What Are Countries Doing About Declining Birth Rates?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- lots, and none of it works
If you want to support more videos like this one, I have a patreon:
/ toycat
This is the "scratch off" map I use to track which countries I've been to:
amzn.to/45ZsPlE
/ toycat - Subreddit community! For discussions on all the things you see on this channel
Check out my probably main channel at / ibxtoycatletsplays
Also on twitter @ibxtoycat
Something people don’t like to talk about is pensions. For most of history, your children were your retirement plan and your insurance. This economic incentive is removed in the modern day.
Why have children when other people’s children will fund your retirement?
@@vacantile theoretically you're funding your own retirement through taxes but that is not how it actually works. however with smart economic decisions you can basically pay for your own retirement.
Women's education is a huge driver of population loss. Afghanistan top the chart.
Just feels to me like if you want there to be an "economic incentive" for child-rearing then you're approaching parenthood with completely the wrong attitude.
Not really its just indirect, its still the young people paying those pensions
"If you don't feel stable in your life, you're not going to have children"
-Toycat, after showing that the highest birth rate countries are war zones
So why is Ukraine so low .Even though it's at war
@@carkawalakhatulistiwaone anomaly doesn’t disprove the trend
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa Because its a post enlightenment industrialised country.
War zones is not the same as financial stability. The latter is caused by modern society and how it is structured.
The factor behind the growth in fertility in war zones is _mortality salience,_ which is an individual's awareness of their own death, it is the psychological impact of contemplating death.
Preindustrial revolution, 40% of people did not reach adulthood, medicine was about making you bleed to cure you, and a small cut could be a death sentence. So people were very much aware of how easy they could die, especially with god and religion being prominent.
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa Ukraine war is regional to its eastern side, but the economical impact, plus the huge refugees leaving the country makes it harder, especially since most of the population was urbanized compared to, let's say, Afghanistan.
Imagine people from old times finding out not having enough babies is the worlds biggest problem they’d never believe it
next to climate change
It isn't the biggest problem.
It indeed happened in Rome.
Less workers. Economy decline, lack of taxes. Pensioners becoming the biggest demographic cohort and youth the least. So rise of taxes. And so on@@petterbirgersson4489
@@YMandarinCliemate change doesn't exist.
Surprisingly most countries have this issue, but Japan and Korea get singled out because they wont take immigrants.
Korea has compulsory military service many don’t want their sons serving or marry foreigners to avoid this.
Japan, Korea and Chinas rates for decades have been catastrophic and much worse if compared to north-western Europe who have had much better rates by comparison over time. (France, UK, Scandinavia) and the rest of Europe have had much worse rates than north-western Europe, but not quite as bad as China Japan and South Korea, except Italy and Germany, who have had the problem for longest in the entire world (since 1975)
They don't want to be altered beyond recognition.
@@charlesrhodes1089 Nailed it.
@@charlesrhodes1089Primitive low iq way of thinking. We don’t live in the 1800’s anymore. They could import only high iq people from around the world, but they prefer not to because “we’ll look a little different”. Haha what a Stone Age way of thinking.
Giving benefits after birth is not gonna help when the problem is that young people cannot get established in the world. No money, no houses, increased taxes are all issues that need to be solved in order for people to have children.
People also go on about how poor countries have more kids, but that's because everyone is poor. If my life is comparable to the vast majority of people around me, then there's a big chance I would consider myself established enough for a kid. When I can see that some 10% of people are doing so much better than me and I can't possibly hope to reach them by working hard, then there's a big chance I won't have children.
On top of just the "considering yourself established" problem, there's also the huge problem that the vast majority of people want to provide a good life for their children. And that good life is out of the window when a significant part of the population is just doing way better than you. Your kid is going to come home and ask why the fuck do all other families have expensive stuff while we don't. Maybe you can have one generation who doesn't care, but the next one will just refuse to have children until they seem themselves at that level.
So yeah until we change the world to help young people exist, there will be no children.
Thats the dummest thing I’ve ever heard. You won’t have children because of the top 10%? If everyone thinks that our population would literally crash to the ground in the next 5 years. And it won’t, so you’re wrong.
People in undeveloped countries see people on social media that are rich and famous. Also your painting this absurd picture that these countries with high birth rates are in jungle eating plants and berries. Countries like Algeria have a higher birth rates but still have billionaires and millionaire with wealthy people around them.
Complete cope.
Hungary's legislation makes sense to me. Women would be compensated for years lost in the workforce (thus lower wages) by not paying tax
fair point, but an expensive principle!
