Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply • Hacker News Board

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#61

Post by sim1collins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:24 PM UTC

jdmoreira wrote: post #19

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #5

"Demographic Apocalypse", Jeez. I for one see more dystopian scenery originating in the hell-bent overpopulation we've been witnessing on the planet for the past 100 years or so. We're looking at ~1'000 places with a population of 500'000 up to 37'000'000 these days (source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities); they comment, quite correctly IMHO: There are quite a number of popular and culturally rich cit…

I really hope our civilization can go from 7 billion people to 1 billion without a total collapse. Unfortunately we might not be ready. Will we be able to keep our technological level? Our current understanding of math, physics and nature? That requires quite a lot of people to transmit and learn. It certainly is theoretically possible but in practice? It's exponential. This has the potential to creep on us really so…

This is one of the reasons why we put together this document. We (as authors) see there being many benefits to smaller human populations on earth, but we think that any transition made needs to be made very thoughtfully.

So far we we can see, there is very little (effective) proactive action being taken to ensure that as population levels decline, things we value (like technological progress, women's rights, diversity of cultures, etc.) are protected.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#62

Post by jtbayly » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:30 PM UTC

oneoff786 wrote: post #27

nootropicat wrote: post #13

Outside of high-tech solutions (external wombs, anti-aging) there's one social: a totalitarian country forcing women to have kids. The only country I could see it happening is China. In the absence of one of the three solutions, technological civilization will peak this century. It's not poverty or culture that leads to not having kids, it's industrialization. Any culture that automates agriculture to a sufficient le…

What about a strong democratic country that simply pays people to have kids

Look at France’s and a few other countries’ attempts along these lines.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#63

Post by sim1collins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:33 PM UTC

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #15

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #5

"Demographic Apocalypse", Jeez. I for one see more dystopian scenery originating in the hell-bent overpopulation we've been witnessing on the planet for the past 100 years or so. We're looking at ~1'000 places with a population of 500'000 up to 37'000'000 these days (source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities); they comment, quite correctly IMHO: There are quite a number of popular and culturally rich cit…

Addendum Quote "The economic systems of virtually all developed countries are predicated on an assumption of constant growth"—I'm with you that shrinking societies will be facing a wholly new set of societal problems. However an economic system that is predicated on constant growth will necessarily fail at some point in the future because physics. We as a species have to find ways to prevent that from happening. To k…

When creating this document, our goal wasn't to give people the impression that our populations should expand in number indefinitely (especially not on Earth alone). You're right that expecting the planet to shoulder indefinite population growth is impractical.

We're just trying to highlight the hazards of population decline that hits humanity like a tidal wave and produces unnecessary suffering and damage. There are ways for populations to sustainably decline without wiping out entire cultures, for example.

We, personally, care a lot about memetic/cultural diversity and worry that a population collapse for which we don't prepare will eliminate loads of perspectives that would otherwise contribute great new innovations and technologies to humanity's future.

We also think it's important that people know that population decline will affect certain fundamentals upon which their lives are based (e.g. "I put all my retirement savings in the stock market because on average the stock market always goes up" isn't going to be a healthy thought when population decline accelerates).

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#64

Post by hamter » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:41 PM UTC

erddfre3423 wrote: post #14

Bubble_Pop_22 wrote: post #8

AKA 'people should have more kids!' 'Wait! Not in those shithole countries!' Declining birthrates alarmists are essentially sponsoring the great replacement theory. Not with words or by shilling the conspiracy online but with their alarmism as conflated to just particular geographic areas without looking at the whole globe. Global population is still growing and will continue to do so during our lifetime. The relativ…

I think it's just good to have open discussion on what these demographics changes might mean in the context of different societies. Both Europe and North America will see increasing migration from more overpopulated and poorer parts of the world, and this obviously presents its challenges to societies in the both ends of the flow. I don't believe in "great replacement theory", what is happening is just a natural cons…

Sure you can have this "discussion" but it comes off as needless (and probably racist) concern trolling. The Sweden thing is a favorite among reactionaries trying to mask their racism. The homicide rate in Sweden is lower than Canada. It's lower than Finland.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#65

Post by sim1collins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:43 PM UTC

catchclose8919 wrote: post #32

...maybe if didn't work so hard to make our socity into a hypercompetitive hellhole intelligent and educated people would also start having more children! Give people guranteed free life-time education from daycare to university + some standard of free universal healthcare (sure, you'll have to pay for your antiaging, but not for a broken leg!) and more people will enjoy having more children. Maybe engineer the world…

While this argument makes intuitive/emotional sense, it's not the case that humans start having more kids once they can finally "chill t f out"—though I totally understand where you're coming from.

