Population Decline

[Clark Addison]

Of all the ways my Mormon upbringing damaged me, the most egregious is that my brain cannot see this thread without, completely against my will, starting to sing "Zero population is the answer my friend, without it, the rest of us are doomed!"

[Moliere]

This is a much more interesting issue to view from the economic standpoint than the social one, IMO. Economically, I'm not too worried about myself since I'll likely be able to reap a lot of the SS benefits I've been promised since I'm sure things will get reworked as we get closer to insolvency in the SS fund. I'll have enough anyway to retire without SS and I've always planned on never needing SS so anything I get will be a bonus that I can spend on travel or just pass it to my kids. But the interesting thing here is that my kids and their kids will likely get squeezed with higher taxes and worse benefits just to pay for everything that is due today, but I also think that my kids and their kids will make a lot more money than we think relatively. With fewer people to take jobs, wages will naturally go up in the fight for talent and AI will also replace some of that demand...which is a long way to say that I think the system will work itself out and it might even lead to more affordability.

Increased immigration is not the answer in America or anywhere in the world. Increased immigration won't work because the population decline is pretty much happening anywhere. It's brutal in Asia and is bad in Europe, but even in America and South America the trend is not great for maintaining the population. So where will the immigration come from?

Lastly, the choice to not have children is a selfish choice. I'm fine with people making that choice, but we are wired through evolution to desire progeny and it's something that adds purpose to our lives. The lack of a real purpose causes depression, regret and a lot of other things that seem to be absolutely prevalent today. The easier and funner road ends up in a never ending loop of the same stuff only to get to the end of a life and find out you didn't really leave a lasting legacy. No one cares if you started or grew a company, it'll just get bought or it'll disappear once you retire. No one cares how many deals you did. No one cares how much paper you pushed around all day or how many business trips you took.

One of the ironies of life is that to be happy, you need to focus on others and not yourself. The most depressed people I know are the ones that do the most self-care. The happiest people I know are the ones that sacrifice and serve without the expectation of anything in return. Having kids is the ultimate sacrifice and it pays out tenfold or more.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is a much more interesting issue to view from the economic standpoint than the social one, IMO. Economically, I'm not too worried about myself since I'll likely be able to reap a lot of the SS benefits I've been promised since I'm sure things will get reworked as we get closer to insolvency in the SS fund. I'll have enough anyway to retire without SS and I've always planned on never needing SS so anything I get will be a bonus that I can spend on travel or just pass it to my kids. But the interesting thing here is that my kids and their kids will likely get squeezed with higher taxes and worse benefits just to pay for everything that is due today, but I also think that my kids and their kids will make a lot more money than we think relatively. With fewer people to take jobs, wages will naturally go up in the fight for talent and AI will also replace some of that demand...which is a long way to say that I think the system will work itself out and it might even lead to more affordability.

Increased immigration is not the answer in America or anywhere in the world. Increased immigration won't work because the population decline is pretty much happening anywhere. It's brutal in Asia and is bad in Europe, but even in America and South America the trend is not great for maintaining the population. So where will the immigration come from?

Lastly, the choice to not have children is a selfish choice. I'm fine with people making that choice, but we are wired through evolution to desire progeny and it's something that adds purpose to our lives. The lack of a real purpose causes depression, regret and a lot of other things that seem to be absolutely prevalent today. The easier and funner road ends up in a never ending loop of the same stuff only to get to the end of a life and find out you didn't really leave a lasting legacy. No one cares if you started or grew a company, it'll just get bought or it'll disappear once you retire. No one cares how many deals you did. No one cares how much paper you pushed around all day or how many business trips you took.

One of the ironies of life is that to be happy, you need to focus on others and not yourself. The most depressed people I know are the ones that do the most self-care. The happiest people I know are the ones that sacrifice and serve without the expectation of anything in return. Having kids is the ultimate sacrifice and it pays out tenfold or more.

Agree on all counts.

[Moliere]

The WSJ right on cue....

More Americans Are Aging Alone. One Woman Told Us What It’s Like. - WSJ

Kant had long cherished the freedom that came with being single. She prided herself on doing headstands in yoga and walking 5 miles a day. But lately being single has felt like a struggle, and not just because of the weighty financial decisions hanging over her head. Back surgery and a heart valve replacement in the past few years have turned her condominium outside Boston into a recovery ward.