Here in Sweden the state will give "newbies" (non swedes) A LOT of help with housing and work. Meanwhile homelessness has gotten so bad amongst Swedes that the state literally censors and contorts numbers. Like in 2023 it was the record for death amongst the homeless by freezing to death in winter. Then it was quickly buried when people started talking about it!
edit; to see if comment got auto deleted
Women getting in workforce created all of this problems, they need to stay at home and take care of it
@@ibx2catThe only event in modern history where the birth rate collapse was successfully reverse direction is 1967. when the dictatorship Romanian 🇷🇴 communist government banned abortion, causing the birth rate to jump from 1.90 in 1966 jump to 3.66 in 1967 and ending up stable at 2.44 -2.22 in the 1973-1989 period. and then the brith rate fell again simultaneously with the fall of the Romanian communist party.
But Hungary government policy it has no impact at all
Here's my reasonably hot take: Economic incentives do not work because the problem is not predominantly economic, but cultural. The high cost of living indeed influences birth rates, but I would argue that 40/50 years ago, in most countries, the cost of living was not as high as it is today, and the birth rate was still below replacement. Consider also that even today, the birth rate of the middle-high/high class is not so different from middle-class people. We have so many expectations put on child rearing and so little community support from neighbours or family members (since family size reduced dramatically) that it becomes impossible for most people to even consider having kids.
This is demonstrated by the fact that, in developed countries, religiosity is the best predicator for having kids. And not just amongst migrant groups. In terms of causes, part of it is community support, but I suspect a bigger part is earlier age at marriage. If woman gets married at thirty, she has maybe 8 years of decent fertility left. It's possible to have 4 kids in that time, but much more difficult than if she'd started having kids at 25. And if nobody is having large families, then maintaining an average significantly above 2 is mathematically difficult.
It's mostly due to a lack of hope for a better future. Governments increasingly don't address the needs of their people, rather focusing on promoting the interests of business classes. When you combine that with lives that feel only geared to be useful workers, business practices that simply squeeze as much as they can from people to go along with enshittification, and numerous 'once in a lifetime events' most people of that age have gone through with little support you get a situation where people will not want to bother bringing kids into the world and instead spend what free time they have on themselves. This situation is most acute in east Asia where their work cultures are the most insane.
Simply giving people money or tax breaks for having kids is not going to work, as has been proven repeatedly when those policies are implemented. Governments need to implement policies so people don't feel squeezed in their day to day lives and have extra free time to spend for themselves and potentially spend time with their kids if they decide to have them.
Comparing the birthrates of two groups in a state of financial stability (middle class and up) doesn't reflect well on the reality of people living paycheck to paycheck, of which I do believe there is an increasing amount lately. I don't think how much spare money you have makes a big difference (as you point out) but having any spare money or not probably makes a very substantial difference.
@@Jack93885 What you are saying sounds intuitive, but it gets very quickly proven wrong when you look into the low class birth rate, as they have the highest number among developed countries. In fact, the countries that seem to have the highest birth rate in the world are the ones riddled with war and poverty. I'm not saying that the economic aspect is irrelevant, but for sure it's not the main driving force.
Yes theyre just a patch on a syndrome and the root of the problem is ignored as it is deep and huge. Modern society in first World countries simply isnt healthy and made to fail
The decline of religious affiliation is a major factor. People who follow a faith have more kids. I go to a free protestant church of sorts nothing that tends to supersize families like Mormons or Catholics however having 3 to 4 kids is the norm.
I then go to work and 40 year old guys are having their first baby with their 38 or 39 year old partners.
Age of having first child is actually far more important than the number of children you have
As the child will mature "faster" in relative to the rest of the population and thus be able to have their own children and then the cycle continues
What happens when birthrates decline in Africa and the Middle East? Immigration will no longer be a "solution" to declining birth rates.
It is a temporary fix. Ideally it will equal out globally and we all become a mixed globalised united humanity lol i guess that is unavoidable no matter what, if we continue to exist and develope for the next centuries
Absolutely. The world population will start to decline from about 2085 as there will be no country with growing birth rate, according to current projections.
They've already declined there but there are declining fast I mean Lebanon supposedly it's at 1.3 kids Iran is only at 1.67 the Middle Eastern part of turkey is falling fast and as a whole turkey only has a 1.51 TFR Morocco is probably at 2.0 and Tunisia is at 1.6 everywhere is falling fast really
I'd wager shrinking populations in wealthy countries and the rise of AI/automation there could go quite well together if managed with a bit of foresight and empathy.
Tho I doubt that will happen because both are like water in a desert when talking about how we as humans generally manage things.
