Live data from Hacker News

The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

sas.upenn.edu

121–130 of 409 posts

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#121
post #79

Ironic as it may sound, coming from a childfree millennial, I'm kind of puzzled how the system will survive. Both my grandparents died in their 90s, and spent over 30 years are retirees - mainly living off their state pension. As people become older, they'll either have to work longer, or the system will come crashing down. Especially with lower fertility rates. My generation should be birthing kids as the previous o…

A substantial realignment in the economy is what's coming. The charge will be when the rate of vacated homes starts to uptick as their aren't enough capable people to live in them: right now the major metros have a lot of pent up demand, but those retirement figures imply a different reality as time goes on: eventually those people start going into care facilities, but their won't be nearly enough people around to su…

> right now the major metros have a lot of pent up demand

The major metros have the least to worry about from this. Those cities have high housing costs because of demand, or to put it another way, those cities have high demand despite high housing costs, and the economic factors that cause people to be attracted to cities aren't going to go away; density is devastatingly efficient and it's cheaper and more convenient for people to be close to things. But what this means is that as the population falls, that latent demand causes the less dense, lower-priced areas to depopulate. See Japan's crisis of rural depopulation, and how Tokyo isn't the one feeling the pinch.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#122
I feel like slide 39 would have gotten you chased out of polite society 10 years ago.

A lot of western countries economies are built on sustained mass migration. Australia, Canada, New Zealand. Arguably the United States where both parties champion it (turn the other check to illegal migraiton of the democrats VS mass H1B visas of the republicans).

As this study points out, it's not sustainable.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#123
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably a factor, but I think it’s a mistake to treat cities not being suited for raising children as a hard, immutable fact. They’re bad because rent continues to soar which clashes on two fronts (kids are expensive already and increase space requirements) and we as a society have decided to build our urban spaces (suburbs included) to be explicitly not friendly to children, families, or anybody not driving…

It's not just rent, it's also transportation. Transporting young kids with a car is easy, public transportation is much harder until they are 10 or so. For example try transporting a sleepy kid, or more than 1 young kid at the same time. Cities are cars don't get along very well, which makes them less friendly to kids. Suburbs are really nice for kids, basically zero car traffic, you can play in the street, easily go…

Transportation can be a challenge, but I don’t agree that a car is a requirement. When I’m in Japan it’s common to see parents carting around a kid or two on an appropriately kitted out bike for example. That wouldn’t be as practical in a sprawling suburb, but it can work in denser cities.

> Suburbs are really nice for kids, basically zero car traffic, you can play in the street, easily go to parks. And when the parents need to take you far you have a car available.

This varies a lot depending on the suburb. There are many that are endless house-deserts where you’re not doing anything without a ride. The one where I live is much more broken up, but sidewalk coverage is patchy at best.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#124
post #15

This is all well and good, but population dropping will only impact our civilization a little. I think this is an issue only because the "very rich" may actually see their standard of living fall. For the poor, it will have no real impact. Plus it is probably a good thing population will start dropping. The much larger worry should be Climate Change , a dropping population can only help Climate Change in the long run…

The history of the world and economics is far more nuanced than rich people hoarding wealth. Wealth is the economy, it's created from systems. The feudal system in the medieval age was relatively poor at generating wealth. A series of technological and intellectual developments began to rapidly increase in the 1400s that culminated in the modern era, including especially the printing press.

But in the 1300s serfdom was still the norm in Europe. Serfs did not get paid and so the Plague made no difference except 2/3 of the population died. Serfdom would last another several hundred years after the plague, and in some countries all the way to the 20th century.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My concern is the intersection of rightwing natalism with Silicon Valley ideology leading to technological “solutions” involving, essentially, test tube babies. Take women out of the picture entirely. I can especially see a dystopian dynamic involving the “we have to compete with China” or “they’re doing it / about to do it in China” narratives.

A "test tube baby" is simply an IVF pregnancy. What is the problem with parents using IVF to conceive?

