The global fertility rate is falling • Hacker News Board

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#551

Post by ddorian43 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:34 AM UTC

zeepzeep wrote: post #544

lqet wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wouldn't want to put children in this world. I don't think the future world is a nice place to grow up in, even the current world isn't. I have posted the following a few years ago: > My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during times in which many scholars where certain the apocalypse was due in the next 25 years, during periods in which the plague killed more than half of the population, during the 30 y…

> assuming that you can look into the future. That's why I said "even the current world isn't".

Do you want to live in this world ?

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#552

Post by burfog » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:35 AM UTC

kamaal wrote: post #401

manquer wrote: post #197

One aspect this article does not address at all is the massive sex ratio imbalance in India and China (for different reasons) at around 1,100 men for every 1000 women. This means there are 100 million girls less today in these countries alone, finding a suitable partner becomes harder and there are lesser number of couples will be there in the first place who can have kids The 2.1 replacement is perhaps not adequate…

>>This means there are 100 million girls less today in these countries alone Actual numbers are way off the real numbers. In my kids school you can see a very noticeably difference in the count of boys and girls in any standard and section. It's noticeable to a point, if you walk in to a classroom you can see at least visually boys outnumber girls by a good enough difference. I also refuse to believe this due to infa…

The girl shortage will change the culture. Dowry will disappear, possibly to be replaced with a bride price.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#553

Post by greggman3 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:35 AM UTC

creato wrote: post #345

It is disturbing that people take for granted that this is an economic problem. This thread is full of people lamenting the fact that we could support X times as many people as we do now if we all just sacrifice Y. When I look around the world today, I think the biggest resource that is lacking is economic opportunity. Huge swathes of people are desperate, angry, and depressed, I think because there is no opportunity…

I see this idea here in several places. Effectively "more money = more kids"

There is ZERO evidence that's the case. In fact all evidence points to the opposite. The more money people have the less likely they are to have children.

I'm not suggesting that we should therefore lower people's incomes. Only suggesting that the idea that his has anything do with lacking economic opportunity has zero basis in fact.

The richer a country gets, the less kids they have, period.

---

follow up: According to this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility

birth rates do rise at some level of income but not enough to cover deaths.

Here's some other charts to look at

https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate

---

To put in another way, let's wonder if we lived in a post scarcity society and everyone had all they needed and more. Would the birth rate explode? Would it go up a bunch? Would it hit the replacement level? I suppose it's all speculation but my reading of the data it is would not hit the replacement level.

Basically, for whatever reason, people that are well educated and well off want children less than those that don't for whatever reason.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#554

Post by scollet » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:37 AM UTC

raziel2p wrote: post #509

thehappypm wrote: post #206

Give it a few generations. In the past, having a family was status quo and basically required. Now, it’s a choice. Natural selection will heavily favor those with the “I want kids!” gene.

I think the point here is that the people who don't want kids are still a useful part of our gene pool, and we should look critically at what factors in to the decision not to have any kids - I don't think it's genetic at all. It's impossible for me not to think of Idiocracy while writing this - which was extremely exaggerated, but still...

Are you thinking of memetics?

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#555

Post by moises_silva » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:38 AM UTC

silveroriole wrote: post #511

freetanga wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the correlation between what you put in and what you get out is much higher. I had to give up a number of hobbies and intelectual pursuits in order to be there for my kids. Building a caring, trust-based long term relationship is hard work - sharing the same blood and providing a roof and a meal is not enough, which sadly is many people’s definition of parenting. I know I am giving up things. I know there is…

It sucks knowing that you’re the reason your parents gave up hobbies, dreams, money, travel etc that they could otherwise have had. I know, like you, parents usually think it’s worth it but it’s not nice to think that my mom would probably have been a more fun, interesting person if I didn’t exist. The admittance that your life has to change and you have to give things up so that another human can do maybe things ins…

I'm not sure why there's this insistence that 'giving up' time spent on hobbies makes you less interesting or less fun. You can have some hobbies, learn new things, etc; while being a parent. Sure you don't have as much time to do it, but having kids can also make you learn things and get perspective you wouldn't otherwise.