0:23 Hey, I made and maintain that map and by quite the coincidence I just updated it to the newest data a few hours ago.
You can find it on the Total Fertility Rate wikipedia page.
(It's supposed to have a sans serif font, I guess Toycat doesn't have the same fonts installed that I do though.)
That's super fun! This is in the Opera browser, I'd be surprised to learn it doesn't have sans serif installed by default haha
@@ibx2cat the SVG image format is quite a difficult one to work with and get perfect and I'm little more than a beginner with it so it doesn't really surprise me with the fonts falling back in a weird way. I doubt this is a problem with Opera.
@@ibx2catThe only event in modern history where the birth rate collapse was successfully reverse direction is 1967. when the dictatorship Romanian 🇷🇴 communist government banned abortion, causing the birth rate to jump from 1.90 in 1966 jump to 3.66 in 1967 and ending up stable at 2.44 -2.22 in the 1973-1989 period. and then the brith rate fell again simultaneously with the fall of the Romanian communist party.
4:37 It doesn't matter if more children are born if they leave as soon as they can...
A decline in population can actually be good for people. Houses will become cheaper because demand will be lower. People could ask for higher wages because the demand will be higher and the supply lower.
Yes it is unnatural to have infinite growth. The actual problem is that our economy and systems are based on exactly that.
I think the problem is more that there would be more old people who can’t work. If mortality rate went up then economically population decline is fine.
@@melvingamer If there wre fewer people, then it is true that there would be fewer workers in the economy, but there would also be correspondingly fewer customers. It's not like businesses are like "crap we still have to make all this stuff, who's going go fill our jobs, better offer them more"; they would simply have less stuff to make, and therefore fewer jobs, which would cancel out the effect of there being fewer people to fill those jobs. A declining population doesn't lead to a better-paid workforce, just a lot of lost jobs and collapsed businesses.
As for housing, there's one country that has a lower population today than it did before the industrial revolution - Ireland. So you'd think that they'd have plenty of housing. But actually they have one of the worst housing shortages in the entire world.
In theory you are correct.
In practice municipalities more frequently tear down properties people once lived in as they decay as the banks who own them refuse to lower their price.
As for wages, what you say is correct in a closed system- one without immigrants willing to take slave wages.
@@Joe-Przybranowski Immigrants have the same effect. They are labourers but they are also consumers. They increase the supply of labour *but also the demand for it,* overall they don't affect wages much as these two effects cancel out.
Half of young people still do not go to university and uni is massively over subscribed. Starting work at 16 is normal and natural if you start at 25 you have wasted your best decade.
In Australia u gotta stay at school until 17 nearly / yr 12 unless u go to tafe (trade school and general courses) or get an apprenticeship
Tbf doesnt help that they made college essentially mandatory, even if you do get a job/placement you still have to attend a college sector. E.g. if you leave school, then get a job as an electrician, you still have to 'be in education', which just mean go to college once a week i think.Makes me wonder which college director made them do that rule.
There aren't enough of these works without qualifications. It's a good thing that the population declines.
Work in the modern world isnt just physical, what a ridiculous thing to say 16-25 is the best decade to spent working 😂 it is the best decade to get educated
No way was that my best decade
Why would anyone want to have kids in a dying world when people can't afford it
Another problem is that even migrants end up having less and less babies by the 2nd, even 1st, generation after moving. Similar to the native population.
So the problem is more systematic and cultural.
Problem is society has fundamentally shifted children provided future stability and or free labour now people just see them as a burden to their luxury lifestyle, it’ll be interesting to see what societal norms change as depopulation becomes a worldwide phenomenon, whatever will happen their will definitely be a backlash to anti-natal sentiment that’s becoming prominent today
lifestyle inflation and kids are exact opposites, it's true!
luxurious lifestyle? buddy, the average joe lives from paycheck to paycheck, trying to not fall into poverty while dealing with inflation and an unstable economy, as well as having other bills to worry about, this is not a luxurious lifestyle
as for the response to the low birth rates, im sure artificial wombs will be a thing, however, its an ethical question on how such technology is gonna be used, either for survival of the human species or creating more obedient slaves for the corporate class
lol 😂 make sure you have many children to be the change you want to see.
The only event in modern history where the birth rate collapse was successfully reverse direction is 1967. when the dictatorship Romanian 🇷🇴 communist government banned abortion, causing the birth rate to jump from 1.90 in 1966 jump to 3.66 in 1967 and ending up stable at 2.44 -2.22 in the 1973-1989 period. and then the brith rate fell again simultaneously with the fall of the Romanian communist party.
