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

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

sas.upenn.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 409 posts

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

#261

Post by wcarss »

rayiner wrote: post #58
Arainach wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over what timespan? This analysis isn't elaborated at all. Does it count the impact of companies being able to pay lower wages and paying more taxes? Does it account for the future generations? Etc.

It’s explained in the link. Figure 2.7. It covers immigrants and their descendants across all ages. Here’s further analysis of the same data: https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/2022/01/immigration-economics-f...

this "further analysis" is comically biased, misinformed, misapplied mush. It's honestly like a gish gallop to quote this shit. Well, I read it, so I'm going to take the time.

> produce a negative financial benefit over their lifetimes

This is an absolute lie, pulled from the trash. Maybe you just didn't understand it -- I hope!

Claiming that either the distribution of contributions across ages, or the "age adjusted average net contributions" graph portray some kind of a "long term" picture of what people's contributions over the next two generations would be is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the graph and data represent, or is capable of representing.

The first chart is simply a calculation of contribution in 2018 by age. The second is a remapping of 2018's immigrant population's 2018 contributions and costs from their then-age distribution to proportions equivalent to the then danish-native age distribution. It has nothing to do with either populations' prospective future contributions. It's just a convolution of data which is presently skewed by extreme circumstance, i.e. being an active asylum seeker by definition means you are recently economically unstable, and far more likely to be a member of specific age demographics. It is not a projection of any likely future; it is solely a lens to remove one confounding factor -- the very different age distributions of the instantaneous populations compared -- for the purpose of comparing their 2018 contributions directly.

And then it goes off into justifying its conclusions by comparing "countries by IQ"?! Pure hack slop, and nothing else. There's references to coronavirus lies, and this being "an immigrant invasion" -- this is not remotely convincing nor unbiased, nor even an interesting analysis. It is just kinda long and filled with errors. Like I said: bit of a gish gallop.

To draw from it, and parrot its erroneous claims like they should convince us as they convinced you, the disinterested and enlightened scientist, is a new nadir on your dismal intellectual track record.

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

#262

Post by pfannkuchen »

idiotsecant wrote: post #260
pfannkuchen wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: my thought process tends to be somewhat autistic, I don’t mean any offense. As a non gay man I am just curious to hear your perspective. From a strictly biological perspective, I think it could be argued that gay “sex” isn’t actually sex. Like, what makes it sex? Is it sex for pleasure? Or is it something adjacent to sex? That has some commonalities with sex, but isn’t actually sex. Like there is a part o…

I assure you, your thoughts on this are not unique or something hardly anyone thinks about, they're just not well reasoned. People have sex for a lot of reasons, and having children is, proportionally, almost never the primary driver. Sex is not the act of fertilization of an ovum by a sperm. If it was, we would call IVR 'sex', which obviously nobody does.

I never said sex was the act of fertilization, you are putting words in my mouth. I also never said anything about recreational sex, I of course agree that exists and is sex. You seem to be disagreeing while saying a bunch of things I agree with.

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

#263

Post by lynx97 »

phba wrote: post #112
lynx97 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intuitvely, those opposing immigration have always known this. But tell that t someone from the left They will verbally kill you for stating obvious facts.

The left vs right theatre is really just two sides of the same coin. By now every western democracy is being dragged along the same path with different stages of progression. 1. Move domestic production and jobs to lesser developed countries to increase profits. 2. Open the gates for mass immigration under the guise of openness and empathy to import wage slaves for the service sector and use every media channel to os…

> any common idea that we can agree on

I'm afraid there is no common ground anymore.

There is nothing "smug" about having an opinion. And there are no compromises in sight.

However, while 2020 helped a lot to escalate the situation, I also feel like politics were always pretty hopeless. Its just that if you grow older, you learn more about what is going on, so things seem increasingly bleek.

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

#264

Post by felipeerias »

api wrote: post #54
rendang wrote: post #51

The selection effects of this transition will be really fascinating to see after the fact. The species has spent a long time under selection pressure for "having more kids", but is being subjected for the first time to "having more kids while extreme prosperity and modern telecommunications exist" which is a very different thing.

I had an evolutionary bio professor in college say this: "you don't understand evolution until you understand how contraception could lead to overpopulation." Anything placed in the path of reproduction is a barrier to be overcome. If there is anything in the human genome that correlates with a positive desire to choose to have children, we are selecting hard for that right now. We may see a bottleneck this century a…

Human cultures are also subject to evolutionary pressures and it is likely that we will start seeing intense selection effects at that level much earlier.

