Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The global fertility rate is falling

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 881 posts

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#641

Post by codegrappler »

skywal_l wrote: post #620
sweeneyrod wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you don't need VC funding.

Well, in most countries, you get external funding from childless people which are paying higher taxes... If people were to pay entirely for the education and health of their offsprings, they would be way less babies in the developed world. And I don't even mention externalities. A human being in a developed country has a big impact on the environment, if people had to pay for it, having a child would out of reach of…

Which is partly true. Those children will also grow up and pay taxes and contribute to companies which in turn fund the retirement accounts of the elderly community.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#642

Post by koheripbal »

tuatoru wrote: post #317
mdorazio wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people, and more specifically having too many people living unsustainable lifestyles. Worse, a large percentage of the world's population is now moving out of sustainable living into unsustainable living as a result of globalization (as people gain more wealth, they tend to want things like more meat and driving a car). The…

> Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people Not exactly. The bottom 85% (in income terms) of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability. There are too many people in OECD countries, perhaps.

The bottom 85% of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability, TODAY.

They are going to dominate unsustainability in the next few decades.

More coal fired power plants were built in Africa in the last decade than all other continents combined.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#643

Post by menybuvico »

iso1631 wrote: post #499
jackcosgrove wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your retirement was predicated on a forever swelling population lifting your boat, then you actually didn't save enough to retire. Secure retirements shouldn't rely on paygo systems and infinite growth.

You can have a billion dollars worth of shares in amazon, hell you can have a billion dollars in cash. It isn't going to wipe your ass in a nursing home. Someone young will. If the people who do the work are downtrodden enough why would they bother participating in your scheme?

This is the one thing people seem to forget; people who work in places like nursing homes rarely do so because they have a dream of wiping old people's asses for a living. Instead, they do it because they need the money.

In a society where there are plenty of other well-paying jobs to be had, working at a nursing home won't be the popular choice. I expect the future to be interesting.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#644

Post by bananaface »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #637
bananaface wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor people in San Francisco have more kids than rich people in San Francisco. The explanation just doesn't fit the data.

I was assuming you knew that your comparison of a builder in Arkansas or a programmer in SF was intended to be a comparison of two people not at the top of the income ladder but reasonably financially secure. Poor people everywhere have more kids than richer people in the same places because various welfare programs make the net cost of each kid less. There's also a massive cost cliff once you get below the threshold…

I posted anecdotes to contextualise the trend. I don't really think there's much point in getting hung up on them because my point is: poor people have more kids, on average, and this trend holds pretty much everywhere. The real question is: what is it about being rich that causes you to have less kids?

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#645

Post by monodeldiablo »

kunai wrote: post #477
kasrkin623 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who wants to live in Georgia though? I mean this unironically, there's not much to do in terms of entertainment and opportunities for a young 20 yo vs LA or NY

There's a burgeoning film industry (well, at least there was before COVID hit pause on it), thriving nightlife, beaches... a pretty big tech sector in Alpharetta (northern suburb of ATL)... lots of opportunities for Black creators (and creators of all colors obviously) and individuals as there's a lot of existing infrastructure for people who want to get started in music, film, arts, entrepreneurship, et. It's only a…

Giordano's is crap. Lou Malnati's is where it's at.

Seriously, though: First chance we got, the wife and I fled Chicago. Great hospitality, fun culture and reasonable diversity (for the Midwest), but the weather is awful but for two decent weeks per year (aka "spring" and "fall"), the lake is disgusting, two centuries of unchecked industrialization have made the place a gigantic Superfund site, and the lack of unspoiled nature is disconcerting.

People's needs differ. We left a lot of very good friends behind who adore the place and have no need for mountains, streams, oceans, beaches, wilderness, etc.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#646

Post by empath75 »

dang wrote: post #408
empath75 wrote: post #27

Why is immigration not the answer to this? Eventually developed countries are going to have to get over their bigotry and open the borders.

