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

The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#531

Post by SoftTalker »

margalabargala wrote: post #271
biophysboy wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you make of the birth rates being much higher and stable among married couples, and of the birth rates among women in their 30s increasing? These don't really correspond to your take.

I think that perfectly aligns with their take. People in their 30s, married, tend to have more stable lives. They are in a position where they feel they are able to give that child a good life.

Peak fertility though is early 20s. By the time people are in their 30s, having trouble getting pregnant is a more common problem.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#532

Post by insane_dreamer »

scottious wrote: post #475
Aurornis wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, the curb is full of extra large SUVs idling with kids just waiting inside the cars Anecdotally, when my work schedule was wonky for a while I would do the same with my kids. Those few extra minutes hanging out with them in the morning were something I valued a lot. We got to talk and relax a little bit after the rush of getting ready in the morning. They had all day to spend with their classmates so a fe…

I am friends with a lot of other parents already. I do go out of my way to make friends. I already organize bike trips to the museum and stuff like that. I'm a very social person. What I'm saying is that there are a lot of forces keeping people solitary and anti-social. This is just one of them. I know for a fact that some of these families waiting in their SUVs live a short walk from the school. Yet still they choos…

> I don't want him going close to the cars because they've LITERALLY been pumping out pollution for 10-15 minutes (those early spots are very coveted). I have to tell my son to hold his breath when we bike on the empty sidewalk past these idling cars.

social-interaction problems aside, why are the cars idling? seems like the school/city would have an ordinance prohibiting that

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#534

Post by peter_d_sherman »

(Comedy writing mode ON: )

"We need to flatten the curve..."

(Comedy writing mode OFF: )

You know, to re-quote the powers-that-be and the mainstream news media...

What, no takers?

You know, "flatten the curve... of population increase?" -- what, still not funny?

Hey, I'm just re-quoting what other people said... (a whole lot of people, incidentally!) but in the context of the article, above!

What, still no takers?

You people have no sense of (dark, very dark, let's be completely honest about that!) humor!

:-)

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#535

Post by jpadkins »

bittercynic wrote: post #457
brightball wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've watched most of my life as narratives have been pushed in popular culture, TV, music, magazines, online articles, etc that go out of their way to convince people not to have children. Just some examples of trends I've observed personally. - Scare media about the cost of having children - Scare media about the environmental impact of having children, even calling it irresponsible for the planet - Scare media abou…

As a man who's never wanted kids, and is now getting to an age where it probably wouldn't be a good idea, those weren't really the big factors for me. Having a kid is just an unfathomably large commitment. If you bring a kid into the world, I believe you're responsible for creating the conditions where that kid can grow into a healthy, well adjusted adult, and that's seemed like an increasingly impossible commitment…

It's not that hard. Sorry you missed out on a wonderful thing. You are not responsible for the world or its conditions. You just have to support the kid and be a good role model, that is 95% of the job.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#536

Post by estearum »

MyHonestOpinon wrote: post #466
throwawayohio wrote: post #85

Living in a city that this administration has constantly been attacking forced me and my wife, as well as many of our neighbors, to put off our family growth plans. Not only did many of my neighbors lose their jobs, but others are simply fearful of living their lives. We're fine financially, have housing, etc, but at this point why would we go through the stress of raising a child when a masked federal agent might ju…

I am with you, it is a scary time. I have to remind myself that we have gone through worst times. My grandfather grew up in a ranch, at 22, along with his extended family and friends, they took arms and joined a revolution, they overthrew a dictator. They fought on the back of a horse for years. It was a rough life, but they endured, and here I am. Enjoying a life so comfortable that would be unimaginable for them. Y…

Eh, my grandfather lived through World War 2 and he was a lot less confident that "we have gone through worse times" than you are.

Physical comforts are a small piece of the equation.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#537

Post by giantg2 »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #452
giantg2 wrote: post #357

Slow and sustained population decline while automation and AI are increasing is great news. A gradual gobal population decrease would be beneficial in every way except for economies built on perpetually increasing consumption.

It's not just numbers or speed. It's the shape of the population pyramid. Around the world except Africa, populations are aging. This means less taxes will come in, less workers of prime age, much more healthcare and elder care will be needed, and thus less of the valuable workers in other sectors.

That's only a bad thing if automation and AI don't increase productivity (shrink the number of workers needed). Otherwise, it's a benefit. Taxes are already unsustainable in the US.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#538

Post by hearsathought »

throwawayohio wrote: post #94
Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't realize incel rhetoric had spread to hackernews. God we're doomed.

The fall of this site after 2016 has been sad to watch. Basically turned into low-volume reddit.

Isn't reddit infested by people complaining about "incels"?

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#539

Post by jpadkins »

izzydata wrote: post #106
jandrewrogers wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The growing population of economically non-productive people requires a growing population of economically productive people to support them. At some point, you could take 100% of the output of the productive people and it would still not be enough to support retirees et al. At the limit, not growing the productive population puts younger generations in a position of existing solely for the purpose of serving the non…

But infinite population growth is unsustainable so it had to come to an equilibrium eventually. Maybe we overshot the maximum comfortable population by a bit and we are going to rebound for awhile. Also an economy that requires an infinitely growing population feels like a pyramid scheme which is also an unsustainable system.

> But infinite population growth is unsustainable

Only if we don't explore and colonize the stars. From what we know, the universe is infinite.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#540

Post by shipman05 »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #359
cco wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't seem to be supported by the data, the "nicer" and richer a country becomes, birth rates drop. And basically the opposite is true for countries with a high birth rate. How do you square those facts with your view here?

The dimension of this issue that never gets air time is that we've made having kids almost completely intentional. The richer a country becomes, the more intentional having kids becomes. The dynamic we see with rich countries is that as having kids becomes more intentional, there's also the increase in reasons why people would choose to delay or forego having kids.

I think you're spot on. And all of the various theories and analysis are pretty laughable if one has any sort of historical context.

- "People don't have kids because they're afraid of climate change" - Wildly overestimates the number of people who figure climate change into their life plans, and it discounts the numerous catastrophes people have feared and experience in the past while continuing to have high birth rates. - "People don't have kids because everything is too expensive" - My father-in-law has 11 siblings and they grew up in a 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom home. His story is not unique.

"having kids is almost completely intentional"....in countries where this is the case due to birth control, abortion, feminism (and other cultural shifts), the birth rate plummets.

Delving into the reasons why people opt to have fewer or no children when given the choice consistently across races, religions, cultural background, etc would be a book-length endeavor, but to me it really is that simple. There are numerous reasons someone wouldn't want to have more children, and they tend to find one of them when given the choice.

Post reply on HN