The global fertility rate is falling • Hacker News Board

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#661

Post by pharke » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:12 PM UTC

fiblye wrote: post #363

creato wrote: post #345

It is disturbing that people take for granted that this is an economic problem. This thread is full of people lamenting the fact that we could support X times as many people as we do now if we all just sacrifice Y. When I look around the world today, I think the biggest resource that is lacking is economic opportunity. Huge swathes of people are desperate, angry, and depressed, I think because there is no opportunity…

> The demand for labor will go up, the supply will go down. Bad for the investor class looking for profits, good for reducing economic inequality. People will be able to profit from labor again. I'm not so sure about that. Loads of wealth is consolidated at the top, both in terms of economic class and age. People who got their jobs and attained management positions after barely graduating high school are demanding ba…

I think we need to ask ourselves why some of those things are the case.

Why are the same jobs requiring higher levels of education now than they did in the past? If you've worked these jobs you know they don't require anything past a highschool education.

Why is housing seen as something that must constantly increase in value? It doesn't, we've been through housing bubbles but people still cling to this belief and continue to pump air into the bubbles with speculation based on it. If you've owned a home you know that it is a constant sink for money just to maintain its existing state let alone what it costs to upgrade it to modern standards as it ages.

What is driving people away from the sectors you mentioned? Is it only lack of pay? Why are we not funding these sectors when they are so essential to the functioning of our society? Where is the existing funding going, specifically whose pockets does it wind up in?

Why don't employers offer higher wages? Are they really being greedy or are their profits going to something else like rent or other business costs?

I don't think this is entirely to be laid at the feet of the richest members of society. Yes they protect their own interests but all of us are responsible for ensuring that our communities continue to function and improve. We've neglected that responsibility, we've all collectively failed. We all have to work together to fix this, blaming one group or the other will solve nothing.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#662

Post by CalRobert » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:15 PM UTC

DrAwdeOccarim wrote: post #592

CalRobert wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for sharing this. I hope my children bring their grandparents as much joy as you do. Speaking of this - "tends to be factual, rational, and logical." - do you worry much about what the world will look like when your grandchildren are middle aged? I spent probably too much time concerned with rising authoritarianism, climate breakdown, shortages of food and water resulting from same, and their resulting wars…

I think about this question often as I now have a 2yo and 4yo. It used to stress me out, but now I realize that no matter how bad it gets, it will almost certainly be better than anything any human had to deal with in pre-modern civilization. Even with all the possible negative things coming, the tools we have acquired as a species would be incomprehensible to anyone say pre-5000 years ago. We are alive such a short…

I like this perspective! In the end my wife and I ultimately said "well either civilisation persists OK-ish and we'll regret not having kids, or this is it and in the grand scheme of things what does it matter if they go down swinging?" So far, I am glad we had them.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#663

Post by zajio1am » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:18 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #335

tingletech wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

now if we could just get the robots to pay social security

Well we can. Someone owns the robots (or owns shares in the corporation that owns the robots). Just change the tax code to make Social Security tax apply to all income, including capital gains, with no upper limit.

The reason why capital income is not subject to social isurance taxes is because it is fundamentally an insurance scheme. People who earn mostly wages need social insurance in retirement (when they would not be physically able to work), so they (have to) pay it, while people who earn mostly capital income do not need it (as capital income does not depend on personal health / fitness to work).

Therefore extending social insurance taxes to capital income without extending pension payments to capital earners would be unfair. Local politicians tried something similar - remove caps on social insurance, while keeping pensions capped / strongly sublinear, and it was struck down by constitutional court.

Perhaps reasonable solution would be to split pensions to tax-based UBI, and smaller contribution based 'linear' pensions.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#664

Post by dmch-1 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:18 PM UTC

This article is not about the correlation of individual happiness and having children, but about a demographic change and issues it might bring in the future. In hundred years we may have a population where 80+ year olds are twice as many as 20 year olds. What will be the health of such a population? Who will take care of the elderly? What will be the economic prospects or innovation on which the today's society relies? Some very legitimate questions, and here I read about advantages/disadvantages of having children from a personal perspective. Just annoying that many people are unable to think about anything beyond their current immediate environment.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#665

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:21 PM UTC

bananaface wrote: post #644

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

>what is it about being rich that causes you to have less kids?