Please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN. You've been doing it a lot, it's not what this site is for, it destroys what it is for, and we eventually ban such accounts. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I’m not sure it’s my fault that a bunch of racists replied to this that you had to moderate.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#647

Post by menybuvico »

tingletech wrote: post #334
qubex wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You jest, but the economic effects of all of this are severe. A total regression in the real-estate market (because stagnant demographics means the existing housing stock will roughly suffice or even exceed demand) will have severe effects. Basically the end to growing demand, and thus essentially an end to growth-orientated capitalism.

I only half jest, but this demographic situation is one of the reasons I support liberal immigration policies.

Swedish authorities did a study about this for that very reason. The conclusion was that it's unlikely that people will want to move halfway across the World only go get a job changing old peoples' diapers.

Alas, the PDF seems to have been taken off-line.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#648

Post by kamaal »

saithound wrote: post #559
kamaal wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine was just an anecdotal evidence. Also that 52% boy babies count itself is too low. The real scenario for my comparison is 3 boys for every 1 girl born. It's also way more complicated than your simulation. Say the first kid was a boy and the second kid was a girl, people don't stop. They think their risk(Having a boy to provide in old age) is hedged and are likely to try for one more kid. If you have families wher…

> You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades. I agree. I just doubt the "not illegal, not unethical" explanations. > If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and…

>>I just doubt the "not illegal, not unethical" explanations.

They are not killing or aborting anything. They are opting to not have kids. Another section can opt to not even have a single kid, or not even marry. None of this illegal, or unethical. It's not exactly a crime for opting to not have kids, or refusing to marry.

>>Is it the conception of male children being more likely?

Yes. Because it's being carefully done so. On the very larger view of things, birth of a boy vs girl appears random(Or by your admission slightly skewed towards boys) if left to nature alone(that is precisely equal percentages). But on individual couple level, very clearly some couples only have boys, and some only have girls. Some have 1 boy and 1 girl. Some have 2 boys and a girl, and some 2 girls and a boy. This is for 1 - 3 kids per couple(The avg Indian family). The ones that are only likely to have girls, or more than one girl, are now opting to not have anymore after the very first one. The couples who now have 2 - 3 boys will struggle to find brides.

Your argument about randomness doesn't hold at the individual level. And the balance that needs to arise at a larger level doesn't work if the rules of impartiality are not adhered equally by each participating couple.

>>we have very good evidence that about 51% of children are conceived male.

That is if you leave nature to take its own course, of course.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#649

Post by kamaal »

burfog wrote: post #552
kamaal wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>This means there are 100 million girls less today in these countries alone Actual numbers are way off the real numbers. In my kids school you can see a very noticeably difference in the count of boys and girls in any standard and section. It's noticeable to a point, if you walk in to a classroom you can see at least visually boys outnumber girls by a good enough difference. I also refuse to believe this due to infa…

The girl shortage will change the culture. Dowry will disappear, possibly to be replaced with a bride price.

Solution for this is already seen somewhat. Basically the rich will get brides, settle for somewhat less dowry.

The mid to lower middle class people neither get brides nor dowry. Poor manage some how.

I have even seen people these days waiting till age 35 - 40 for brides to get the right match(that is everything else plus dowry).

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#650

Post by Tepix »

mchusma wrote: post #205

I hope Humanity grows many orders of magnitude larger and expands across the galaxy. The universe will be a more interesting place. Some people here are saying this is good for the environment. Having 20% fewer people won't do that. Clean energy and other technology will. You can easily fit 100B humans on earth, with more of the earth dedicated to nature preserves. (Maybe a trillion people https://youtu.be/8lJJ_QqIVn…

I hope that humanity doesn't grow until we actually have that room beyond Earth available to us. Martin Rees believes with a vegan diet, no travel and spending most of the time in VR, Earth could sustain 20 billion people.

We're already using resources in an unsustainable manner. Human greed will keep it that way.

Now, once we have those O'Neill cylinders out there, sign me up! Just building a single one in space is going to require an incredible amount of resources, however.

Post reply on HN