Are birthrates the most important economic issue in the world today?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 มิ.ย. 2024
- Are birthrates the most important economic issue in the world today? Most countries of the developed world today have birth rates significantly less than replacement levels. In some countries, such as South Korea and China it is less than half the number required to sustain their current populations. Within the next 20 years, this shift will result in a massive transferral of economic and political power to those countries with younger populations. Meanwhile much of Europe and Asia will be struggling to take care of their aging populations with a rapidly declining cohort of younger workers. This massive realignment will have huge consequences both locally and internationally for much of the world. Join us with two of the foremost experts in this area of demographics to consider the effects of this decline in childbearing and consider what can be done to reverse this trend and prepare for the economic impact of this demographic shift that will be larger than that caused by Climate Change.
In the US we've disenfranchised young people by transferring wealth upward, from poor to rich, from young to old and from those who own no assets to those who do so successfully for so long that young people have turned to nihilism and have little hope for the future. It comes as no surprise then that they don't form households, marry or have children. They can't. Enriching older cohorts at the expense of younger ones is a short term strategy that ultimately ensures that young people are priced out of participating in the continuation of our species.
I'm surprised we aren't being offered cash for babies.
Indirectly there's plenty of tax breaks. Too bad they are puny and if you happen to be above poverty level almost puny.
Birthrates are not the most important issue, it is only the most important to the fiat currency creditism ponzi scheme model. What happens when you devalue your own currency [borrow from the future] while having less future taxpayers?
Okay fine, now what's the solution?
I get the impression your economics knowledge comes from the back of a cornflakes packet…
She's right. Corporations must show consistently growing profits for the current Ponzi scheme to keep going through ever increasing stock and real estate valuations. They can do this through increased consumerism, which has reached it's per capita limit, especially with stagnating wages. The answer (at least for the political/managerial class) is an ever increasing population of consumers/wage slaves/taxpayers. This consumerism is also supported through debt, as well as inflation to pressure people to spend their money before it loses value.
The problem is that this runs up against limited resources. The first of these is space. The guy says there's plenty of space for people to live but that's not the point, because people can't just go live in the middle of nowhere. Everyone wants (or has to) live in cities where there are jobs and resources, and cities are becoming extremely expensive and overcrowded. Take Canada, for instance. People are always yapping about how Canada has so much space, but they don't realize that the vast majority of people (90%? I forget the exact figure) live within a hundred miles of the US border. Try finding an apartment in Canada, or a family doctor. There's increasing pressure on urban infrastructure of all sorts ranging from the electric grid to sewage systems, parks and on and on.
How many more tent cities can Canada and other countries bear to support? While he goes on about declining population, we are busy producing literal tent cities of fentanyl addicts. This ain't workin'.
@@25Soupy the solution is that the economy will have to adapt to the trend (lower birth rates), even if that means taking a few recessions
Most people I know including myself didn't have children or more children is 100% financial reasons. Children are expensive. Also, women are told that their career is the most important thing in their life. It doesn't help that all my life of 55 years we've been told overpopulation is the problem that will end us all.
The biggest problem is often the people still having kids. What good is the Idiocracy?
The capitalist tears over birth rates are delicious.
Religious conservatives are the only ones having kids, be it Hindus, Muslims, or Christians. Your commie dreams will never come true 😥
Number must go up.
Communism will continue to fail like it always has 😢
Rome collapsed into modern Italy. It was not a disaster as you claimed.
Natural world depopulation is a great blessing for mankind, for the planet and for other species on earth.
Your and Zeihan’s arguments would be proven wrong over time.
I am sure somehow the blame for this will be put on women, again
A large number of Earthling organisms, the ones that we are so carelessly driving to extinction, very much would like the human birthrate to fall to zero.
bullshit
@@KhanneaI find it hard to fathom a less relevant response.
@@justinmanley8131I find it hard to imagine the idea of any other earthly organism having the cognitive capacity to develop the line of thinking as presented in the original comment.
Or
No plant or animal would be capable of having such a what-if-scenario.
Or
Male bovine menure
I am sorry but I disagree. Earth's resources are finite. and not infinite. Population control particularly in high birth rate countries is important . All births should be wanted children and parents should be in a position to be able to support their children until adulthood..
Bill Gates will be proud of you speaking like Eugenicist ! What's next China one child policy ???
Take it up with Africa
Concern over long term significant decrease does not equal championing unlimited growth.
Great idea. While we’re at it, let’s have world peace and gender equality…
noone cares about finite resources when it comes to consumerism and high carbon lifestyle
Maybe if man pitched it more with domestic and emotional work in the home, women would have more kids. This is the fault of MEN! Women are earning money, but men are slacking at home.
Lmao okay Tabitha. If that's true then why do social groups with more traditional division of labor have higher birth rates? Maybe you're just entitled.
@@tabithan2978 It is not the fault of men but central planners. Men, esp. White presenting ones are deliberately excluded from parts of the workforce. See DEI, affirmative action policies