She spends most of her time at home these days recovering from heart surgery complications, with friends stopping by. She finds solace painting in a spare bedroom she turned into a studio, but knows she will eventually have to move to a smaller place that’s easier to get around in.

Kant is among the millions of Americans learning to navigate aging alone. Roughly 10% of the more than 125 million adults ages 50 and older in the U.S.—or at least 12.5 million people—are solo agers who live alone and have neither a spouse nor a child, according to an AARP analysis of census data. It’s a growing demographic hitting both genders, driven in part by climbing divorce rates among older Americans and a rising number of adult children becoming alienated from their parents.

Back in her art studio, Kant processes how her life is set to shift in coming years through painting. She created a series about being alone but being part of a larger world. She also made a collection of autumn leaf portraits that explore aging, decay and the search for where we belong.

“I’m thinking about what my legacy will be,” she said.

Umm, your legacy is likely going to evaporate within months of you dying and no one will remember you after a decade or so when all your friends are dead.

[frank ryan]

Some people shouldn't have kids.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The WSJ right on cue....

More Americans Are Aging Alone. One Woman Told Us What It’s Like. - WSJ





Umm, your legacy is likely going to evaporate within months of you dying and no one will remember you after a decade or so when all your friends are dead.

Yeah, and all those paintings will likely be hauled to the trash a week after she is dead. Sad.

[Moliere]

Some people shouldn't have kids.

I agree…we are talking about Ute fans, right?

[USUC]

Some people shouldn't have kids.

I agree. There are a number of reasons while some probably shouldn't or can't have kids (infertility, genetic diseases, severe mental health disorders, haven't found a spouse/partner), but they are the exception and I think when most people speak about this issue, they aren't pushing for the exceptions to have kids. It's the people who are otherwise capable eschewing it for lifestyle reasons.

[Northwestcoug]

I agree. There are a number of reasons while some probably shouldn't or can't have kids (infertility, genetic diseases, severe mental health disorders, haven't found a spouse/partner), but they are the exception and I think when most people speak about this issue, they aren't pushing for the exceptions to have kids. It's the people who are otherwise capable eschewing it for lifestyle reasons.

The best of my life comes from my family, and it comes at great sacrifice. So I am naturally inclined to agree that in general people should buck up and realize that having children is more worth it than not.

However (and this is not necessarily directed to your post), we need to be really careful about singling out people not having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. We all come from a culture that essentially expects more children than what the natural man/woman is comfortable with. And since birth control is not a taboo anymore we are all making decisions about having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. A lot of them are absolutely valid, but still, could we have had that 5th child? And especially with the upcoming demographic collapse? Sure. But we had lifestyle reasons.

I agree wholeheartedly that there is a certain percentage of humanity that aren't cut out for parenting. The professional people I've come in contact with may have realized that they weren't cut out to be parents or their professional expectations prevented them from being the parent they thought they should be, among other lifestyle reasons. It may doom our current society to allow everyone their freedom to procreate or not, but I'm grateful for my freedom to decide also.

[USUC]

The best of my life comes from my family, and it comes at great sacrifice. So I am naturally inclined to agree that in general people should buck up and realize that having children is more worth it than not.

However (and this is not necessarily directed to your post), we need to be really careful about singling out people not having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. We all come from a culture that essentially expects more children than what the natural man/woman is comfortable with. And since birth control is not a taboo anymore we are all making decisions about having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. A lot of them are absolutely valid, but still, could we have had that 5th child? And especially with the upcoming demographic collapse? Sure. But we had lifestyle reasons.

I agree wholeheartedly that there is a certain percentage of humanity that aren't cut out for parenting. The professional people I've come in contact with may have realized that they weren't cut out to be parents or their professional expectations prevented them from being the parent they thought they should be, among other lifestyle reasons. It may doom our current society to allow everyone their freedom to procreate or not, but I'm grateful for my freedom to decide also.

Fair. To qualify, I generally mean people who choose to have no children due what they perceive will cut into their own quality "me" time. I'd need lying if I didn't fantasize about more me time often. It's an intriguing line of thought. And I only have 2 kids (I'm technically guilty of contributing to the population decline myself)

I'm not a Christian nationalist who wants to impose my will upon women. Of course it is their right to decide what they want to do lifestyle wise. This is the only place I have even piped in on the topic. But I have noticed a general hesitancy to discuss this topic in general even though the implications of it go far beyond letting individuals live the way they want.

