U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:23 PM
 
2,514 posts, read 1,837,071 times
Reputation: 3370

Advertisements

Robots and technology can replace many jobs human previous conducted. So we don't need as many people, we will need more engineers and techy people, along with more human relationship personals. But less cashiers in retail store, less assembly line worker, we might even come up with more solutions in next 20 years

I want to say better policy = paid maternity leave, culture of not getting penalized for time off to raise kids, more professional part time jobs for mothers who want part of both world..etc But the countries who have these benefits like Europe and Canada, I don't think their birth number has gone up much. So does it really work

As an older millennia who is dealing with TTC/infertility, I found myself thinking about wanting a healthy baby who will make the world a better place only to stop midpoint & think "Why does my kid have to save the world, why can't I save the world. Why can't i do everything I want my imaginary child to do". And that thought process made my desire of wanting kid little less important. Unlike previous generations, our dreams are not pinned on our children but rather on ourselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:26 PM
 
5,970 posts, read 1,761,770 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
We were in dismal times even before the virus wandered by; a dispirited people do not tend to think of having children under such circumstances.
Very true -- but ONLY inside Barnes & Noble. In the Fiction Aisle.

Prior to the Pandemic, it was the best of times. The economy was in the best shape it had been in for many decades. If you had a pulse and wanted a job, you could get hired very quickly. If you drove to work and accidentally pulled into the wrong parking lot and went into the building, they'd say "you're hired - get to work."

Because the economy was so good, therefore the opportunity cost of having children went up. I trust I don't need to define opportunity cost for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:29 PM
 
5,970 posts, read 1,761,770 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
And we need to stop using fossil fuels, pretty much right now, too.
If you'd like to discuss that, I invite you to start your own thread on that topic, and I'll be glad to post there.

Until then, let's stick to one topic in this thread - and the use of fossil fuels is off-topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:30 PM
 
9,612 posts, read 10,235,075 times
Reputation: 8405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
Quite seriously, an administration with a more positive focus and all it would bring will turn the curve up.
That's just asinine.

Much of the first world has seen dropping fertility rates for years predating Trump.

____________

ETA - I looked up the date to be sure........Japan's fertility rate fell below 2.00 in 1975 and is around 1.4 now.

Last edited by EDS_; 05-20-2020 at 12:45 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
28,055 posts, read 66,560,300 times
Reputation: 33569
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
This is a very troubling economic trend:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-bir...ow-11589947260




The economic consequence 21 years from now in 2041 will be severe. Every credible econometric model of the US economy shows population growth as a principle driver of future economic growth.

In many senses, this decline is associated with the incredibly strong economy we've enjoyed over the past several years - economic opportunity for women has resulted in their personal decisions to work and defer/decline to procreated.

More and more, it is clear the USA needs a policy of encouraging immigration of fertile women who are of childbearing age.
China needs them a lot worse than we do. their policy of one child per couple resulted in a lot of families killing off girl babaies becuase they wanted a boy. Now they have a crap ton of boys and not enough women. to make things worse, many of their people are chosing not to marry/procreate. Now they ahve a baby shortage. As their huge population ages, there will be too few people of working age to support the elderly. They are facing an unprecedented economic crises (unless they get rid of some of the older people).



Much of Europe has a similar problem to the United states. Perhaps even more pronounced.



Fertile women of childbearing age may be the next hot world commodity. (Meaning attracting them to your country, not buying and selling women directly).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Alexandria, VA, USA
1,093 posts, read 632,541 times
Reputation: 2466
Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaminB12 View Post
And just lack of birth control.

We've added ~40 million to this country since 2000. That's a lot.
Today's young women may not be able to afford to get married and have children due to the expense. Maternity Leave is also scarce, and after childbirth, few women get family leave. Once the child is old enough, day care is also expensive. Additionally, many young women hold marginal jobs that do not offer medical insurance, or poor medical insurance, so the expense of childbirth is also a consideration.

