting them grow.
We're eating plastic. Might have something to do with it.
Yet, the life expectancy in most countries continues to rise. Did you know the sun inflicts radiation upon the entire earth every day? I'm surprised anything can survive on this planet.
The water's toxic the air is toxic the food is toxic, the government is toxic, yeah let me bring another human being into this world, lmao!!!!
Certainly doesn't help
but that is nt important what you eat , its important MOLSANTO to make couple billions more ,
ding din ding! here i thought i was the only one who figured it out. its in organs and arteries. plastic massively reduces the ability to have kids and clogged arteries is the reason for nearly all deaths.
Job stability and immigration is the driver. Immigration is causing massive job instability. Companies can hire/layoff as immigration provides an endless supply of labor and supress wages.
This is a super great conversation but it is unfortunately way too late. What is done is done, we need to focus the conversations on how we are going to deal with demographic changes that humanity has never ever seen before.
a lot of people are satisfied with porn over finding a mate. a lot of people are having a hard time supporting themselves even basic needs such as paying bills and buying food. a lot of people are barely surviving alone, let alone find a mate and have a child. women want nothing to do with a man who is barely surviving.
This seems very out of touch. Try to look beyond your own social circle. Not everybody has your paycheck. Not everybody has shared home/childcare duties. You can do a search on any social platform and people will tell you why they are putting off having kids.
Straight up.
Look at healthcare.
exactly, should include someone outside their circle, this seems too narrow for such a wide discussion
Orange pill moment: Building our lives around the car is very inconvenient for having children. If I'm not watching my kids for 30 seconds, they can be killed by a car. 30 seconds, its unacceptable. Yes, other things can happen, but that is the number 1 risk.
This world is insane and a complete suffering why would you want to bring anyone else into this madness, why.
for satanic purposes , and for couple of billions more,
Make housing with several bedrooms in a townhouse affordable, and this will get fixed. Also, get the men to do more in terms of child care
In the animal kingdom, any species that has more food, greater security, and no natural predators will reproduce more; every succeeding generation is guaranteed to be far more numerous than the one before until the food source determines the equilibrium and natural carrying capacity of the land.
In western capitalist liberal human societies especially, and those aspiring to become so over the last one hundred and fifty years, once people become richer and more secure, with fewer threats to their health, safety, and longevity, they tend to reproduce less. The all-important question is why. The answer, I believe, lies in the internal psychology of humans with this particular ideological bent. They become hyper materialistic hoarders. Greed, selfishness, individualism, me, me, me, more, and mine become their religion and god.
the day food production gets extremely cheap due to automation, and the majority of jobs can be done remotely from rural areas, and housing cost gets more reasonable, people will be having few kids. and if the current situation is due to people actually not wanting kids, then how would it ever change
Hallelujah
The interviewer’s use of the term “individualism” could more accurately be described as narcism. When people reach a certain level of affluence and believe in nothing bigger than their own wants, this is what we get.
Google the average fertility rates in practicing Christians and Jews vs the fertility rate in atheists and agnostics and you will prove my point.
No fault, on demand divorce makes having children highly dangerous for a woman. She can be forced into single parenthood and poverty at any time, against her will and on no grounds at all. Alimony and child support is half the living standard of a person with a productive, contributing partner. No one with whom to share the expenses and domestic labour.
We should be careful on money usage,if you are not spending to earn back,then stop spending.
People dont understand that the prices of things are never going back down. This inflation is deeper than we think. Those buying groceries are well aware that the real inflation is much over 10%. The increments dont match our income, yet certain investors still earn over $365,000 in stocks and assets. Wish I could accomplish that.
Very possible! especially at this moment. Profits can be made in many different ways, but such intricate transactions should only be handled by seasoned market professionals.
Some persons think inves'tin is all about buying stocks; I think going into the stock market without a good experience is a big risk, that's why I'm lucky to have seen someone like mr Brian.
Brian demonstrates an excellent understanding of market trends, making well informed decisions that leads to consistent profit
I'm surprised that you just mentioned and recommend Mr Brian Nelson. I met him at a conference in 2018 and we have been working together ever since.
How do you slow population growth across any and all cultures without anyone even realising it? Empower women (even to the point of absurdity) but say it’s about equality. It’s certainly more subtle than a one-child policy.
Ill tell you how to feel about it. It took until 200 yrs ago to each 1 b humans. Then 200 hundred more years ti get to 8 billion. 8,000,000,000. Another 100,000,000 every year (but youre special).
This is the stupidest concern i have ever . Most living in poverty, all wanting to live like Americans. We have one planet.
Get a grip, Gary. Take your anti-hyterica meds, then take some classes in stats, economics, science, etc.
