To think pronatalists are on to something?

How does excessive breeding fit in with the climate issue? Surely the best thing to contribute to the reduction of carbon emissions is to reduce the numbers of children? Unless of course you are a billionaire then it's ok to have 11 children and jet around the world. While we need to recycle toilet rolls.

“According to Eurostat, the old-age dependency ratio in the EU was 33% in 2022, meaning there were just over three working-age adults (15-64) for every person aged 65 or more. By January 2050, state spending on healthcare and pensions is likely to grow, as the ratio looks set to hit 56.7%.”

considering the ratio was 1 to 5 in the 60s the above is not sustainable. Yes there are policies & innovation that can help but governments get away with ignoring it because most of the population don’t want to acknowledge any of the associated issues.

The generations behind them won’t be smaller if we keep importing people in quick fixes though, will it.

The demographic shift is one reason for higher inflation & why we are highly unlikely to see very low interest rates again.

Humans aren't that significant. The most diverse planet in the solar system is hardly going to be desolate without us

Earth has already gone through several mass extinction events. So even if humans were gone, all the natural life you see today will not exist long into the future. So why bother to preserve something that will have no chance to last anyway?

(tbf I do enjoy nature and want to stop unnecessary destruction. But not at the cost of human thriving)

Humans aren't that significant. The most diverse planet in the solar system is hardly going to be desolate without us.

Yes I agree we may need a softer landing, but people are still having children. The huge baby boom of elderly people born in the 1940's and 50's won't be alive by the time today's babies are taxpayers. We need to look at short term solutions to help them, and look at how AI and technology is going to change the way we live and work. We don't need as many babies to look after the elderly born in the 70's and on, because the global birthrate since then has been more or less stable since then, and we may end up eith the problem of too many young prople eith no jobs due to advances in robotics and AI. Population growth has been almost exclusively caused by people living longer, not birthrates.lower birthrates means fewer prople throughout their lives, even if they live to 100.

I think this is the point Malcolm and Simone ultimately make.

If you're someone who believes in women's rights, secularism, protecting the environment etc, you're likely to have fewer children than someone who believes the opposite of these things. At current trends, in a couple of generations a much higher percentage of DC will have been raised by people who don't hold those values.

I still don't want to have a whole brood of kids myself, but they seem uncomfortably right on that point.

The planet is a giant ball of rock. It has been a ball of fire and an ice ball in its time. It made no difference to the planet, and life forms evolved out of that. Humans are the most remarkable species in the known universe. Other species don't know or care if they are extinct or not. Rhinos only care if they can feed their own baby rhinos to self sufficiency and if they have another rhino to procreate with and a tribe. They don't know or care about the future of their species or if there are other rhinos in other parts of the world after they are dead. Only humans do that- about themselves and other species.. If humans need to go extinct to ' protect the planet' what's the point in all this environmental nonsense? The quicker we kill ourselves by making the planet uninhabitable fir ourselves the better. Let's burn all the fossil fuels until we choke to death.

Yes, I don’t really get the humans are the worst and we should all die. We evolved to live on the planet like other species.

A high quality social system that values care of babies, toddlers and elderly would help. Providing a high salary for well qualified capable, valued staff to work in care would help. Affordable homes in a community for people for public sector and low paid workers. Not a small block of affordable flats stuck to the end of a ££££ private new build, beside the sewage pipes. No private care homes, rentals, nurseries. People can have larger families when services, homes, life are affordable and the burden on NHS would drop as the need for mental health care and chronic addiction help dropped.

The planet is a giant ball of rock. It has been a ball of fire and an ice ball in its time. It made no difference to the planet, and life forms evolved out of that. Humans are the most remarkable species in the known universe. Other species don't know or care if they are extinct or not. Rhinos only care if they can feed their own baby rhinos to self sufficiency and if they have another rhino to procreate with and a tribe. They don't know or care about the future of their species or if there are other rhinos in other parts of the world after they are dead. Only humans do that- about themselves and other species.. If humans need to go extinct to ' protect the planet' what's the point in all this environmental nonsense? The quicker we kill ourselves by making the planet uninhabitable fir ourselves the better. Let's burn all the fossil fuels until we choke to death.

I don't agree; I think the opposite to these people.

Humans have ruined the planet, it would be a good thing if the human race came to a natural, gradual end through people having fewer children.

The planet could then be reclaimed by the billions of other species that have treated it with respect.

@DramaLlamaBangBang who is arguing for a baby boom? We need a softer landing though.

I would have loved to have a big family & had money been no option I would have had several. As it is, I have one child as I can't afford any more. I actually think the benefits cap on 2 children is probably a reason why people don't have more children, which I understand, the general public cannot be expected to fund an unlimited amount of children per family, but it definitely is a factor. Add to that the lack of affordable housing, especially for larger families. I'm not going to make my own life harder so the elderly have carers in the future. I can't afford it & I daresay there are many, many people in the same situation as me.

I also think it’s quite sinister for women’s right eg China clamping down on abortions, some American states banning them etc.

We need a short-term fix to care for the current large elderly population. The generations behind them are smaller. When they are elderly there will not be as many of them. The answer is not to create another baby boom and push the problem onto another generation in 80 years time.

We have nowhere near enough suitable housing stock for example.

Upside down pyramid schemes really don’t work. Taxes will need to increase & people will get poorer.

The future belongs to those children, not those who create them. And you do realise your kids aren't obliged to take on your values (and hopefully they won't, because you sound even more judgemental than myself, which IS rather an accomplishment), so you can put that smug idea in a box and tie it with a ribbon

My children may or may not. But children generally do take on the values of their family, in aggregate.

So if you like the society you live in, then you should try to perpetuate that with children.

If you do not, well, I guess giving up and having no children is a sensible response.

It’s not really about me or my children as individuals.

Tell that to the Pharaohs.

Many don’t seem to grasp the economics of a largely older population.

The future belongs to those children, not those who create them. And you do realise your kids aren't obliged to take on your values (and hopefully they won't, because you sound even more judgemental than myself, which IS rather an accomplishment), so you can put that smug idea in a box and tie it with a ribbon.

My husband and I feel so strongly about this that we put our money where our mouths are and chose not to have children - no way were we going to contribute to the harm that humans cause over and over again

The future belongs to those who have children, so our values will ultimately win out in the long run.

Our closest relatives are critically endangered through human activity. Who's to say the human race is more important than the orangutan?

The human race is more important than the orangutan, in my opinion. We could have a chance to get off this planet and terraform other planets. Bring other species with us. But if we don’t do that, most species will die in the next mass extinction event (we will too, if we regress …)

I couldn’t agree more with this. Humanity has proven itself to be selfish, exploitative, cruel, violent, devastatingly chaotic and an absolute blight on the planet and to all other living animals.

My husband and I feel so strongly about this that we put our money where our mouths are and chose not to have children - no way were we going to contribute to the harm that humans cause over and over again.

So falling birth rates make me happy. I don’t care if there’s no one to look after me in old age (or any of the cliches thrown out by those who want to encourage human reproduction).