Nice video as always, funny how i discovered this channel after you're awkward driving attempt on Conquer Driving.
Israel is still growing, mostly due to Jewish culture.
Give a free house to people who say they want children - if they don't have a child in four years, take back the house and charge them for the past year/ give them a mortgage to buy off the house as normal.
Nah just give them a free Villa and lambo and a ps5 for every child 🤡
Northern Ireland is the part of the UK with the highest birth rate. The reason for this is maybe something to do with the troubles & all. Also the higher rural population. Like we have 6 major cities Lisburn, Bangor, Belfast, Derry/Londonderry, Craigavon & Ballymena (which isn't a city just a large settlement) we have a few other bigish settlements like Newtonards & Newry (which is a city but smaller than bloody ards). Basically anything below newry in population have less than 28,000 people. So if I do the math 1,046,869 (863,674 living in urban areas) people don't live in urban areas give or take. Also the fact that we are quite poor also makes us have a higher birth rate. NI is just kinda in a situation that let's it become large. So how we fix the birthrate problem is follow whatever is done here.
Not really the poorer and less developed a place the higher the birthrates. If northern ireland would become as developed as england for example it would have the same issue. The problem is to develop AND maintain birthrates
@@ArdaSReal yea but there is also a lot of cultural aspects. I recognise that if we developed more it'd remove that but we aren't really set up for anything. We've tried to build up the old shipyards of the titanic quarter & develop but that's been a pretty big failure & we mainly still rely on British taxes to keep us from falling apart as most people work in the civil service or something relating to it. We have a good deal of tourism due to things like GOT but we don't really do that well. We are always the slowest however to adopt things the rest of the UK has such as abortion only becoming legal in the last 4 years & likely will become illegal again soon enough knowing how Sinn Fein & the DUP feel about it. We likely just need the right conditions to allow us to keep a relatively high birth rate but its still declining just at a slower rate to the rest of the UK.
It's sad to see towns and bloodlines die out, but I don't blame people for not having any kids. Jobs (low level) don't pay enough to support families like they used to in the past, college/university is insanely expensive, housing is insanely expensive, cars are insanely expensive, medical care (in the states, idk about other places) is expensive, corporations are out of control, divorce and fatherless children is rampant, immigrants (many of them illegal) are given benefits and incentives while you get nothing in the very country you're born in, crime and corruption have skyrocketed, the weather and environment have gone to shit, and the recent social medias and popular culture is absolutely ROTTING away the minds of the younger people.
UK has very expensive childcare costs & housing is expensive.
Big contributors to not feeling stable enough to have kids, for sure!
Not at all that’s a complete cope for the real issue. The poorest countries have the most children so that cannot be the cause.
More women are working so they are not interested in children. That’s the trend, more women’s rights = less children but we get massive economic growth with women working so we had a population boom for a while due to a massive increase in recourses.
That’s over.
It's because of massive amounts of immigration; people aren't able to get housing, health care, school places. Then there's the threat of terrorism and crime going up in general in 'certain areas'. People can't have children anymore.
@@Unknown24466 Yh so western culture and not cost of living. We agree
@@griefwnl7641In a lot of these poorer countries, many families work agriculturally and have their children work the farm at a very young age. This 'free' labour is the only way the family can provide enough income to sustain themselves. The same thing used to be common in western countries.
Instead of promoting lots of parental leave, I think we should promote parental telework. The parent gets paid, spend time with their kids, and save on daycare. Plus, companies get productivity. A win-win.
Germanics collectively doing absolutely nothing
How about people start saving for their own retirement fund rather than relying on an obviously unsustainable inflow of young people that work and pay for someone else's retirement while they are barely left with enough for themselves. basically public pensions are a scam.
Impossible - electoral success is linked to the increasing elderly population
@@supersuede91 that doesn't align with the age demographics of those who voted Labour. Pensioners was the lowest.
Their kind off the point of the goverment, a huge party of the contract. Very sad how modern society is this unsustainable
@@talebm5008 i don't know much about uk politics but i'm pretty sure both parties won't risk the elderly population, both parties are automatically pro pensions, if they weren't then they have no chance. so it's not a lefft vs right thing.
lol.. not it’s not. We have superannuation in Australia that pays for our retirement. The employer pays between 10-20% on top of one’s salary into an account that can’t be accessed until retirement age (unless you have good reason to access it before then) . If you spend 40 years working you should have a decent balance to retire on at 65.. or 67.
I had an idea while watching this, specifically for South Korea. They have insane competition to get jobs at the big companies like Samsung and will do anything for a leg up. If they were to do some sort of affirmative action for hiring parents, I could see a lot of people getting married and having kids for a greater chance to get one of those prized jobs.