Agree 💯
Most demographers seem aware of the links between demographic trends and economics. Consumption trends, savings rates, productivity levels, etc. This demographer seems very focused on feelings, not economics.
Help me with the math!
If the global fertility rate is 2.2, but half of all newborns are born in places where the replacement level is 2.5 or even 3 and higher (Chad, Sudan, Niger, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc.), then the fertility rate is already under replacement level worldwide, correct?
Or are you telling me that the supposed global replacement level of 2.1 takes into account the situation in the above named nations?
Ezra I would love to hear an entire podcast just on your ‘individualism’ theory, I think you’re definitely touching something important
I agree it's part of the explanation. But, capitalism doesn't seem to work well without individualism. Not only was modern capitalism invented by the most individualist nations on earth (the WEIRD people), but these places continue to lead the race. The only places that challenge them, in NE Asia, have somewhat less individualism, but even lower birth rates. Also, NE Asia is much more individualist than it was a century ago.
Screw individualism
@@catholicconvert2119 Thanks for the internet graffiti.
that's an easy answer, micro plastics in your organs and arteries massively reduce the ability to conceive. I like to believe it was planning when we switched from glass products to plastic.
An hour's worth of conversation and not a word on migration and the fulfillment of labor needs through more realistic immigration policies (throughout the world). Not a word on the forced birthing in the US by the removal of women's reproductive rights. Ezra. What does "highly successful" mean?
So that's you literally in favor of Replacement Theory.
The future cultures that will exist will be the ones that have children.
This is terrifying to me.
I listen every morning. Thanks!
You can't tho. Because welath in rich countries dosn't translate to the average person getting more money. Just like being rich in New York by the standarts of some small town that's in the heart of the countriside dosn't actually make you rich in New York. You may still struggle to fit grocheries, rent, other necceritys and a bit of small fun into the budget.
Housing, grocheries etc how much of that you can afford defines how much money you actually have!
That lifestyle you want to have is what I mean. Ofc you could be poor and have children, but that's not wealth. If you need to choose poverty or at least a substantialy more poor lifestyle to have a child you are not in fact rich
Nice hear Ezra! So great to have you among us!
Funny that Ezra does not understand why women do not want to have lots of children
Im just judging this by the thumbnail, let me guess some over researched under thought about non-threatening NPR voice drivel that pretends to be contrarian or cynical but misses the point massively and sells ad-space well?
Give me the podcast i want.. 'can you afford a fish?'
Mostly accurate
It's declining because we are overpopulated. We are fighting over real estate fighting over land. Israel/Palestine is a perfect example. Becoming richer is not worth this. We are fighting over everything and turning on each other. It is not smart to increase the population we need to be below replacement to reduce the total and start acting like people again.
Ezra, you are so right that we don't want public policy that intrudes on family planning. How's this for a hands-off public policy to support family development: last year, Florida eliminated sales tax for all baby-related goods; diapers, formula, clothing, strollers, etc.
The birth rate in the hispanic countries south of the US is 1.5 times that of the US.
The birth rate of African countries is 4-6 times that of the EU countries.
Fascinating discussion but oh my so much privilege being shown! Having kids being fun? Historicly they just happened. Kids were just part of life. And then they were useful for hunting, gathering, farmering. Starting in at least the 70s we started hammering it home that if you had kids before you graduated college you had ruined your life and your chances. I think people really took to heart that kids ruin lives. Now, im all for sex education and I have three kids myself, so I can say that kids make life more: hilarious, stressful, satisfying, and anger inducing. But they certainly don't make it easier.
A person born today can probably live to the end of the century. By then the world will be very different from the world of 1960 or even 2000. Sea levels will have pushed populations near the seas to move inward. Money will have been funneled into the hands of the wealthiest 2-4%. Sea level raises will have also reduced arable land. The population will have grown to unsustainable levels.
This is not a scenario for lots of good outcomes.
My belief is that the peoples need for more resources to live will attempt to redistribute wealth and resources which will lead to a world wide collapse of society.
Having children today might be the ultimate bad move. For them and the world.
The proximate cause is very simple: people are marrying later. Fertility directly correlates with marrying young, especiallly for women.
Why are people marrying later? They have been told a bunch of lies about what success is, what they need, and how to find fulfilment.
Edit: Sorry, Jennifer has a very annoying intonation and cadence. I couldn't listen to her.
First went to China in the early 80's. It was overpopulated then from what I saw. The population was then about 1 billion. China will not get back to 1 billion until about 2475. We need faster population declines to make the world more liveable. Once it becomes more liveable, people will have children again. This is NOT a extend the chart type of issue. As circumstances change behaviours will change.
Experts are saying that the Chinese population will reduce by 50% by 2100.
