Pondering the Birthrate Decline...

[Upsideyourhead]

Was just reading an article about this and wanted to get other people's views. The birthrate in the UK is at a record low, 1.44:

https://post.parliament.uk/research-briefings/post-pn-0745/

The Adam Smith Institute thinks the triple lock on pensions will be unsustainable by 2036, due to too few working people.

I haven't really seen this spoken about on here, in fact, it's normally the opposite: save the planet, have fewer kids, etc. Just wondering what people think about this and what they think the solution is. I'm pretty optimistic, so I'm focusing on the fact there might be more housing available for the kids we do have...

I feel like one of these three things has to happen, but can't work out which would be most popular:

1. Retired people from 2036 will have a raw deal when it comes to their pensions - they'll get far less than expected. There may be fewer workers to do, or willing to do, care work, so OAPs might physically suffer that way also. But that's the way it is, until the working age population can balance again, in a few generations time (assuming it doesn't decrease even more).
2. We will need to encourage and incentivise even more immigration, to get in workers to care for our old people (through tax and providing services)
3. Encourage more people to have children (e.g. South Korea offers cheaper mortgage rates to parents), although few countries have done this successfully.

As someone who will be retired in 25 years, I'm leaning towards 2 or 3. But perhaps the result will be a mixture of all three.

People's expectations have changed. 100 years ago people had large families because many children didn't survive childhood. Families would live in 2 up 2 down houses with children sharing bedrooms regardless of which sex they were, and sometimes sharing with parents as well.

Now parents expect their children to have a bedroom each.

I would not accept one iota of shame for not providing carer labour in the future for my abusive mother. It's every individuals responsibility to plan for any care they will need provided to them, not dump it on their offspring by default.

There was an article in the Guardian a few years ago saying how there'll be millions of climate refugees by 2050. Humans use up earths resources before even mid-year (earth overshoot day), our species is not sustainable at over 8 billion.
The UK soil has less than 60 years of nutrients left for crops to feed all these millions of people.

I am proudly childfree and there's no incentive imaginable that could get me to have a kid. Other people's pensions are not of interest to me. 💁‍♀️

Here is an entire page you can read about their research on child brides in US.

https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/learning-resources/child-marriage-research-action-network/crank-research-tracker/child-marriage-in-the-united-states-how-common-is-the-practice-and-which-children-are-at-greatest-risk/

Niger is still in the lead, which matches the birth rate chart.

I think we will find a much more efficient way to look after and entertain the elderly. The cost of care could be massively reduced with technology.

Write an "Advanced Decision the Refuse Treatment" (ADRT) I have had one since I was 40 (and wrote it much earlier just never got round to printing it off and getting my signiture witnessed). I've attached the main narriative part of mine here. I intend to review it when i'm closer to your age and most likely reduce the "12 month" threshold to 6 or 3, but whilst I'm younger the biggest threat to me neurologically would be head injury and 12 months gives time for any meaningful recovery.
Edit - image isn't showing at the moment

My grandparents were from families of 13 and 7, and 5 and 2 children respectively. They had 5 and 2 themselves. Those kids (my parents’ generation) had 7 kids between all of them, with no one having more than 3. So we've gone from 27 to 7 in two generations.

I planned on 6 myself but stopped at 2. Partly money - it didn’t use to cost this much to have kids, but also because I was raised to have self worth, education and expectations of being valued for myself rather than not valued for providing unpaid labour. And I’ve ended up with two autistic kids who I have to care for full time with fuck all help from any man, even though I have a better brain and education than my husband. Back 40 years ago my kids would have been fine - the world was quieter and they would have gone through school with playing at friends houses informally until I got home (as I did) so I could have worked, but now it’s expensive paid childcare, no local community, kids don’t attend their local school and aren’t allowed to walk themselves home, and schools that are loud, chaotic and impossible for autistic kids. But I planned on 6.

Of course we can’t replenish the workers.

How though?

I saw a program a few months ago that showed people shipping off their relatives to care homes in India and Thailand because the cost of a place there was something like £200 a month and it was cheaper to send them over there and go visit once a month than it was to have them in a care home in the UK.

I really hope this idea doesn't take off. Imagine shipping your 80 year old demented mother to Thailand 😥

Im 52 and im childfree by choice One of the reasons is i wasnt going to run myself ragged by working and bringing up kids, Back in the 90s i could see where this was all going and just thought..............nope!

Increasing the pension age to 70 has been touted as a potential for some time now

By 2067 ( based on the current pension age ) the newly retired will have had the benefit of employer contributions to pensions. So the majority of pensioners won’t be as reliant on the state pension as mush as they are now. This may lead at that point to some form of means testing ( I’m not saying I agree I just think it could happen at that point )

Retaining net contributors is essential

Encouraging a full working week as a minimum is essential to reduce UC and increase tax and ni payments

I think with more people choosing to wfh and thereby less opportunity to meet partners we may see the birth rate continue to fall.

As a whole world view I think a reduction in the population is a good thing.

