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

361–370 of 409 posts

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

#361

Post by worik »

nradov wrote: post #242
worik wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And where did Musk's money come from? No body (?) is contending that in a free market wealth is not created. The contention is that when wealth is created it tends to head to other wealth. When a bank lends capital and has a choice of lending to, say, Elon Musk or me, I think the bank will make that rational choice and lend to Elon. Thus once you have some wealth attracting more wealth is less difficult than from b…

The "Boots theory" of economics is garbage, just utter nonsense. I don't understand why people keep mentioning it here without applying any critical thinking. It simply doesn't apply to the vast majority of actual consumer products. Some of most durable, longest-lasting footwear I ever bought was also among the cheapest. By contrast the expensive stuff tends to be fussy, fragile, and impossible to repair. This genera…

Where do you buy shoes?

That is the exact opposite of my (and Cpt. Vines) experience

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

#362

Post by worik »

WalterBright wrote: post #171
worik wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In a free market society, wealth is created, it is not "concentrated" That is incorrect In a free market wealth has a definite tendency to clump together, to concentrate. A moment's thought will make clear why.

> A moment's thought will make clear why. Take a moment and elaborate, please.

I have a comment above about access to capital, which is much easier if you already have it, so the rich have more access than the poor to the main tool of capitalism.

But another example, equity: If I am raising money for my startup, and I have no traack record (I'm poor in this context) and Sam is doing the same after Sam made a successful exit from their last startup, who would you invest in, all else equal, Sam or me? Sam if you are rational

Thus the rich have more access to equity than the poor

This is a pattern that repeats over and over in free markets

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

#363

Post by xp84 »

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.

While I wouldn’t like to place all my faith in that happening, that would certainly be a great development.

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

#364

Post by xp84 »

bombcar wrote: post #239
lynx97 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Late child birth is not about fertility but about risks for the child. The only woman I know (yeah, anecdotes) who attempted to delay getting a child until after her 40th birthday got a baby with down syndrome. I know what living with a disability in our world means, from personal experience. And given that experience, I have a hard time giving these women some slack. I think they are risking the well being of their…

Late first child seems to have some substantial risks, though (what they call) geriatric pregnancies in general may not be as risky. But even starting in your 30s gives you a big disadvantage, toddlers are fast (the fastest land mammal is a toddler who’s just been asked what he has in his mouth!).

Became a parent mid-30s and I cannot agree more. I didn’t feel old right away, but my first child is somewhat special-needs and it feels like parenting him has aged me 20 years in the past 7. This is a special case, but even with a ‘normal’ kid it’s still true.

The #1 thing I would tell any young person who would listen is that if you want them, finish having children by like 27. I know for most people, that represents a gamble (that you’ll be able to achieve financial stability in the future), but it’s a safer bet than betting that ‘future you’ will be better equipped in all of the non-money ways. Spoiler: older you is worse equipped in most ways. You might have more wisdom to impart, but the children won’t listen to you anyway so that’s moot.

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

#365

Post by xp84 »

pfdietz wrote: post #132
adriand wrote: post #108

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.

Nah, the right wing solution would be replacing prison with compulsory pregnancy. Sufficient numbers of convicts can be created by appropriate laws.

This really shows what a bogeyman the “right wing” is to you! Cartoon villains, basically.

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

#366

Post by FredPret »

JPLeRouzic wrote: post #351
triceratops wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have to release brine directly into the seaside? What about long pipes with holes that go 50-100 kilometers into the sea? There's no question of polluting all the oceans with brine. They get freshwater from the rain and the salt came from the oceans in the first place. We aren't net destroying water molecules.

That's a very theoretical point of view. How to maintain those pipes? In two or three years, they will be full of small mollusks and other seafood.

There are many sewer and storm outlets just like this all around the world already

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

#367

Post by xp84 »

pfdietz wrote: post #131
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.

For a technological solution, I've previously suggested changing the male/female ratio of new births. Filter out most of the Y bearing sperm cells. In this new imbalanced society, a TFR well below 2 will still allow a stable, or even growing, population.

While I think such a society would end in a lot of bloodshed, it sounds like it would make for an entertaining sci-fi or anime. I assume the elites would try to condition most or all of these women to be lesbians, to keep them believing that this is about women’s empowerment and not develop ideas of women being unvalued concubines and entertainment for the few Y-chromosome-bearers that survive (who I imagine couldn’t help but develop enormous egos and senses of entitlement).

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

#368

Post by tuatoru »

neaden wrote: post #317

I remember when I was younger being constantly told that the earth was destined for overpopulation. That if we didn't do things soon to curb fertility there was going to be mass starvation and death. That this was just an inevitability, a certainty unless something was done. There were so many visions of the future based on overpopulation and the problems it would bring. Now we've switched to the opposite side, I nev…

>I remember when I was younger being constantly told that the earth was destined for overpopulation.

Moral: Journalists are stupid and ignorant, and you should always keep in mind Gell-Mann amnesia, and go to the source papers.

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

#369

Post by oh_my_goodness »

worik wrote: post #360
oh_my_goodness wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This part is true, and the folks who equate new borrowings with income are liable to do some real damage if anybody ever listens to them.

Totally and utterly wrong, a complete misunderstanding of capitalism Let me explain. Access to capital is key. If you have it you can do business, if you do not you cannot, in general terms There is more than one way to access capital, debt is very common. And to get rich you have to do business So if you are already rich getting more money, in a free market, is easier than getting started, in a free market That is t…

I don't know who you're writing this to. You're not addressing any point I brought up.

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

#370

Post by spauldo »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #297
h2zizzle wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a single, gay man. During two of my last major existential crises, for about two weeks following, I noticed a marked turn of my thoughts and feelings towards having (biological) children. Stuff like, "If I'd had a kid at such-and-such age, how old would they be now?", "How would I manage if a child was suddenly in my life?", and "Oh god, my line stops with me panic ". For a number of reasons, I am extremely unlik…

Sex is for procreation; even when done for sport, the biological studies show that changes happen hormonally that increase the chances of reproduction. Ergo, even when you don’t think sex is for reproduction, nature made it so that it is.

This is a strange take.

Sex is - barring IVF - required for procreation. But saying that sex has a purpose implies a creator. And once you require a creator then you're off in the land of theology and biological studies take a back seat.

Post reply on HN