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

#265

Post by lynx97 »

Analemma_ wrote: post #62
rayiner wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but shouldn’t the burden be on the people advocating mass immigration to prove it helps?

No, because freedom of movement and commerce (specifically, selling one's labor) are human rights. No right is absolute, but the burden of proof is on the person claiming the consequences of exercising these rights are severe enough that they need to be abrogated.

If what you write were true, there wouldn't be any borders on this planet. However, there are. The right to free movement is simply not true. If you want that to be true, advocate for the removal of all borders worldwide.

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

#266

Post by JPLeRouzic »

FredPret wrote: post #35
Animats wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India got there on overpopulation. Total fertility rate around 6 in 1965. India does not have enough water for its population.[1] China would have hit similar problems if not for their one-child policy. China managed to avoid the overshoot when medicine starts to work but the economy hasn't developed yet. India didn't. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_scarcity_in_India

If you have access to the sea and to uranium you can make all the freshwater you need, even recycle your own wastewater nearly infinitely. This is a technological and economic problem, not an overpopulation problem.

> If you have access to the sea and to uranium you can make all the freshwater you need

I don't believe that would be true on a large scale because the seaside would quickly become polluted with brine, and then having an infinite supply of uranium wouldn't help you.

Desalination only works in the long term if there is an unlimited amount of body water to dilute the brine produced by the process.

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

#267

Post by felipeerias »

Zacharias030 wrote: post #81
api wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an evolutionary bio professor in college say this: "you don't understand evolution until you understand how contraception could lead to overpopulation." Anything placed in the path of reproduction is a barrier to be overcome. If there is anything in the human genome that correlates with a positive desire to choose to have children, we are selecting hard for that right now. We may see a bottleneck this century a…

What do you / your prof think about the timelines though? I always heard people shoot these kinds of arguments down by saying that evolution does not significantly operate on our accelerated timelines of human technology.

Human culture is subject to evolutionary pressures, just as biological systems, but it can change in a shorter timescale.

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

#268

Post by 4gotunameagain »

stego-tech wrote: post #148
chrisco255 wrote: post #104

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.

> 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. Disagree on both. Pornography, like any media, has a multitude of styles and types that can evoke different sets of emotions from the viewer. It's an art form that speaks uniquely to each individual, and I've foun…

> While it's true that not everybody uses it in such healthy ways

The vast majority abuses it, and I suspect it plays a huge role in dwindling relationships. It is much easier to keep enjoying intimacy with your partner if you're not busy running like a hamster on the hedonistic treadmill of pornography.

Drugs can be therapeutic as well, and profound. The vast majority abuses them like crazy. So many examples. We are addictive as a species.

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

#269

Post by SJC_Hacker »

WalterBright wrote: post #169
SJC_Hacker wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I cut down trees to build a house, then I may have created "wealth" but I've also destroyed trees. Now the net affect may be that wealth has increased, but it may also have an effect which actually destroys wealth like for instance if those trees existed on a hill, and the roots were holding the soil in place, the act of cutting down "Free market" economics does not capture this destruction of value. It only cares…

> "Free market" economics does not capture this destruction of value. Oh, but it does. It turns out that people who own land take care of it, so that it keeps producing. People who own timber land tend to manage it so it continues to be productive. Destruction happens with government owned land. For a related example, why are we not running out of cattle, hogs, and chickens, despite slaughtering them on an epic scale…

They might take care of their land, but they don’t generally care what happens to other peoples land. So excess fertilizer creating dead zones downstream? Well sucks to be them I guess. Markets are not good at pricing in externalities such as those

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

#270

Post by suslik »

adriand wrote: post #108
baron816 wrote: post #22

The mid-century Baby Boom occurred after a surge in affordable home keeping technologies (vacuum cleaners, washing machines, refrigerators, etc). I think a rebound in fertility will have to come from technology. Specifically, robots to help with child care and new fertility treatments to allow women to have children later in their lives.

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.

I’d say artificial womb is a technocratic center-left solution. A right-wing solution would be a proverbial “Kinder, Küche, Kirche” for all women.

I, for one, would bet my firstborn that a solution to the demographic question such that fulfills modern sensibilities is to ever be found.

Post reply on HN