Are we talking locally rich or globally rich?

People in industrialized (rich) nations don't have tons of kids because that's not how you get ahead in that kind of economy. Subsistence farmers have tons of kids because that's how they get ahead economically.

Within richer nations richer people have fewer kids because the way social safety nets and social expectations of how one should raise one's kids make kids more expensive the higher up you go.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#666

Post by snidane » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:25 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #187

corysama wrote: post #90

This article is quite exasperated, but doesn't say much. I'm far from an expert in this area, but here's what I've read elsewhere: We're quickly moving from the population explosion problem to the population implosion problem. No one planned it or made it happen. But, it looks like we're not actually going to overflow the planet with people standing shoulder to shoulder. Instead, the problem we're facing moving forwa…

Here are two scary storylines that get discussed pretty regularly here on HN: a) AI and machine learning will raise productivity so much that they will steal millions of jobs from people. b) Global population will eventually go into decline, which will crash the economy by killing growth. But, these two stories look far less scary when considered together. In fact they seem directly complementary, although the timing…

Or consider the alternative scenario where population keeps declining but technological advancement doesn't materialize. Which for AI and machine learning could happen soon with another 'AI winter' after people realize only narrow set of opportunities to deploy it.

The stability of society depends on technological progress and more children born in each new generation. Once this global Ponzi scheme reverses there is an incentive to manufacture lies about massive technological progress ahead of us. See buzzwords such as autonomous cars, industry 4.0 or quantum computing.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#667

Post by godfreyantonell » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:31 PM UTC

jonwinstanley wrote: post #656

zeepzeep wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whether to start trying to have a family is a BIG-ASS decision, with life-long consequences It especially has life-long consequences for the children! I wouldn't want to put children in this world. I don't think the future world is a nice place to grow up in, even the current world isn't. IMO it's selfish to make kids just to feel fulfilled and not be lonely.

If sensible people refuse to have children and morons continue to have several, then we will be in an even worse situation down the line

Amen. Why is it that morons and the evil seem to be the most fertile? I have no science to back this up. This is just something I have observed from personal experience.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#668

Post by Aeolun » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:32 PM UTC

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…

> having a child would out of reach of most

I think that just means more children get less fulfilling lives.

At least that seems to be the case in countries where children are not subsidised.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#669

Post by iso1631 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:32 PM UTC

qayxc wrote: post #640

iso1631 wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Someone clearly hasn't seen what a healthy lifestyle can do for you: https://theculturetrip.com/asia/japan/articles/why-japans-ok... It's common to equate old age with nursing homes and misery in the West. Other cultures show that this needn't be the case at all and is - for the most part; there's still about 30% genetics involved - dependent on how you chose to spend your days. Less Netflix, Facebook, and convenienc…

If an 80 year old no longer contributes to society, and all they have is pieces of paper indicating they used to contribute in the past, they are relying on people who do contribute (by fixing toilets, growing food whatever) to accept those pieces of paper. They will only do so if they feel they are getting enough of those pieces of paper, and if they will believe those pieces of paper will work in the future.

The health of that 80 year old is only relavent in terms of the amount of resources needed to move from the working class to the non-working class. The healther the aged, the fewer the resources. The higher the working:retired ratio, the fewer the resources.

What is to stop the adults under say 50 who have barely any capital at all (401ks, houses, shares, whatever) from saying "screw this, I'm off to $other_country where I don't live hand to mouth and have no future of retirement"

A country can not survive when 90% of its population are 80 years old, no matter how healthy or rich those people are, it means for every 10 hours an under-80 works, 9 hours is to produce goods and services for other people.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#670

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:33 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #344

jessaustin wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps the "premodern societies" that are emphasized in educational settings had those qualities. Maybe that says more about our educational values than about premodern societies. Many ancient people didn't emphasize property in the first place. Many others were more matriarchal than patriarchal. Sure, Catholicism was fairly irredeemable...

> Sure, Catholicism was fairly irredeemable... What a bigoted thing to say. Truly the last acceptable prejudice.

I did my time in the Catholic church. There were some weird moments, but I got a lot luckier than a lot of other kids (and women, indigenous, etc.) Now I get to say my truth. Actually, anyone who reads history can say it too.