Live data from Hacker News

Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

bloomberg.com

171–180 of 643 posts

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#172
post #162

Birth rates are low pretty much everywhere in the developed world, but South Korea is an outlier in how low they are. For example, Japan's fertility rate is 1.3, compared to Korea's 0.84. That's a huge difference. It's possible there's something unique to South Korea that causes it. Perhaps it's mandatory 2 years of military service for males. Or maybe their famously judgmental culture. I don't know.

As an opposite data point: in Israel, military service of 3 years is mandatory for males, 2 years for females. Israel has BY FAR the highest fertility in the OECD. So military service probably isn't a strong correlation here.

The highest fertility rates in Israel, by far, are in groups exempted from mandatory military service.

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure Korea has pretty shit work/life balance. And if you lose your job you're also SoL. There's still a substantial amount of instability and psychic stressors that could lead to someone not wanting kids, on top of constantly fearing war with NK

I can assure you from personal experience that the average South Korean is not "constantly fearing war with NK" or anything close to it.

[deleted]

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#174
post #92

I have 3 kids with one due at the end of the year. All are from the same woman and we’ve known each other since being teenagers. We are planning to have 5-7 total. They really add a richness to life. It’s fun to see people stare when we go out.

Yeah at our church the average is probably 4-5. There are dozens of families like this. Were planning 5-6 like you. Events with all the kids are lovely and many of the adults who grew up in this church know the other adults because they all used to be kids here once. Great community and a lovely life.

What church?

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Talking about “developed countries” here, not SK specifically. Is declining fertility really such a societal and evolutionary danger when we’re talking 1.4-1.5? If you think of us all as one race, the human race, the fact that a few corners of the world are declining in fertility is arguably an environmental victory that could soften some crises’s in the future. We are like 99.9% genetically similar, why risk gutting…

I think it's less about preserving sparkling blue eyes and more about the negative effects of a declining population on a country's economy. Sam Harris had a guest (Peter Zeihan) a few episodes ago who talked about the downsides of population decline, and he was pretty interesting. One of the key points he made that seemed fairly intuitive is that as your population declines you eventually wind up with significantly…

Sam's a smart guy. He gets a lot right. Sometimes he has blind spots that make him seem alarmist.

> I think it's less about preserving sparkling blue eyes and more about the negative effects of a declining population on a country's economy.

Good thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration is a thing

> One of the key points he made that seemed fairly intuitive is that as your population declines you eventually wind up with significantly fewer long term experts in various fields of science and engineering.

Good thing we have books, the Internet, billions of video recordings, et al.

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah at our church the average is probably 4-5. There are dozens of families like this. Were planning 5-6 like you. Events with all the kids are lovely and many of the adults who grew up in this church know the other adults because they all used to be kids here once. Great community and a lovely life.

What church?

This is a Catholic parish that leans traditional, but not sedevacantist or anything like that.

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except unlike the foxes which eat their rabbits to near extinction, and therefore soon join them, humans can change the rules of the system they're in. Calculating the carrying capacity of the world before agriculture would have given you a much different number than after it.

Okay, sure, but none of that changes what I wrote. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Nor that improvements to Earth’s habitability will be timely, nor whether incentive structures will line up to implement the changes needed.

> Past performance is no guarantee of future results

By that logic we shouldn't be applying arguments like "It is quite normal in ecology to see crashes and recovery in the event of overpopulation".

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it is still among the best places to live on earth.

Depends. Versus some third world or developing country? Of course. Versus other developed countries? South Korea has its pros and cons just like any other.

[deleted]

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it is still among the best places to live on earth.

Depends. Versus some third world or developing country? Of course. Versus other developed countries? South Korea has its pros and cons just like any other.

According to your framing, "third world or developing countries" are wholly and obviously less desirable ("of course"), than developed countries.

I don't agree with that statement, but let's follow the logic.

Most countries are not developed. Therefore, by your own definition, South Korea is one of the best places to live on Earth.

Re: Korea shatters its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate

#180
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much everything I can find says it started in Britain with textiles. Everything from Wikipedia, National Geographic, to Encyclopedia Britannica all say the same thing.

You are citing a British-US founder's product, an US magazine, and Encyclopedia Britannica to assert it all started in Britain. I'd wager we need a bit more geographically/culturally varied sources to have a fair guess at the truth.

Can you provide some of these sources for folks open to educating themselves?
Post reply on HN