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.
Successful intelligent couples often decide not to procreate because there is pain in the world or because we are overcrowded. In their hearts these couples believe they are doing the right thing for humanity.
Meanwhile, China has discovered that curtailing reproduction has backfired and they will soon have an aging population with not enough young people in the pool. The one child per couple is a disaster, but at least there is one kid in the picture. However, it seems one kid is not enough! Most of the couples I talk about have ZERO children even though they are well educated and from a higher socioeconomic level.
Why do you think European countries freely admit so many Muslim migrants. They know quite well that without young folks the future is bleak.
What will happen in 100 years if all educated economically successful couples do not have children? What if ALL the kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background?
Successful intelligent couples often decide not to procreate because there is pain in the world or because we are overcrowded. In their hearts these couples believe they are doing the right thing for humanity.
Meanwhile, China has discovered that curtailing reproduction has backfired and they will soon have an aging population with not enough young people in the pool. The one child per couple is a disaster, but at least there is one kid in the picture. However, it seems one kid is not enough! Most of the couples I talk about have ZERO children even though they are well educated and from a higher socioeconomic level.
Why do you think European countries freely admit so many Muslim migrants. They know quite well that without young folks the future is bleak.
What will happen in 100 years if all educated economically successful couples do not have children? What if ALL the kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background?
I'm one of those who don't plan to have children. I am highly educated and live a good life. Most people who are childless by choice do so because of economic and lifestyle choices. The overpopulation thing is just an add-on, not the main reason.
On a personal level, it might make sense, if you have money. For a society, enough new born are definitely important. The Europeans know that for their welfare state to sustain themselves, they need more young people. Japan will be the first country to demonstrate what it means when half of your population is older than 60. China is smart too. They know that they need more people if they want to build a prosperous society. The thing is, most retirement systems and economic systems are built with the expectation that the pouplation continues to grow. This is essentially a consideration behind immigration policies in north america and europe.
Speaking of the U.S., it is indeed true that more kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background. The problem isn't low birth rate, but the stratification. Rich people, educated people, socially liberal people have a lower birth rate. Religious people, conservatives, immigrants, and people of color have a higher birth rate. Those who are financially independent tend to marry within their class and enjoy their wealth. Those who are dependent have more children who are dependent.
In the future, many young people will have too little to be independent. They also tend to come from backgrounds and cultures that value education much less. Single parenthood, several children, dependence on public assistance, and no future. You will see more protests like those in Mizzou and Yale, probably worse than they are today. The class gap is going to be so big that those at the bottom simply give up on it and expect populist politics to supply oxygen. The society is also going to be cognitively stratified. The poor become less cognitively capable, which limits their employment opportunities and upward mobility. Some of the best jobs in America will hire from a global pool of candidates, leaving behind America's own poor to welfare and campus yelling. And as long as the global talent continues to satisfy corporations' appetite, businesses have little need to support america's own education system and help its own poor. Corporations' diversity today goes heavily toward foreign citizens, than American minorities. While immigrants worked hard to better themselves, america's own spent time protesting and demanding.
Across the top, the rich class will be multinational and multicultural, further alienating the underclass. it's already happening. that's america's future.
I say yes, even if population isn't their excuse- it's a good reason when we are trying to make the planet conform to oir needs, and nothing elses. It sickens me. The population needs to be reduced, one way, or another, and apparently natures way is constantly being foiled.
Well, considering how population is spreading like wildfire everywhere in America alone - and causing much stress and discontent for it - I am damn grateful for those who choose to NOT add to the reproduction pool.
Successful intelligent couples often decide not to procreate because there is pain in the world or because we are overcrowded. In their hearts these couples believe they are doing the right thing for humanity.
Meanwhile, China has discovered that curtailing reproduction has backfired and they will soon have an aging population with not enough young people in the pool. The one child per couple is a disaster, but at least there is one kid in the picture. However, it seems one kid is not enough! Most of the couples I talk about have ZERO children even though they are well educated and from a higher socioeconomic level.
Why do you think European countries freely admit so many Muslim migrants. They know quite well that without young folks the future is bleak.
