To think the young are less interested in sex, relationships and children

@JoyousGreyOrca That would suit me just fine! 😂

Pretty soon people will be healthy and active (and productive) well into their 100s. Lifespans of 130-150 will be the norm.

Most of what I've seen suggest 120 is an upper limit for humans and frankly most of population will not see that. Plus given obesity levels and lifestyles- rationing was apparently good for us -it's not impossible that despite better treatments we may start dying younger. Then there's whole thing of quality of life arguments and also euthanasia polices creeping in world wide.

Demographically the drop in fertility rates world wide has been much sooner and more dramatic than policy makers and researchers ever expected. It's also built in now fewer people each generation to have people each generation and as parental ages causes widening - stretching out - between the generations.

Apparently when we do peak world wide the decline will be as rapid as the assent - that could bring infrastructure maintenance issues and food production issues on their own - though that's a management issue so may be avoided.

The focus on African countries having higher fertility - and fertility more generally-conveniently means consumption levels and Co2 production per person figure are ignored - meaning people in west don't feel need to make changes.

I have seen argument that children being worst thing you can do environmentally are flawed and ignore the higher disposable income levels can lead to more CO2 heavy pastime like air travel and pets.

Having fewer kids will not save the climate
Is climate change really a reason not to have children? Here’s four reasons why it’s not that simple

Median age of death for women in UK is 84, so you may get your wish.

@Dappy777 You are looking at the population from a world viewpoint. You can do nothing whatever about this. The newly rich have always wanted to travel.

What is importing is what we do and what we need to do. We can pull economic levers to help young people want families here. We cannot control or even influence what anyone else does regarding family size. We now have 1.49 children per fertile woman. Long gone is 2.40. Of our projected population increase, 90% is expected to be immigration putting pressure on services immediately. We may well have 3 million over the age of 85 in 25 years time. Unless we get economic growth we won’t have the money to care for the ones who need it.

These are very difficult questions aren't they...is it really preferable for people to live until their 90s perhaps with dementia and/or other health conditions and needing carers 24/7? On the other hand, is it ethical to restrict very elderly people from medications which will prolong their life? My two grandfathers....one lived to his 60s and dropped down dead with a heart attack...the other lived well Into his 80s with Alzheimers living a dreadful life in a care home. These are very tough and uncomfortable conversations

@Comedycook I don't think it's that great when you're actually living the long life. My Dad (86) isn't bothered about living much longer, tbh. I think I'd feel the same after nearly nine decades!

@Goldenbear Yes, I can't say that DD and her friends are abstaining, and they tend to meet people in person now, just as we did.

I agree that apps were more of a thing a few years ago and obviously v. popular during the pandemic as it was the only way to stay in touch with people! But they seem to be waning.

Society has focused heavily on extending life and discouraging people to have children. This was always going to happen.

Where are these Gen Z abstaining from alcohol? I have Gen Z child as do my colleagues at RG Unis they are not abstaining from alcohol. What I do think is true it that many older Gen Z and youmg millennials have spent their whole life using apps to meet people, the lack of organic evolvement of relationships is a result of that. However, I have a young Gen Z and Gen Alpha and I think there is a backlash against all this online presence, none of them or their friends post images of themselves, they see that as an older people's thing. I personally think that was a young millennial thing, along with influencers etc. with the backlash against online presence and smartphones for teenagers, I think things will revert a bit.

@Dappy777 I don't think there's any point extending our lives, who wants to be around for a century? I'm 50 and would be quite happy to pop off by 80.

Greater life expectancy is a huge part of the population boom. Child mortality rates massively declined during the 20th century and the number of people living beyond 80 massively increased. I don't think that extending our lives any further would help, even if we were in good health for longer.

". Pretty soon people will be healthy and active (and productive) well into their 100s. Lifespans of 130-150 will be the norm." Hmm maybe, but currently life expectancy is actually declining in the UK @Dappy777

Casual sex and to some extent relationships in terms of opportunities to meet others went hand in hand with drinking for me in my youth. I guess now that they're abstaining from alcohol and going out and partying/clubbing less, there's far less opportunities to meet and mingle, and less risky behaviour. It's a good thing but I do wonder if there'll be an en masse mid life crises.

China is a great example. At first, it worked great, because people could work more and save more with only one child. So it got a huge economic boost from those young and productive workers. Now, there are fewer women to have children and the population is forecast to be cut in half by the end of this century. By then, half the population will be over 65. Right now, there are four workers for every pensioners, by the end of the century it will be one for one, or worse. Think about how that works. One person supporting all the benefits and health needs of that other person. It will happen in Africa too. Living longer just amplifies the problem, since few will want to or be able to work for 100 years. I think we'll see systematic assisted dying before that. A smaller population could be positive in some ways, like using fewer resources. But earlier era like the Black Death showed that innovation and productivity caught up to exploit those remaining resources more efficiently. The riches started a new wave of population growth. The losers will be us alive now, the people getting squeezed by the declining fertility rate.

Discussion round this usually suggests more homosexual relationships in young women and more relationships with older more secure men - but yes I did wonder if that was a miss match in commitment levels between women and men.

Anecdotally on internet there seems to be more walking away by young women stories realising they are "miss right" now and not long term commitment often after begrudging commitment offered when man realises he's getting on a bit or all his mates are settling down - in which case I think that's a bloody marvelous thing - and that's the heterosexual women getting more picky argument in article.