Also, worth remembering the alternative to such a "pointless cycle" is a pointless short existence and then human life would be over. Sure, you can argue that's a good thing for earth, but even life on earth is pointless in the grand scheme of things if you're going to use that line of reasoning.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#556

Post by arvinsim » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:39 AM UTC

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #352

corysama wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully expect the Indian and Chinese population coming into wealth will go through a period of fairly outrageous conspicuous consumption. I have a hope that it will be fast-forwarded compared to the past 70 years of American history. Hopefully after a decade-long warmup and another decade of settling in, the novelty will wear off and there will be a move away from focusing on "More Stuff!" and toward focusing on "Le…

> Hopefully after a decade-long warmup and another decade of settling in, the novelty will wear off and there will be a move away from focusing on "More Stuff!" and toward focusing on "Less Clutter, More Experiences!" The western world hasn't even moved past that stage, so I highly doubt developing countries will move through it quickly.

Ironically, it is cheaper to have "more stuff" than to have "less clutter, more experiences!".

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#557

Post by nocitrek » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:39 AM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #337

Maybe a controversial opinion, but: the specific way in which Western capitalist societies (which were then pushed on to the rest of the developed world, directly or indirectly) went about the liberation of women is a major cause of population implosion. It used to be possible to raise a family on a single income. However, once corporate interests (and the blind market itself) realized that having women in the workfo…

I agree with you. The message is mixed. You shouldn't have kids because climate change / woman should go into workforce, yet on the other hand we need people to support our eldery.

So which is it? You can pile up immigrants to support eldery, but why don't we work on baby boom within our communities? Why don't western woman have 6-7 kids, like their African counterparts?

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#558

Post by scollet » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:39 AM UTC

Santosh83 wrote: post #405

mchusma wrote: post #205

I hope Humanity grows many orders of magnitude larger and expands across the galaxy. The universe will be a more interesting place. Some people here are saying this is good for the environment. Having 20% fewer people won't do that. Clean energy and other technology will. You can easily fit 100B humans on earth, with more of the earth dedicated to nature preserves. (Maybe a trillion people https://youtu.be/8lJJ_QqIVn…

A human being can fit into approximately 2x2 feet cylinder. I propose packing the entire accessible Universe with a human being per such cylinder stacked alongside each other with no padding/margin between cylinders. We will thus avoid shrinking into extinction and maximally populate all available 3-dimensional space.

I propose hexagonal storage pods. Even though the bees may be gone, we can carry on their legacy.

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#559

Post by saithound » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:40 AM UTC

kamaal wrote: post #508

saithound wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your proposed (not illegal, not unethical) explanation does not work out mathematically. Even in the extreme scenario where all families stopped would stop having kids after the birth of a daughter, the expected number of male children would equal the expected number of female children. And even if say 52 percent of babies born are boys, you won't ever get a male excess of the discussed magnitude (1100 men for every…

Mine was just an anecdotal evidence. Also that 52% boy babies count itself is too low. The real scenario for my comparison is 3 boys for every 1 girl born. It's also way more complicated than your simulation. Say the first kid was a boy and the second kid was a girl, people don't stop. They think their risk(Having a boy to provide in old age) is hedged and are likely to try for one more kid. If you have families wher…

> You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades.

I agree. I just doubt the "not illegal, not unethical" explanations.

> If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and you will the see things start going real bad soon.

No, this is precisely the kind of "family planning" that mathematically won't be able to affect the expected gender ratio at all. The ratios are skewed in India, but that's definitely caused by something else. Is it the conception of male children being more likely? No, probably not, we have very good evidence that about 51% of children are conceived male. So it's caused by something else. Selective abortions would be my best guess, but that's not "not illegal, not unethical".

Re: The global fertility rate is falling

#560

Post by rimliu » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:42 AM UTC

thehappypm wrote: post #206

Give it a few generations. In the past, having a family was status quo and basically required. Now, it’s a choice. Natural selection will heavily favor those with the “I want kids!” gene.

That's not how natural selection works. Most of us want sex because of that gene. But we do know about contraception, which natural selection knows nothing about.