[Goatnapper'96]

This is a much more interesting issue to view from the economic standpoint than the social one, IMO. Economically, I'm not too worried about myself since I'll likely be able to reap a lot of the SS benefits I've been promised since I'm sure things will get reworked as we get closer to insolvency in the SS fund. I'll have enough anyway to retire without SS and I've always planned on never needing SS so anything I get will be a bonus that I can spend on travel or just pass it to my kids. But the interesting thing here is that my kids and their kids will likely get squeezed with higher taxes and worse benefits just to pay for everything that is due today, but I also think that my kids and their kids will make a lot more money than we think relatively. With fewer people to take jobs, wages will naturally go up in the fight for talent and AI will also replace some of that demand...which is a long way to say that I think the system will work itself out and it might even lead to more affordability.

Increased immigration is not the answer in America or anywhere in the world. Increased immigration won't work because the population decline is pretty much happening anywhere. It's brutal in Asia and is bad in Europe, but even in America and South America the trend is not great for maintaining the population. So where will the immigration come from?

Lastly, the choice to not have children is a selfish choice. I'm fine with people making that choice, but we are wired through evolution to desire progeny and it's something that adds purpose to our lives. The lack of a real purpose causes depression, regret and a lot of other things that seem to be absolutely prevalent today. The easier and funner road ends up in a never ending loop of the same stuff only to get to the end of a life and find out you didn't really leave a lasting legacy. No one cares if you started or grew a company, it'll just get bought or it'll disappear once you retire. No one cares how many deals you did. No one cares how much paper you pushed around all day or how many business trips you took.

One of the ironies of life is that to be happy, you need to focus on others and not yourself. The most depressed people I know are the ones that do the most self-care. The happiest people I know are the ones that sacrifice and serve without the expectation of anything in return. Having kids is the ultimate sacrifice and it pays out tenfold or more.

Well your social commentary is far more interesting than your economic commentary. But I think you knew that going in and you was just building on common beliefs or something like that.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The best of my life comes from my family, and it comes at great sacrifice. So I am naturally inclined to agree that in general people should buck up and realize that having children is more worth it than not.

However (and this is not necessarily directed to your post), we need to be really careful about singling out people not having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. We all come from a culture that essentially expects more children than what the natural man/woman is comfortable with. And since birth control is not a taboo anymore we are all making decisions about having children for 'lifestyle reasons'. A lot of them are absolutely valid, but still, could we have had that 5th child? And especially with the upcoming demographic collapse? Sure. But we had lifestyle reasons.

I agree wholeheartedly that there is a certain percentage of humanity that aren't cut out for parenting. The professional people I've come in contact with may have realized that they weren't cut out to be parents or their professional expectations prevented them from being the parent they thought they should be, among other lifestyle reasons. It may doom our current society to allow everyone their freedom to procreate or not, but I'm grateful for my freedom to decide also.

Huh?

We are not "singling out people". We are commenting on overall societal trends. And the fact of the matter is that the aggregate birthrate that modern society is trending to for "lifestyle reasons" is effectively suicidal. That's an objective fact.

[Northwestcoug]

Huh?

We are not "singling out people". We are commenting on overall societal trends. And the fact of the matter is that the aggregate birthrate that modern society is trending to for "lifestyle reasons" is effectively suicidal. That's an objective fact.

I didn't say you nor anyone else was singling out anyone. I was making the observation that it is difficult to judge the relative merits of lifestyle reasons, since we all have them and we've planned our families accordingly.

Agree completely about the larger implications of demographics.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I didn't say you nor anyone else was singling out anyone. I was making the observation that it is difficult to judge the relative merits of lifestyle reasons, since we all have them and we've planned our families accordingly.

Agree completely about the larger implications of demographics.

In this particular context, I don't think it is difficult at all.

[Northwestcoug]

In this particular context, I don't think it is difficult at all.

Yes, in the context of population demographics. But individually who are you or I to judge our lifestyle reasons are better than anyone else's when considering family planning?

I think we're in pretty close agreement with the problem here. I just feel uncomfortable giving blanket accusations based on seflishness to people who aren't procreating.