Finally, maternal mortality is higher in the US than in most civilized countries, so there is that factor that eliminates women of childbearing age who are willing to have children from having any more children. Also, US women are waiting later to have children, so they are likely to have fewer children and to have a greater likelihood to die in childbirth

See https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/n...202001_MMR.htm

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/healt...udy/index.html

The US is tied for 56th place for maternal mortality at 19 deaths per 100,000 women. The most favorable rate is 2 deaths per 100K. (Belarus, Poland, Italy and Norway)

Romania 19
Oman 19
Moldova 19
United States 19
Latvia 19
Ukraine 19

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ortality_ratio
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:49 PM
 
5,970 posts, read 1,761,770 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by athena53 View Post
I'm old enough to remember when women couldn't get into medical and law schools or into management tracks in corporations. Sandra Day O'Connor graduated from Stanford's law school and got one offer- as a librarian in a law library. Many of us stayed in the workforce after having children because we had access to educational and career opportunities that made it worthwhile. In my own situation (first husband unemployed last 5 years of the marriage, six years as a single mother, remarried to a dear man who was 15 years older who retired and started on SS after we moved for my job), it was a stabilizing influence. How many families are staying a float and maybe even have health insurance because of the wife's job?

I also believe that smaller family size is also a function of more reliable and easily-available birth control. Thank God for that!

I do agree, though, that a decreasing population brings problems of its own as fewer people in the workforce support more retirees in the population. Unfortunately, many systems such as SS have a Ponzi element that falls apart as the average population age increases. It's something countries such as Japan are dealing with now and we'll have to deal with it as well in the US. IMO it's better than over-population.
Very well said. Can't give you a rep, as apparently I'm not promiscuous enough with my reps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:53 PM
 
1,994 posts, read 510,658 times
Reputation: 3201
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
If you'd like to discuss that, I invite you to start your own thread on that topic, and I'll be glad to post there.

Until then, let's stick to one topic in this thread - and the use of fossil fuels is off-topic.
Simply pointing out an equivalent "no option" crisis we are spending 99% of our time trying to find an option for instead of addressing. 'Nuf sed.

I maintain that the article you cite, from what used to be a highly reliable source, is overstated headline-bait not consistent with actual population trends. But assuming US fertility is falling below some critical value (as happened across Europe after the war, and in Japan over the last 30 years), it's still a two-headed problem: do we continue with an economically sustainable population (inverted-V) or figure out how to handle an "aging boomer" problem of 10X the scale (oak tree)?

Reasonable immigration, as the US has always permitted and depended on for economic vibrancy, is a solution in the first way. I'm not sure what solution exists in the second mode other than a couple of generations of paupers as the demographics level out—immigrationless Japan's only road to the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:55 PM
 
5,970 posts, read 1,761,770 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonathanLB View Post
Yeah, have to say I agree. We need fewer people, not more, and to the extent any economy depends on more and more people, guess what? We’re gonna have to rethink that.
We probably do need to rethink it - our current method of The State providing Social Security depends on having a (relatively) stable and/or growing number of workers working to pay payroll taxes to support each retiree drawing SS. I don't think we're there yet, but at some point what happens when there are not enough people from who to extract a payroll tax?

Slightly less connected are public sector pensions. They are funded by the assumption of an ever-larger number of people from whom taxes can be collected in real time to pay benefits to retirees. This would be a great place to start to trim that future expense if you're a taxpayer. If you're a pension collector rather than a tax payer you'll have a different view of the world, of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2020, 12:58 PM
 
1,994 posts, read 510,658 times
Reputation: 3201
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
We probably do need to rethink it - our current method of The State providing Social Security depends on having a (relatively) stable and/or growing number of workers working to pay payroll taxes to support each retiree drawing SS.
That's only the simplest and most obvious part of the problem. An economically healthy nation is powered almost entirely by its prime workforce. No workforce? A lot more problems than just enough tax base.

Micro example: there are villages in Japan with millennium-old traditions involving children; one village of elders had to put the ceremony and performance on the shoulders of one 5-year-old girl. Nil economic impact but devastating on a social/community level, which helps nothing and no one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top