What will happen in 100 years if all educated economically successful couples do not have children? What if ALL the kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background?
1. Personal freedom -- including to choose whether or not to have children -- is healthy for society.
2. While I do not personally approve of abortion, in the years since Roe v Wade, without that freedom of choice we would have about 42 million more Americans. Could we handle that?
3. I'm not clear why you are bringing the Muslim issue into the discussion. Hidden agenda?
4. All educated economically successful couples will not not have children, and all low socioeconomic couples will not all have children. Why make such a ridiculous statement?
I always thought it was arrogant of people who think everyone must have kids. One big reason is I don't want the hassle. Kids are an 25 year commitment and many times it turns out badly. My cousin treated his parents terribly and ended up on drugs. 2 co-workers of mine have 30 year old kids still living at home no job no school feel sorry for them self's.
There is no sweeping right answer. Everyone must do what is right for themselves and the future they wish to build. If the choice is to have kids, have them, if you don't want kids, then don't. Pretty simple.
I'm one of those who don't plan to have children. I am highly educated and live a good life. Most people who are childless by choice do so because of economic and lifestyle choices. The overpopulation thing is just an add-on, not the main reason.
On a personal level, it might make sense, if you have money. For a society, enough new born are definitely important. The Europeans know that for their welfare state to sustain themselves, they need more young people. Japan will be the first country to demonstrate what it means when half of your population is older than 60. China is smart too. They know that they need more people if they want to build a prosperous society. The thing is, most retirement systems and economic systems are built with the expectation that the pouplation continues to grow. This is essentially a consideration behind immigration policies in north america and europe.
Speaking of the U.S., it is indeed true that more kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background. The problem isn't low birth rate, but the stratification. Rich people, educated people, socially liberal people have a lower birth rate. Religious people, conservatives, immigrants, and people of color have a higher birth rate. Those who are financially independent tend to marry within their class and enjoy their wealth. Those who are dependent have more children who are dependent.
In the future, many young people will have too little to be independent. They also tend to come from backgrounds and cultures that value education much less. Single parenthood, several children, dependence on public assistance, and no future. You will see more protests like those in Mizzou and Yale, probably worse than they are today. The class gap is going to be so big that those at the bottom simply give up on it and expect populist politics to supply oxygen. The society is also going to be cognitively stratified. The poor become less cognitively capable, which limits their employment opportunities and upward mobility. Some of the best jobs in America will hire from a global pool of candidates, leaving behind America's own poor to welfare and campus yelling. And as long as the global talent continues to satisfy corporations' appetite, businesses have little need to support america's own education system and help its own poor. Corporations' diversity today goes heavily toward foreign citizens, than American minorities. While immigrants worked hard to better themselves, america's own spent time protesting and demanding.
Across the top, the rich class will be multinational and multicultural, further alienating the underclass. it's already happening. that's america's future.
Great post!
Successful intelligent people tend to have successful intelligent kids.
Folks from the lower social strata tend to perpetuate the low socioeconomic status. The Ben Carson story is actually quite rare.
Simple birthrate math will tell you that after some years there will be a massive unbalance with a much larger proportion of folks with low IQ and socioeconomic status. That cannot be good for any society!
If you take this to an extreme it could lead to the extinction of some segments of the population. Form an evolutionary perspective the world belongs to those that reproduce the most. And evolution does not always lead to improvement of the species.
It seems that one child per couple is not enough. In fact, two kids per couple is barely adequate for population replacement.
It is no accident that Leopold Mozart the father of Amadeus Mozart was also an accomplished musician.
I say yes, even if population isn't their excuse- it's a good reason when we are trying to make the planet conform to oir needs, and nothing elses. It sickens me. The population needs to be reduced, one way, or another, and apparently natures way is constantly being foiled.
China thought just as you do and the experiment is failing. Soon they will have a population of predominantly OLD people.
There is no sweeping right answer. Everyone must do what is right for themselves and the future they wish to build. If the choice is to have kids, have them, if you don't want kids, then don't. Pretty simple.
This may lead to extinction of some segments of the population.
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.
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.