Good that this issue is becoming more and more prominent in mainstream public discourse. Global demographic decline takes effect over decades and there is no historical precedent for its recovery. S Korea, Japan, china, Russia, Ukraine and Scandinavia are excellent and varied models of this decline.
The frustration is that people cannot or will not recognize that things CHANGE. Populations go up, and they go down. The people of one generation are not pre-destined to do what earlier generations did.
Yes. Right now we have lots of immigration. In just a year from now we are going to have almost none at all.
@@jeremy____5747 You're saying that The Donald's second term will be even better than his first? Inshallah!
Wasn't the population growth an anomaly in of itself? The economy will adjust either way, instead of this "boom" and "bust"?
In the past, men were building their careers over many years, and once they were established, then they married young women of childbearing age.
The current pressure for women to build their own careers, outside the home, is pushing back the age at which women have babies.
Taboo subject : The correlation between fertility rates and intelligence.
The comforts of the rich depends on an abundant supply of the poor, Voltaire.
Afghanistan and Nigerian women don't have agency!
Lab babies and robots will help the wealthy countries with their needs if the low population trend continues.
"Industrial Society and It's Future"
I did that! Had my third 10 years after my first and second and ive always worked. I got my degree while working and raising them. Its easier with two involved parents. I think its all about happiness. If you're not happy in your environment you will find it difficult to be a parent. Also, l find with my Gen Z child that she and her friends are quite self centered and don't have time for parenting.
Finite planet. As populations grow, constraints on resources increase, making life "more expensive" for individuals and for the planet. We need to get back to a population of around 2 billion for humanity to not destroy the planet ecosystem. Obviously doing it quickly will be problematic, but as resource constraints ease and things like housing become less expensive and ai gets more pervasive, having children may again become possible for more. The big "problem" now is AFRICA. Just Nigeria and Ethiopia alone are projected to add 500 million by 2100. A lot of that is already baked in (see pop pyramids for these two). This complicates the desired overall population decline and means resource constraints are still going to get worse. There should be a MAJOR international effort to bring down African birth rates as a major part of fighting climate change and overpopulation ... but religions don't like that.
Is it possible that here in the US, the Forced Birth contingent is driving people to make permanent decisions about their fertility as a way to protect themselves from 2nd class citizenship, breeding sac status and coercion?
Because no one can afford it. Simple.
Exactly. For women, especially, having children is the #1 risk factor for financial ruin (because they tend to end up with the caregiving responsibilities if the couple is unmarried or the marriage breaks up).
Because people, especially women, are victims of rising expectations, otherwise known as running on the hamster wheel.
Why does africa which i would assume is mostly poorer than america have so many births?
@@bagofdoom7693 for real. I'm not saying financial worries play no role but your question makes it plain that it can't be as simple as "can't afford it".
@@bagofdoom7693low iq
The notion that global population decline "will be good for the environment" seems somewhat absurd. Without a tax base, how does the government implement and enforce environmental policy? Countries that have trouble funding basic services don't have robust environmental programs.
How can this generation have families when they can't even move out of their parents home!!! They can't afford to work and barely pay for a car payment and insurance!!!!! Are you kidding!!
Misogyny is ending the world and ppl refuse to just accept that fact. Men don’t want to be better partners so 4b all the way.
I didn.t need to say anything. The comments said it all
Years of abortion on demand, men rejecting fatherhood....
Because the planet is dying stupid.
Yep, you keep telling young people the planet is dying...do you think they want children?
Crocodile Tears
Less humans is less taxes
Less consumer addiction
It ebbs and flows with affluence.
When times are bad family grouping is essential and nonsense is intolerable.
When times are good less tight grouping with fewer rules are allowed - the Germans have a word - verboten (forbidden) - that which isn’t forbidden is allowed.
Bad times breed strong men.
Easy times breed weak men.
I would never try to raise children in this world
That's what they've been saying for hundreds of years. Even the panic of 1000 AD was the end of this decadent, corrupt horrible world lol. They'll still be saying it in 3000 AD lol
That's interesting that we have this idea that you have to perfectly plan the whole day with your kid, when maybe you don't have to.
Wow. Its interesting that stay at home mothers in the past spent less time with their kids than working moms do today.
39:21 That's a good point. There is less of a community to support you
Both of you obviousyl missed the boat🤣Its called clueless
And don't forget to discuss the health: both factors: that both adults and kids are less healthy today than decades ago (both due to environmental factors, poor air quality for example and less nutrition through food even if the family has financial means to have very healthy diet rich in organic fruits and veggies) and the healthcare in the US is a joke: super expensive and the opposite of preventive. Families with kids who have health issues - even having one is financially and mentally and physically exhausting