To think the pope has a point??

[HiggleDyPigGeldy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65572153

I was in Italy recently and visited several large towns in the North. More dogs being walked than babies in buggies.

I personally think a smaller population overall is a good thing & whilst it's great life expectancy has increased I think there needs to be a much greater balance between young & old. For me youth brings more progression & innovation in a society.

@OutsideLookingOut as I said I don't think having dc is simply to prop up a society & the whole argument about labour slaves is imo redundant since the vast majority of us already are. I mean we live in a capitalist society!

See there is no longer a stigma attached to being selfish. You are all answering your own question by abusing me. You all think it is wonderful and great so obviously less and less people will have children because it is being endorsed by the vast population. Not so long ago people would have been gently prodded to grow up and act responsibly. Today that is no longer the case. Case is solved!!!!!!

Whilst care and funding for the elderly will be an issue, things will eventually even out again, as the currently elderly and soon to be elderly (i.e me) will die off plus there are 100s of millions of people who want to come to Europe/USA.

We are going to see mass migration on a scale we ve never seen before and there is nothing we can do about it unless we wish to erect walls and shoot anyone who tries to cross them.

Which imho may well happen.

My argument is that for those who don’t like being labour slaves what incentive is there to produce more? Of course people have children for other reasons, I should hope so! I think however the push from people in power is to continue their power, not for the good of those future children. They want more workers and more consumers. The pope needs future catholics or there is no Catholic Church/it loses a great deal of power. Governments need future workers. I’m simply saying a lot of people are not interested in playing that game. There is also no endpoint; have more children now and they need more children afterwards to take care of them. It’s a pyramid scheme.

I would start to tackle it by bringing in a wealth tax where CGT, dividends etc is in line with income. Reduce IHT thresholds. Care in the home needs to have a similar funding model to care out of the home, stop blanket free prescriptions for over 60s & I would bring back the NHS levy that was recently scrapped. I would increase income tax bands as they have been frozen for years which is just a stealth tax.

You decided to bring people into the world, some may argue that is selfish. Did you do it because you wanted to do it? By definition selfish. Some selfishness is good. If you also do not neglect your responsibilities by taking care of those children it helps make up for what was a rather selfish choice. And that is not a dig at those with kids. It is good people want to have kids - just as good that those who don’t want them do not have them.

No, I don’t care if I’m considered selfish for not having children. You seem to think that if people aren’t naturally inclined to follow your example, that shaming them into it should be sufficient. That is clearly isn’t apparently is the problem, so to sum up your viewpoint:

”it’s a problem that I can’t shame people into doing what I do by calling them selfish! How dare they want to live according to their own desires, rather than by mine!”

Ironic.

Aside from that, you seem to view human behavior through glasses so rose tinted it’s more akin to looking through bloodstains. If anything, there is now more focus on being mindful of the needs and rights of others than there has ever been, at least in the west.

Oh right, it's just a slanging match now then? These personal insults backwards and forwards are so boring, what a waste.

That would work in a world where people remain in their own country, but that isn’t this world, and they don’t. Currently, the UK is losing more high rate tax payers than it is gaining, which amongst other impacts, puts an increased burden on those with less. The UK needs to attract wealth, businesses and investment (more tax payers, jobs, innovation), not discourage it.

Ride it out. In the meantime, focus on the economy.

He is not advocating large, poor families

Not overtly perhaps, but that's exactly the logical consequence of their anti-birth control stance - and how convenient that folk coping with large families are likely to have less time for questioning the church's atrocities

Ironic that someone mentioned them opening a creche though. I can't personally imagine anyone entrusting their children to an organisation which has enabled what the church has, but each to their own

This is an issue, which may increase after next GE

To be honest we will do what we do now and ignore requests for help and support from the elderly until they die. 500 people over 65 die every week whilst waiting for care in England. I’d imagine that number will be higher next year. Politicians will offer meaningless platitudes involving thoughts and prayers.

It’s awful but it’s reality. Politics seem so short term these days, it’s all buzzwords and distraction. Schools, hospitals, social care, social housing should be a focus but just get lost in this endless churn of shit.

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/04/older-people-in-england-dying-without-the-care-they-need-says-age-uk

I don’t think anyone should be encouraged to have children. If they need encouraging then they don’t want them.

However I wish people who don’t have children, or very wealthy people, would stop banging on about ‘their taxes paying for other people’s kids’ via health care or education.

If having children was only for the wealthy, then who will cut your (and your kids) hair in future? Who will take your/their bins out? Serve in shops? Work as a carer looking after you when you’re old? Do you really think the offspring of wealthy people will want to work these jobs? Every working person should be able to have children, because we actively need them to do so.

It's absolutely true that contraception and women's rights tend to result in fewer children - but are the number of children that women are having now the number of children that they want or are family sizes stymied by economic and other social factors?

Economic factors for me. I would like 3-4 children, currently have 2, no money for any more until youngest gets his 30 free hours and by then I’ll be reluctant to start the treadmill all over again as it means a 4 year gap. Plus we can’t afford a house big enough for that many.

Age is definitely a factor, I see lots of posts on here by women who wanted more children but ended up with 1 because they didn’t meet someone to settle with until much later. I’m not sure what can be done about that really.

Or maybe you can accept that other people have a different viewpoint to yourself? Then, the case is closed. You're not being "abused" which is very dramatic, but you seem to thrive on being the victim?

You’re just sounding more and more like an idiot. The only one who has been hurling abuse was you.

Do tell everyone of the selfless reasons you chose to procreate…

No one should feel obligated to breed a working class of career, servers etc for the rich.

The reality is they can though.

Let’s face it, while the birth rate has declined quality of life has increased. While one has gone up the other has gone down
People are by and large much between off and life a much better lifestyle now than 70 years ago when people had much more children. So it seems clear people having less children I more of a lifestyle choice.

On another thread you are abusing and stigmatising women who have children, work and get UC and help towards childcare costs.

Apparently your plan for selfless people includes women popping out babies, not being able to work and being forced into a position where they can be abused and cannot escape it.

If thats your selflessness I would encourage women to be selfish any day.

Perhaps if housing was affordable and people had well paid, secure jobs they'd be more inclined to have children.

Selfishness means lacking consideration for other people. Which of these activities is inconsiderate of others?

If anything your friends may be contributing more to the economy than some parents, who have kids that end up criminals or never working and therefore being a drain themselves.

People in poorer parts of the world are still having many children.

So it's not that being a parent is too hard in the West (though it could be made easier).

I think for many having children just isn't a priority anymore.

A falling population is a good thing. The pope just doesn’t want other religions to overtake his in numbers. More people should choose a pet over a child.