I find it amusing that when Hungary has a financial incentive to have more kids it's considered 'right wing', but when Britain has a financial disincentive discouraging people having more kids it's also 'right wing'.
Basically, there is nothing right or left wing about having kids.
Population collapse i.e no more slaves to milk 😂
Sure but it also means no more cushy benefits you get from the welfare state that you claim to love (pensions, paid holidays, free healthcare, free education)
@@inbb510 I don't love them, never did.
@@ahsaniqbal5084, maybe you don't but many do and still adopt this attitude that the welfare state can just operate out of thin air which is frustrating.
The world also have an overpopulation problem, it's just that the economy require perpetual growth which you can't maintain with a declining population, thus the need to increase the population in an already overpopulated society, such as is the case for China as an example, is pretty much like an addiction that causes withdrawal symptoms if you go without.
I wonder why Sweden birthrate is higher than Hungary... hmm
been living in the UK, if your options are to rent a room with other strangers also renting a room in the same house you don't really have the space even if you wanted to have kids.
Promoting immigrants in your country is also bad for the country - i.e. doctors and Engineers leaving Nigeria or the Phillipines, lowers the access and quality to healthcare and infrastructure in Nigeria and the Phillipines.
Duuuuude your Channel Name is waaay to hard to remember. Some time Ago i watched your Videos a lot. Then i somehow lost your channel and had several attempts to find it again. It took me 2 years to finally find your channel…just today
Just like ToyCat has immigrated to ToyCat2 due to declining viewership on ToyCat1
Abortion in the UK is now around 250K and if you ban it, you'll be up to replacement level even accounting for the black market. You can also ban contraception or make it more difficult to acquire. The incentives people are talking about will not make a difference.
I believe parents need to be able to rely on communities to raise children, as it was for most of humanity we lived in bigger groups than just our direct family like know. If the mother goes working she should be able to rely on other, older retired people, neighbours friends, other mothers and institutions to take care of the children. At the same time countries have to start prioritising happiness and development not just sheer wealth through infinite growth
Countries should accept it, jobs are getting more automated, more robots are on the horizon. Having children that will probably grow up and just be unemployed is not what most people want...
well except that as we get more automated we are going to have alot more time to innovate and invent. I large reason in the last few decades we have seen unprecidented growth is due to the fact we can spend more time doing things other then just worrying when our next meal is.
Oh no my child will not work because ChatGPT😢
@@ArdaSReal It's not will not work, it's can't work. How many people work farms or factories nowadays? Millions less than there used to because of automation...
Cost of living is too high for children. Gut the governments spending and taxes and focus on making gas cheap and kids will follow.
That would unfortunately pollute the atmosphere for the next generations. We need to get carbon levels down somehow.
how would making gas cheap result in more kids???
How would cutting government spending on healthcare, childcare, education and social benefits increase birth rates? It would lead to a social collapse instead. The opposite should be done - we should increase taxes on the rich (maybe even nationalize their property) and massively increase the government spending on education, housing etc.
@@ibx2cat Because gas is needed to run society. Its price effects everything down the supply chain.
Solution: Remove social services for the elderly and have a culture where the young are expected to house and take care of the elderly. This incentivising young people right now to have children because who is going to take care of them when they are old.
That doesn’t work seeing as many Asian countries also have declining birth rates and are obsessed with the young looking after the old. Just deal with the fact many women and men don’t want to have four or five children. Humans adapt so we just got to adapt to the new normal instead of trying to flog a dead horse and whinge about there not being enough children being born.
What's the point if you are replacing your own people/culture with a different culture? In that case you have a good population growth, but it's not for the benefit of your society.
1000th video!!!
There is literally nothing you can do. This issue will destroy our society as we know it.
I think AI and robots will come in clutch to fill the gap
@@supersuede91 lowkey they could save the day
@@supersuede91yeah. Japan is already on it.
I think there is a simple solution but we'll never implement it before a crash
X amount of kids for a free house or mortgage forgiveness would be great.
In the UK, it's very difficult to get housing, health care, school places, etc. due to uncontrolled immigration. Plus, people don't feel as safe as they used to, so are less likely to want children. The native population has decreased, while the foreign population has increased, although I think this is part of the plan.
It is but you have it twisted. The migration is whats keeping the numbers up and the country rolling, like it or not. Also how is it uncontrolled, youre not part of the EU anymore? England without migration will quickly shrink to 30mil people and lets see how happy you will be then.
housing, health care, and schooling is not limited because of immigration. The true problem is an economy thst prioritizes profits over people.