Incentive can bring births rates up slightly but not to replacement levels. Would give more a slump than cliff with aging population but population will still decline and still have fewer workers to dependent ratios.

As I said early there some evidence people would have more kids if it was even slightly easier - seem similar data from France from parents who have more if it was affordable. The focus is always on women who don't have any kids - though in UK ONS figures indicate a consistent figure there.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/conceptionandfertilityrates/bulletins/childbearingforwomenbornindifferentyearsenglandandwales/2020

While average family size has decreased, two children families remain the most common family size across both generations, with 37% of women born in 1975 and 44% of those born in 1949 having two children. For those born in 1975, 27% had three or more children and 17% had only one child, compared with 30% and 13% respectively, for their mothers' generation.
...

The percentage of women who remained childless in 2020 by the end of their childbearing years, has remained fairly consistent since the late 1950's, with 18.1% of the latest cohort born in 1975 having no children. This suggests that women are delaying childbearing rather than not having children.

China sort of shows though once smaller families become the cultural norm it's very hard to get bigger families - there's a lot of social pressure against it as well as continued financial pressures against.

Research is increasing linking house prices/rents with decrease in number of children. We had a previous housing crisis in UK - apparently we got out of that one by there being political consensus that private sector wasn't going to sort it out and doing a massive building program including massive council house program. There's no consensus at moment though Labour do seem to want to try and sort planning out.

It's not just us - there only a few countries with fertility rates above replacement levels now.

Conversely, fertility is below replacement level (2.1 children per woman) in 152 of the 235 zones that now account for 63% of the world population (vs. 45% in 2000)
Mapping the massive global fertility decline over the last 20 years

@Comedycook

It's basic science...each species wants to replicate itself. Of course, there's always outliers who won't feel any urge to do so...but ultimately we are no different from any other species.

At a population level species want to reproduce yes, but I disagree about humans being different, We are very different from other species: we are far more intelligent than most mammals and get satisfaction in much more sophisticated ways than just meeting basic needs and procreating.

It's hard to say how much of the urge to procreate is genuinely innate and how much of it comes down to social conditioning: I would argue that for most women in most situations in human history there wasn't really a Plan B so it was hard to imagine life without just having babies. You basically knew you would either have kids or die and you made peace with having kids as your predestined "role" and that informs the way a lot of women approach motherhood today.

So I'm not sure that people not wanting to reproduce are necessarily "outliers". They may just be people who have realised there's a much wider array of choices open to them than there were for their parents and grandparents. It's not an accident that generally speaking the more affluent and educated a population becomes, the fewer children women want. Because the more educated they become the more they realise it's not always great deal and comes with many strings attached.

At any rate, I think its a great thing that people don't feel its the only option open to them these days.

@brassandswitch

We need relationships and partners to reproduce. That's what we are here for,

I'm not having children and that is my choice. We are not 'only here to reproduce'. What about women who have fertility problems. Not everyone can have children and not everyone wants them.

Procreation was a fairly shit deal for the vast majority of women throughout the vast majority of human history

Indeed but that's indicative of society not biology.

It's basic science...each species wants to replicate itself. Of course, there's always outliers who won't feel any urge to do so...but ultimately we are no different from any other species.

I don't think everyone does have an urge to procreate though.

Some do, certainly. But for millennia women procreated largely not through choice. Procreation was a fairly shit deal for the vast majority of women throughout the vast majority of human history.

Now women have the tools at their disposal to be more than baby factories, and the ability to support themselves, its hardly surprising some of them are choosing to step off that roundabout. And its not the responsibility of the individual to prop up the needs of a society which hasn't managed its demographic trends properly.

I don't like the argument that says people have a responsibility to have children to support the elderly. Why should young people who don't want children have to put their needs aside for people three generations older than them?

They are NOT ever increasing! The birth rate is falling too quickly. We need more babies here and especially to better educated parents. It’s obvious. We cannot keep getting others in to do our work and pay tax.

But how do you see that happening? Assuming you’re not thinking along the lines of the Handmaid’s Tale or penalties for people who don’t want / can’t have kids. A society where people feel pushed to have children even if they don’t want them would be abhorrent.

Are you thinking of stronger incentives for parents?

@StMarie4me Unfortunately, £9-15K a year is a drop in the ocean for uni costs here in the US, but my DD and her friends still like a good frat party!

But yes, most of them are veggie or vegan and they definitely take their studies more seriously than many of my contemporaries in the 1990’s. She lives in a flat with other girls and they’re all focused and career-oriented. They date, but I think only one of them has a partner and DD says it’s not serious.

They are NOT ever increasing! The birth rate is falling too quickly. We need more babies here and especially to better educated parents. It’s obvious. We cannot keep getting others in to do our work and pay tax.

I will happily tell that to the elderly.

Ever increasing birth rates is an unsustainable Ponzi scheme. It’s not supportable in the future so we have to find newer ways of funding the welfare state.

All the panic in the world is not going to scare people into having (more) children.

What is interesting is when you look at the age profiles. I thought the reason why so many more young men were single compared to young women was because women dated older. But looking across the ages that does not seem yo be the case.

It seems more likely that some of the young women in relationships are with men who view themselves as single…