That’s a colloquial term for IVF pregnancies but that’s not what I mean. I mean artificial wombs, and all the other technologies downstream from a push to “scale up” procreation: like robots that can raise children.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#126

I'm probably going to get in trouble for this, but the population numbers and statistics for Africa are totally unreliable. Fertility and total population are all wrong. The DRC is said to have 100M people, but check out satellite imaging. There's no chance -- and I mean none -- that it actually has 100M people. Unless 9-out-of-10 inhabitants live in the woods under tree cover, the actual population of the country is…

I just did what you suggested and looked at Kinshasa and it looks HUGE to me. Endless rows of streets. Reminded me of Mexico City (and I just compared satellite imagery and they seem similar in that respect - and they are similar in terms of population). Big cities with few skyscrapers and tons of low rise buildings are quite common. In the west, Paris is an example of a populous city without many tall buildings.

Kinshasa's urban area (not the entire province) is generously estimated at 600 square km.

Mexico City is 1485 square km.

Mexico City's population, within that 1485 km^2 envelope, is most commonly given as ~9.5M. (It's ~20M with satellite towns and regions.)

And then consider that most of Kinshasa is comprised of buildings that are very low to the ground -- far lower than in Paris -- whereas Mexico City is in places very dense.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#127
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fertility rate is falling everywhere, even countries that have extensive childcare and maternity/paternity leave. Sweden grants 68 weeks of shared parental leave and their TFR is at 1.45. There is nothing authentic about porn, what a strange comment. Sure, it hacks the reward system of the brain in the same way that a slot machine does, but this does absolutely nothing to promote families.

> Sweden grants 68 weeks of shared parental leave and their TFR is at 1.45. I speculate that a different thing is happening in Europe. Every time I hear European takes on issues, it feels like Europe is post-religion, post-values, post-meaning. Everything is relative; pleasure is the only personal goal, and not harming others is the only external goal. Why even have kids? Why get married? It's a lot of work, plus the…

I mean, this is a quaint narrative, but it doesn't explain the fact that fertility is falling everywhere on earth, regardless of current economy, colonial past, continent, race, or religion.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#128

I'm probably going to get in trouble for this, but the population numbers and statistics for Africa are totally unreliable. Fertility and total population are all wrong. The DRC is said to have 100M people, but check out satellite imaging. There's no chance -- and I mean none -- that it actually has 100M people. Unless 9-out-of-10 inhabitants live in the woods under tree cover, the actual population of the country is…

Zoom in on Kinshasa though and you can see that it's almost entirely very densely-packed slums and shantytowns built up against each other, about 100 - 250 square meters in size, with no gardens or back yards. Slums can be very dense, Dharavi in Mumbai 2.3 square KM with a population of about a million. Manhattan has a much lower population density now than 100 years ago.

Also in all the street view pictures it looks absolutely packed - every road is gridlocked with people everywhere, but Shanghai has a lot of empty space for people despite its size. Roads have trees, they're much wider, there are a lot of open parks, office buildings etc that Kinshasa wouldn't have.

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#129
post #7

The complaining about fertility rates, mostly done by the chunk of the population hoarding more and more of the wealth, will continue until people's ability to afford rent and children improves.

> will continue until people's ability to afford rent and children improves.

Historically that's never been a requirement for people to make children. Poor people have tended to be pretty prolific.

> hoarding more and more of the wealth

In a free market society, wealth is created, it is not "concentrated".

Re: The demographic future of humanity: facts and consequences [pdf]

#130
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fertility rate is falling everywhere, even countries that have extensive childcare and maternity/paternity leave. Sweden grants 68 weeks of shared parental leave and their TFR is at 1.45. There is nothing authentic about porn, what a strange comment. Sure, it hacks the reward system of the brain in the same way that a slot machine does, but this does absolutely nothing to promote families.

> Sweden grants 68 weeks of shared parental leave and their TFR is at 1.45. I speculate that a different thing is happening in Europe. Every time I hear European takes on issues, it feels like Europe is post-religion, post-values, post-meaning. Everything is relative; pleasure is the only personal goal, and not harming others is the only external goal. Why even have kids? Why get married? It's a lot of work, plus the…

I'm guessing you literally don't know anyone in Europe.
Post reply on HN