@@twinyang1770 An increase in demands has obviously put pressure on the supply of the things you mentioned.
Do you think Nigeria, Kazakhstan and Afghanistan have a higher birthrates because the government there is giving their citizens loads of free money 😂?
Religion is what keeps them breeding.
you can also increase your productivity. Something most Western European countries really should be doing but haven’t basically haven’t in the last 2 decades (by the recent EU report).
The solution is more alcohol, and remove the agelimmit, that's how teenagers get's pregnant!
Singapore has an interesting way of doing things too! 😂
This is massive exaggeration.Looking at the birthrate right now is silly, you need to look at it over the last 45 years to understand the country situation and the UK rate has been 1 of the best in the developed world, in fact it's similar to Sweden and Denmark over time and only inferior to France by a small margin.The countries with a severe crisis coming in the next 10 years are Germany Italy and all of central eastern and southern Europe as well as South Korea, China and Japan - but Germany and Italy have had the crisis longer
How is it silly if you want to predict the future? Ofc you look at current birthrates
@@ArdaSReal because you have to identify what's the problem with low birth rates and then at what level they become a serious problem.For example, automation is going to eventually make up for the shortfall, but this probably won't be for at least another decade or more, and then the problem will not be the birth rates, but how the population that cannot find work have managed to gain a sufficient "universal allowance" from the government , which they deserve and yet corporations will try to pay no tax because current tax rules don't cover automation
*Ultimately, when countries that have had extremely low birth rates for several decades start to have a crisis (hasn't really happened anywhere yet), then you are probably going to see skilled and unskilled young workers looking to other developed country to work to send money back to their families who over time will have their services cut because there won't be enough money in tax revenues to pay for everyone.This might solve the problems that countries without the imminent earth rate problem will have if they don't solve the problem in the long-term e.g. having enough workers to produce tax revenues to maintain services.
*The countries that have had an extremely low birthrate (under 1.7 for over 45 years ) will probably be in this boat within a decade.The only countries in this situation are Germany and Italy.Then you have countries who have had the problem for only 40 years, but even lower levels e.g. below 1.4) These are China, Japan and South Korea.
Ironically war might be a key factor, considering israel has a high fertility rate.
Not war but the Island effect.
my theory for the drop in 2002 was because less people wanted to … after 9/11. i have no source for this.
It should not be a bad thing that the population declines. You only need to adapt the society: Automation, favor collective living for older people, preventative healthcare etc.
I like this idea, I’m just not sure it gets to the root of the issue. Tax payers still have to pay for these social programs
Our systems are based on infinite growth, same mistake as companies
Pretty much nothing.
Western countries want you to have more kids but than they make everything so expensive. Me and my wife are looking to move to her country in Eastern Europe because it doesn’t make sense financially to leave where we do especially if we want more than just our one child.
A couple years ago, one of my a level teachers asked about our classes plans for kids. Literally no one had plans for kids
@@hircenedaelen You can't really plan to have kids until you're in a serious relationship - not necessarily engaged, but living together. Because "let's have kids" is something that two people decide on together.
So it's not surprising that sixth-formers weren't thinking about it.
But what is the point of increasing birth rates in a world with declining natural resource supply, e.g. water?
Water is not declining though; we have the water cycle for reason; and isn’t the ice melting due to climate change? That would bring more water into the system.
@@davisvoelzke8011 Many scientists disagree with you.
The technology for harvesting ice melt before it becomes salinated is somewhat clunky, and some of what is harvested today is not used for fresh drinking water ... but for niche products like Iceberg Vodka. And the supply of ice melt is not infinite, either. At best, it's a stop gap.
Desalination is currently both expensive and energy intensive, although innovation in that sector is ongoing.
It is though! Artesian basins and rivers have been sucked dry due to terrible industrial farming practices. Google it. It’s not good. Technology is waaaaaay behind
HOLY MOLY i cant believe Hungary got all that legislation to pass, very cool
"In the meantime we can borrow the people from the countries that have too many" No, it's that thinking that got us into this position to begin with; abortion alone did not destroy birth-rates correlation does not equal causation for there has to be substantive link to make a relationship between the 2 statistics. If we going to do the statistics thing do it properly or not at all cause were just misleading people otherwise.
Not at all migration is the single thing that is keeping the west alive, like it or not. Its also why the USAs future is brightest compared to the rest of the west and why south korea, japans etc. Future will be so much worse. Ofc migration from poor undeveloped countries brings problems too, but despite that its the biggest advantage of the west and that is fact
@@ArdaSReal Well like it or not insisting it works doesn't make it true all of a sudden. Also I didn't say anything about poor people from under developed countries that's a non sequitur. Anything else?
