US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level • Hacker News Board

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#271

Post by dragontamer » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

magduf wrote: post #263

dragontamer wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and certainly didn't have a religion that promoted extremism Lets cut through the code words then and have a direct counterexample to what you're trying to say. Nigerians are primarily Muslims. They are also highly educated and among the most entrepreneurial immigrants to the USA. And while there's a "Nigerian prince" joke every now and then, they really are doing relatively well in the USA. Like, "better than Asia…

Ok, then what is the problem then? It's not racism; Nigerians are a lot darker than Arabs. Maybe it's a cultural problem, combined with religion: you never hear of Nigerian Muslims committing terrorist acts in the West. Islam is a big, big religion, and Muslims from some cultures simply don't have any kind of bad reputation (I'm thinking Malaysia here), while others certainly do. So maybe it is religion, just not the…

Its certainly a problem that's specific to particular sects.

The sect of Osama Bin Laden was "Wahhabism", which is relatively rare outside of Saudi Arabia. And even then, the Saudi Princes who work with the USA are often pro-Wahabbism, so the USA can't even deride that sect (even if its the primary sect of Al-Qaeda). Because there's still "good guys" who follow that particular sect.

Note that the "Bin Laden" family was a very rich and entrepreneurial group of people. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family) Some of them were huge investors in the US before their "black sheep" messed up their family name forever.

The Middle East is complicated. Like, super super complicated. Honestly, the bin Ladens in general (aside from the infamous one) should be welcome to the USA. A bit unfortunate about their "black sheep" sibling.

-----------

Besides, if "Religion" was the problem, why did the USA DESTROY the only secular, maybe even atheist, group in the Middle East? (aka: Iraq Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athists).

Reason: the world is complicated. And thinking about it in terms of Religion only is a mistake. ISIS for example is a combination of yes, Wahhabism, but ALSO has the support of former Ba'athists.

And the Ba'athists believe in Secularism and secular law. They seemed to have joined in the ISIS fun not because of religious reasons, but because they wished to take over Iraq and saw aligning themselves with the fundamentalist Wahhabists as the best path forward and creating a unified Arab State.

So yes, we are fighting secular (arguably an atheist) groups in the Middle East. The world is a very complicated place. Yes, we have enemies some places, but Muslims exist across the entire world. You can't paint the issues of one region as a blight on all Muslims.

Even then: I'd imagine that we should welcome the many Iraqis who have helped the USA and are now getting targetted by ISIS in their country. We have friends in the region and we are turning them away with our immigration policies. We've turned our back on our closest supporters of that region, and I wouldn't be surprised if a large number of them have died because of their pro-US support or actions.

TL;DR: Immigration policy is hard.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#272

Post by ch4s3 » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #35

mhneu wrote: post #8

For decades, the US birth rate has been held up by immigration. American values have been to regard the country as a nation of immigrants, who not only act as a source of youthful workers, but also have more kids than Americans who have been here longer. So the US has avoided workforce aging, as has happened in parts of Europe and especially Japan, through immigration. With the recent reduction in immigration, accele…

I don't see the value in large numbers of unskilled workers entering the US every year. With a potentially large wave of automation coming, the US shouldn't straddled itself with lots of unemployable drivers, farm workers, etc. I hope we can move to a much more sensible immigration system, similar to Canada's, for example.

> I don't see the value in large numbers of unskilled workers entering the US every year. With a potentially large wave of automation coming, the US shouldn't straddled itself with lots of unemployable drivers, farm workers, etc.

Your argument is that the jobs these people do might be automated away so they shouldn't come here. Is that correct?

I would counter that many of these jobs can't easily be automated and that these workers are much more adaptable than you give them credit for. You just aren't going to see robots picking strawberries or hanging sheetrock on a large scale anytime soon for economic and technical reasons. Delivery drivers and dishwashers have very low cpaex vs robots that could do the same. These immigrants also start small companies at higher rates than native born Americans.

I guess I just don't get the rationale for keeping out low skill workers. The pay for goods an services, provide labor, start businesses, and generally do quite well.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#273

Post by gowld » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

bmj wrote: post #41

craftyguy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be a lot more older folks, who expected to retire and collect social security, still in the workforce as a result of diminishing payments by youngsters into that program. Demand for medical care will continue grow as the majority of the population gets older. I believe Japan is experiencing this right now at a large scale.

There are also ramifications with older people who have no one to care for them at the end of their lives. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/world/wp/2018/01/24/feat...

Japan is transitioning from traditional family-based care (which fails when children are absent or nonexistent) to government-funded social-safety-net care. USA has already made that transition (with Medicaid for nursing home care).

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#274

Post by randyrand » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

reb wrote: post #32

confuseddesi wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, the richer someone is, the less likely they are to have as many children. See https://www.economist.com/node/21561112 .

Doesn’t that still track? Having children makes it harder to get/stay rich, not having children makes it easier.