Why a full working week? What is a full working week, other than an arbitury norm?

Surely reducing the working week and sharing out the work that is available, as AI becomes increasingly present, is fairer and more sustainable up to a later retirement age.

I don’t see how you could raise the birth rate with economic incentives. So far no country has had much success with it. The cost of a child is huge if you want to have a comfortable life with holidays and fun time. And people prefer to have a comfortable life to a bigger family. Quite a lot of people also choose to have no kids at all and it’s now socially acceptable and even celebrated. Large families are considered odd.

I think it’s much more realistic to try to plan a future where the birth rate is low and we manage that decline better, rather than badger women to give birth to more kids.

For decades they have been telling ppl not to have kids that they cant afford e.g See Peter Lilleys misogynistic speech about single mums from 1992.
Never has the phrase "be careful what you wish for" been so apt. Now they are whining that the reckoning has to be paid and that people did as they asked. 🙄😑

We have low levels of productivity in this country, compared to virtually all of our developed nation peers.

Increasing our productivity will enable us to support people more easily. So one worker can produce enough to support themselves, plus elderly parents, plus children for e.g.

The digital revolution should improve our productivity, but British firms need to up their levels of investment in order to take advantage of this. Historically, British firms have low levels of investment compared to their peers.

High levels of unskilled migration do nothing to help our productivity problem.

I don't think any country manged to get to above replacement level but some have managed slight increases with pro natalist polocies.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/pro-natal-policies-work-but-they-come-with-a-hefty-price-tag
Problem is the cost and designing an effective program.

I think it will be drip drip next decade or so till a crisis point comes - and we've been below replacement level since late 70 - my entire life so it may be long time coming when it hits.

They are already raising retirment ages every so often - they are slowly cutting benefits and services as they have been - they'll keep high immigration as they have been - I think inhertiance taxes will go up hitting more. I think they'll continue - trying to push more costs onto families and individuals- very likely further decreasing ferlity levels.

Persuamably at some point we'll hit point where either there arent enough young people or ones we have have given up striving then something drastic will happen.

I think that would be completely impractical.

How on earth are you supposed to look after your elderly relatives if you live hundreds of miles away, work full time, have a family of your own to consider and you live in a modest sized house?

You'd either have to uproot your family, move house and change jobs to move closer to your relatives or buy a new, larger house to move them in and then reduce your hours all the while having a larger mortgage/outgoings etc

Also, if you're a couple then that's 2 sets of potential elderly relatives needing support who quite likely don't live anywhere near each other.

Back in the day people didn't move as much for education or work and far fewer women worked outside the home - ie the ones actually doing the caring of elderly relatives.

I have 4DC and DBro has none. 40 and single. He just isn't interested.

People were told to get on their bikes and look for work. More whining from the powers that be that people did as they were asked

Triple lock pension is unsustainable and should be voided, so that's my main solution (to answer OP).

I'm not worried about this at all. Japan & South Korea are coping. Everyone else will cope, too.

I can't look after my elderly parents as they live in a different region. I have multiple children who need me each day. Impossible. My single DBro can step up instead.

The fact that he is single and child free is irrelevant. Your distance however is relevant.

Oh it's very relevant as he's time rich because he has no family like I do, so he can spend time with parents whereas I am time poor as dependent children need me. He does work full time tbf but still loads of time to help them between working hours.

The children you chose to have

It needs proper grown up, cross party consensus - they all need to say this so that it can't be a political football. If even one party lies about it for political gain, then people in this country will choose to believe them. Social media doesn't help with this - it has shrunk people's intellect and critical thinking.

Unfortunately where we are now is one result of eighty years of the welfare state. None of the political parties have been blunt enough to say

• you need to contribute much more to your own pension because the state part of it won't be enough for even a very basic standard of living
• You need to take responsibility for your own heath and stop eating so much processed crap even if it is an easy option.
• You need to maintain your own strength and fitness - no one is going to be able to do this for you, and it will probably make your later years so much easier
• You need to know that the NHS will not be able to do what the population has come to expect and demand
• You need to realise that people living into their nineties is not the biological norm

But because of five year Parliaments and the greed for power, none of them have been telling the truth. Look at the state Labour have got themselves in with their promises/not promises and their constantly changing definitions (apparently because I am a sole trader, I (for example) don't count as a "working person")

Pensions were always going to be an issue as the UK doesn’t have a pension fund.

We know that once women have genuine choice birth rates fall, someone who doesn’t want baby number two or three won’t be swayed by money or additional time off work. Where we live parental leave is generous, fulltime childcare is readily available and very cheap, employment is flexible and not just for parents.

He does have a family. He has a sister and parents and nieces/nephews. He might not have his own children but it doesn't mean he has no family. He also presumably has his own life and work and friend and commitments, like lots of child free people have.

Small point, but it's worth pointing out. Same as I have a family even though I don't have my own children.

Do you really think it's fair for him to take on the lion's share of responsibility for your parents simply because he has no children?