@@TheOriginalJAX the wests future is only looking better than eastern europes because of migration. Yes it is proven to be working it's intended purpose
So only allow women to work if they have at least 2 children? Probably wasn’t done before
I know some people will get angry about this. This is as obviously satirical as was possible to me
Not a bad idea, but I would just bar full time work from women at first, then eventually bar most kinds of work from women, so it's less a shock to the system and to give time for women to find a partner.
That's pretty cringe of you.
14:42 *SO real* :(
Western countries with Islamic population. Better speak clearly.
Children use to be a resource to their parent, now they have become a burden. Make it so parent can have like 5% of their kids income when they start working, i'd have 100 kids just for the money
effectively we do that with pensions, you live of working peoples taxes, but without a requirement to produce your own working age people.
Toxic Diet increased radiation limited resources... Be nice to have a few mill in UK instead of 68...as long as I'm one of em!
or maybe we can create an economic system that does not rely on growing birth rates. Do we really need more people on this planet? to the point that we're incentivising people to procreate even if they don't feel like doing it?
It seems like a Good idea, but it would take so much time and effort to destroy the system. Our entire system is based on increasing birth rate
What kind of system do you suggest? Cause every economic system currently in existence requires the population to at the very least get replaced close to 1 to 1 to not collapse long term. Workforce can't be generated out of thin air
The welfare system you love literally works because of a growing/stable population.
@@inbb510 where in my comment did i ever said that i love the welfare system? All i ever said is that we need new system that does not rely on growing birth rate.
We can’t expect the population to keep growing.
@@takakocaesar579 , we can't expect it to keep growing but we can expect it to be stable with intermittent ups and downs.
But a declining population simple will not be a functional society unless you go back living a caveman style society or a capitalist society where the function of a nation doesn't depend on the welfare state.
Educating children is expensive. Its mucher cheaper if we repalce the population with adults from places like Ukraine and Africa.
Educating is still always worth it, and adults are the biggest group migrating
@@ArdaSReal It depends on the standard of education. Sometimes you can make someone more dumb than they would have been without any education.
wow you used so many words and haven’t said shit
Guys here me out: robots!
Speed it up please .
that green strip to the left of the chair is so distracting, literally unwatchable
You use Al Jazeera? Do you use RT also? 😂😂
So many women haters in the comments showing their true colours. Toycat even explicitly said that most of the world’s countries with high birth rates have terrible things happening in them, and the incels are like “yeah, we want that!”. 🤡
women are blamed for everything, because its easier to do that than to fix a broken economic system that needs more slaves
Well if they didn't make it a punishment for having children out of wed lock then people would be having a lot more children.
Like child support, and that entire system basically scares off most of the dudes even before they can have kids.
You think child support is hurting Birt rates😂 pls never have a child, may the world never be cursed with your genes lmao
What a dumb analysis by Politico. Hungary clearly shows the most improvement since introduction of discussed policies, while France just keeps slowly declining.
People who choose not to have children should be denied access to government assistance when they get older. To expect the offspring of others to foot the bill for your care when you made no contribution to the population is selfish.
No
Forcing your own children to pay for your retirement is just as selfish
But they too have been paying tax all their adult working life. Does that count for nothing?
No you pay taxes your whole life, if the goverment can't keep its end of the deal than the goverment failed. How dumb are? Everyone who isn't old yet is also paying the pension of others now, if they are older themselfs they have earned the right for their pension. Use your brain a little
@@princesstm, not really. The economy doesn't care about your contributions if there aren't enough younger people to perpetuate that economy.
If you are relying other people's children to care for you when you yourself didn't contribute to this specific thing, then society should penalise this action through higher taxes on single/childfree people (either through lower pensions or harder access to care).
I've spent a lot of time thinking about this and reading lots of takes on it and I'd say the primary correlation for lower birth rates is increased education levels. Especially among the least educated quartile, once they start getting educated enough they stop having teen and/or unplanned pregnancies, and this really lowers the birth rate. Making the population dumber isn't really an option (and calls into question if this low birth rate trend is even reversible on a multi-century timescale...)
The broad social attitude also seems be quite important. That is if there is a stigma attached towards having lots of children then the birth rate will be lower; however in more religious societies the birth rate is often higher due to having lots of children being viewed pretty positively.
All this said it seems to me that lower birth rates are by-and-large a good thing, not because of decreased environmental impact (the effect is actually fairly minor), but because there are more natural resources per person it increases the wealth per person and everyone gets a bit richer the fewer people are around. I'm aware the tech bros have a totally different view on this, they think more people means more innovation-derived economic growth, but I haven't seen any evidence for this.