In practice, populations in actual hypercompetitive hellholes, where they're not just competing for a job/status/basic financial solvency, but literally for their food security, physical safety, etc., are those which are having more kids.

The pretty-much-universal trend appears to be that once people become more educated and comfortable, they stop having kids above repopulation rate.

All that said, we are not arguing in favor of making life more stressful for any group, be they in developed nations or nations facing severe hardship. We're simply pointing out that "make raising kids cheaper/easier" and "make life easier" are not interventions proven to boost birth rates.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#66

Post by cuteboy19 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:46 PM UTC

orwin wrote: post #56

cuteboy19 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However an economic system that is predicated on constant growth will necessarily fail at some point in the future because physics. Nonsense. And the audacity to add "because physics" at the end. Newton himself proved this wrong. 1+ 0.5 + 0.25 + 0.125.... Is this sequence constant growing? Yes. Is this sequence infinitely increasing? Yes. Does this sum up to a finite value? Also yes!

But that's not our growth. Our system suppose constant exponential growth. And to use your maths: 1% + 0.5% + 0.25% + 0.125%.... Is this sequence constant growing? Yes. Is this sequence infinitely increasing? Yes. Does this sum up to a finite value? _Sadly no_

I'd have to brush up on my math but even that feels bounded. Per cent is just division by 100, you take it out as a common divisor and you still arrive at the same sum.

Unless you mean something like

  1 * 1.01 * 1.02 * 1.03.....

Which is indeed unbounded.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#67

Post by hamter » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:47 PM UTC

zshrdlu wrote: post #50

Bubble_Pop_22 wrote: post #8

AKA 'people should have more kids!' 'Wait! Not in those shithole countries!' Declining birthrates alarmists are essentially sponsoring the great replacement theory. Not with words or by shilling the conspiracy online but with their alarmism as conflated to just particular geographic areas without looking at the whole globe. Global population is still growing and will continue to do so during our lifetime. The relativ…

As a black man in Africa, I had not realized that this was not an obvious subtext until I read your comment. Is it not?

A lot of people haven't developed the muscle to look at anything discussing "demographics" extremely critically.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#68

Post by sim1collins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:48 PM UTC

jtbayly wrote: post #60

catchclose8919 wrote: post #32

...maybe if didn't work so hard to make our socity into a hypercompetitive hellhole intelligent and educated people would also start having more children! Give people guranteed free life-time education from daycare to university + some standard of free universal healthcare (sure, you'll have to pay for your antiaging, but not for a broken leg!) and more people will enjoy having more children. Maybe engineer the world…

Ah yes, the old “More from the fit, less from the unfit” view of reproduction. Where “fit” of course is “like me.” There’s a long history of this sort of eugenics.

This is NOT a view expressed in the document (nor is it a view held by its authors).

One of the key risks this document highlights is the risk that many populations, which contribute helpful diversity and different perspectives to the world, go extinct before people find a way to sustain them (e.g. Koreans, Japanese, Jains, Parsi, Emirates, Tanka, Macanese, Taiwanese, Italians, etc.).

This is not about "I want the 'good' people to reproduce and the 'bad' people to stop;" this is about raising awareness of various implications of population decline, which affect not just cultural/ethnic diversity, but also the viability of many major cities, stock markets, and governing formats.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#69

Post by sim1collins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:51 PM UTC

orwin wrote: post #54

Hey, i've read the intro and the first part: a remark to the authors: Calhoun experiment haven't been published, this is vrey much popsci, and it is hard to look at the "results" and make conclusions or inference about human behavior. A much better study was by hammock[0], with control group and no anthropomosrphism from the author. I have some contempt for papers using Calhoun. It's fine for movies, but not for seri…

That's an entirely valid point. We'll seriously consider taking it out. It provides an interesting case study and allows for some interesting conjecture, but it certainly isn't core to the arguments we hope to make and its lack of credibility probably does more harm than good to our overall arguments.

Re: Why falling birthrates might be a bigger deal than dominants narratives imply

#70

Post by jtbayly » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

sim1collins wrote: post #68

jtbayly wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the old “More from the fit, less from the unfit” view of reproduction. Where “fit” of course is “like me.” There’s a long history of this sort of eugenics.

This is NOT a view expressed in the document (nor is it a view held by its authors). One of the key risks this document highlights is the risk that many populations, which contribute helpful diversity and different perspectives to the world, go extinct before people find a way to sustain them (e.g. Koreans, Japanese, Jains, Parsi, Emirates, Tanka, Macanese, Taiwanese, Italians, etc.). This is not about "I want the 'g…

I was not replying to the document, but to catchclose8919's comment where he advocated "handing extra child care support to educated people in helthy societies and contraception to the others."