Sure we could come up with a bunch of reasons each way. They're probably all wrong. But why are we speculating? Just go ask some rich people why they want/don't want X number of children and they will tell you.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#275

Post by briandear » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:30 PM UTC

mhneu wrote: post #8

For decades, the US birth rate has been held up by immigration. American values have been to regard the country as a nation of immigrants, who not only act as a source of youthful workers, but also have more kids than Americans who have been here longer. So the US has avoided workforce aging, as has happened in parts of Europe and especially Japan, through immigration. With the recent reduction in immigration, accele…

Has there been a reduction in legal immigration? Just curious what the actual numbers are.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#276

Post by cjbprime » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:32 PM UTC

gxs wrote: post #196

smaddox wrote: post #117

> "The rate has generally been below replacement since 1971" And yet population has grown by 120 million [1]. There are a lot of problems in the world, but I don't think low fertility rates is one of them. http://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table

I think that's due to immigration - not birthrates.

There's also a lag associated with fertility rate decreases.

Even if the children-per-woman rate has decreased sharply, the population can still be increasing for decades afterwards, because there are still a sharply higher absolute number of women in the relatively-lower-rate birthing generation, thanks to the rate having been higher in the past when they were born.

Not caring about lower fertility rates because you don't realize that there's a temporary lag keeping the population increase high seems very careless.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#277

Post by magduf » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:32 PM UTC

tathougies wrote: post #230

annywhey wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stereotypical American setup is: Man helps by going to job, paying bills, doing "male-coded" household work(handyman, auto maintenance, etc.). Woman does "female-coded" equivalents(cooking, cleaning, shopping). In my own family the actual way it worked out was that both of them indulged their fixations and muddled through the rest without much discipline or mutual encouragement. This was imperfect but mostly work…

Isn't male coded housework quite difficult? My dad did a lot of projects on our house that were quite necessary to prevent things like mold growth or to make it easier to live there. He made my brother and I help a lot, and based on my memories, it was not easy work. We had this shower that needed sealing quite often, and from my memories, it was back breaking work. Often times, I would hope my mom would ask me to he…

In my experience when I was married and lived this way (without kids), the "male" tasks were comparatively quite difficult and frequently involved specialized knowledge, but didn't take all that much time compared to all the cooking and cleaning my ex-wife did, though sometimes it required some late hours if a project needed to be done at a certain time.

In our case, I worked a full-time tech job while my ex either wasn't working at all, or for a while was in a technical school (which wasn't taking all that much of her time), plus for a while we had several rental houses that we had to do repairs and upgrades on. So I did auto repair, tile installation, plumbing repair, etc., while she did most of the cooking and cleaning, and some things we shared like painting.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#278

Post by mc32 » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:32 PM UTC

Andre_Wanglin wrote: post #160

jacquesm wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They may not appear to be "winning" to those who measure civilizational success by the quarter but I bet their way wins out in the long run. I'll bet the opposite. The long run is really long and if your population is in decline then you either up the numbers or sooner or later it will be game over for your branch of the tree.

Populations can grow geometrically at any time. What matters to a particular "branch" is that it remains a cohesive and clearly demarcated appendage while it weathers hostile conditions. Grafting on another branch is what ensures its demise as a distinct entity.

Actually I agree with you, if a society at some point believes it has progressed enough and feel happy enough, there is no internal reason to pursue growth at any expense.

Japan may decide that being self sufficient and self reliant offers them the best return on their lifestyle.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#279

Post by briandear » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:33 PM UTC

mozumder wrote: post #187

losteric wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile Chinese citizens "subsidize" the rest of our economy... The only difference is we can't move all our food factories abroad, so the labor travels here.

We could build a high-speed Maglev rail line over the Bering Straights to Asia and another one to South America... But yah, open the borders. That's the only immediate solution. The 90's had our greatest economic growth, and the borders were basically wide open then.

The borders weren’t basically wide open then.

Re: US Births Dip to 30-yr Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

#280

Post by parentanonymous » Thu, May 17, 2018, 9:35 PM UTC

For what it's worth, I've got two kids and live in a 2bd. apartment in SF. I'll never be able to afford a house in the city, but I like my job and I'm not willing to commute from the outermost burbs I could afford. And it's totally worth it.

Yes, having kids brings some limitations with it, but it's also one of the very best experiences that one can have.

I hear a lot of young professionals express fear that they can't afford "a big enough house" or that "the city isn't good for kids." Here's the thing, the kids do not care. They don't think they they live in a small apartment. They just think their home is next door to the bakery that sells their favorite oatmeal cookies. That they can walk to beautiful parks and libraries and schools. It's just normal to them, they're happy, and they aren't comparing themselves to the 50's era stereotypes of what "lifestyle" is "healthy" for kids.

SF is a great place for kids. All the parks and rec programs are so much fun and so cheap, the kids here have access to the abundant cultural and educational resources that aren't available at any price in most of the world.

I say this not because anyone should be convinced to have a kid. But, if you want to have children and the thing that is holding you back is a materialistic fear that you won't be able to "provide a good enough life" for them, or that the city "won't be a good place for them," just know that isn't necessarily true.

The best way I know how to express this for young urban professionals is to compare it to world travel. You probably know people from your home town who have never left, and how their world view is kind of small. It's not that they need to move away from home, but you know from experience how much traveling has opened your mind and enriched your life, and you wish they would choose to have that experience too. If they say to you "oh, but travel is so expensive," you know that isn't necessarily true, you can have an amazing travel experience on a dime if you want to.

Parenting is a lot like that. What kids care about is having parents that love them and care about them. If you can do that part, they won't care too much about the rest.