Honestly TFRs of between 1.0 and 3.0 seem fine to me. Areas of concern to me are sub-Saharan Africa, which just needs help in general; Pakistan, which has a worryingly high fertility rate based on its starting conditions; and South Korea, the only country to have a TFR so low I'd actually worry about it causing economic problems down the line. Most of these politicians and/or nationalists just like ruling a more powerful country, which having more people gives you. Nobody gives a damn what Denmark has to say, even though they (or a country like them) really should be the one the world is listening to.
But if you _really_ want to raise the fertility rate then focus on making it cool to have kids. Cheaper housing wouldn't hurt either.
Yh, making it cool to have kids. Feminism destroyed that.
In some countries, especially in Europe, the decline in population is not driven by the low fertility rate, but by the rapidly aging population. Politicians push for more natalist policies just to replace those elderly people that are dying.
@@J.o.s.h.u.a. that’s logically flawed. If people are living longer and getting older, this should push the population up as there’s less turnover at the dying portion of the stats.
@@griefwnl7641 Sorry, I think I didn't explain myself well.
In the original comment, it was stated that a TFR between 1.0 and 3.0 is not a problem. In some European countries it is, because the fertility rate is made worse by the rapidly aging population. There aren't enough children to replace the elderly people. In many countries, this means that soon we will have more elderly people than workers and because pensions are paid by the workers, the government won't have enough money to pay people's pensions and this will lead to the downfall of the welfare system. This is why in these countries the tolerance for fertility rate needs to be higher and why politicians are pushing for more natalist policies.
I think my mistake was saying that the problem was people dying. Let me rectify: the problem is not them dying, it's them getting old, which means they are not going to work. Sorry for the confusion.
Sweden has a nigher birthright than Hungary because of Muslim immigrant women. Ethnic Swedish women do not have a higher birthrate than ethnic Hungarian women.
Technically, the Vatican State/Holy See is an independent state. They have a birth rate of approximately 0, which is lower than both Hong Kong and South Korea.
Because there aren’t any hospitals in Vatican City. Furthermore, all citizens of Vatican City are male
Just ban tiktok and teach kids patriotic values instead of letting them do bad things.
Here's a controversial but I think valid opinion: If we want western countries to have more children, we have to stop women from working full time jobs, and eventually completely bar women from working This will not only guarantee less single parent homes, which are huge drains on the economy and society, eventually prices will have to go down because companies will have to price homes, goods, and services for single income households again. The way I see things, we can choose this, or a total societal collapse from men refusing to work the hard jobs because there is no wife or kids to support, which is what is currently happening.
Tbh, i dont agree with stopping women from working/doing whatever they want, but that would work, just logically speaking. But theres also the social issues that have caused men and women stop getting together and having kids, not just financial. So im not even 100% sure that would fix it. And to be honest i think the government and companies wouldnt let that happen either since now its less taxable income and less work being done.
This isn't a solution.
Any country that does sets themselves up to do worse than other countries so no country would want to do it.
Your talking about market crash levels of economic set back and people will not be happy with this sort of change.
Additionally this puts economic dependence on the man. I don't know if you realise but a lot of men would find this sort of thing unfair, why should they slave away and never get to spend time with their children? And with no female working they need to work twice as hard.
Why would a female go to university or college if they can't work? Now more females drop out of education and the democratic system works less and less since people don't know what they are voting for.
And if someone could already afford single parent homes then they are already doing a good enough job, they just need to find a partner. Why should they now be forced to not work and become reliant on someone else.
Basically thats a really bad take.
Give mid 30s year old women their pick of 20 year old men. It's when they want children the most. Just a modern form of national service.
Prices will go down yes... But factories and businesses everywhere would close, the local businesses would move processes abroad and local businesses would be forced out of business by foreign brands since they can't keep up with their output now that they lose half their work force.
The price will not change referential to how it is now, if anything it is referentially higher. Yes it dropped, but compared to how much money they have now it's more expensive.
And men are not refusing high pay jobs because they can't support someone else right now... No one is refusing high paying jobs. The real truth is that the supply of high paying jobs is lower as a percentage which you can see in graphs like the comparison between the cost of housing and wage growth.
My first comment isn't showing, but yeah... This is a really bad take.
1st
Its simple why a 26 year old curting a 16 year old a crime? Change the mind and laws 10 year age differnce is nothing, and a 26 year old can provide for a family.
Hahahah I didn’t even think about that wtf