To think a declining birth rate is a good (and inevitable) thing

[OptimismvsRealism]

Article in the times today about the "push for Britain to have more babies" on the basis that a declining population will cause economic shocks.

One of the proposals is "fertility checks in your 20s and education about declining fertility in biology classes".

I mean. Isn't it great that people only have babies if they really, truly want them? And isn't it good to have a smaller human burden on the planet (and fewer humans vying for declining jobs as tech replaces us at most of the things we used to do)?

I don't believe for a second that fertility checks would help anyone. Nobody is out there going "trala I'm 45 and really want five babies but just haven't felt like starting yet"!

shaping their environment into something our ancestors could never have imagined

Yes, thankfully our ancestors didn't have to worry about microplastics in their testicles/placentas, or widescale air pollution, or decimated oceans....

We haven't shaped the world for the better, have we? Maybe we did good up to around the 19th century (although the dodo would disagree!), but it's been pretty much downhill since we invented the internal combustion engine.

Our need for ever more power/energy so we can go places and make stuff has trashed the planet. Every species on the planet will pay the price of us 'shaping their environment'.

There's a generational resentment because statistically speaking- although obviously not in your case as a Labour voter- older people have been far more likely to vote for a political party that has historically shown contempt for the young. Doing little to solve the housing/ COL crisis, ending their right to live, work and study in 26 countries, raising tuition fees sky high- it goes on and on and on. This latest military service suggestion- and the messaging around it- has been the cherry on top of the cake. Can you really blame younger people for being pissed off with the Boomer generation?!

The cure for poverty is educating women and girls. Not birth control, because birth control is seen as a ' foreign' imposition. Women being them to control their own lives, is far more effective than just contraception.

They've been lied to for decades. It's called feminism. You can raise more tax revenue by getting more women into work and reassurring them that they can start a family later in life. Some women can have children later, but biology can't be cheated. Women have a finite number of eggs that are for more sensitive to the ravages of time that men's sperm, partly because men produce sperm all the time and women are born with all the eggs they'll ever have. The women having children now are incredibly lucky. Women like me are very unlucky and are wondering what the point in life is now.

You've summed up my reasons for being one and done. I was absolutely set on 2 up until my daughter was 18 months old, she's just gone 4. but the aftercare was shocking and now we're £700 a month worth off a month this year compared to 1 year ago due to COL.

We're at probably at the stage where people would typically having their second. Absolutely no chance it's happening again for us due to how much everything has changed over the last year.

On separate note I do agree it's for the best. Having children is the worst thing for the environment and if everything is going to shit like you hear then cutting down is the best thing humankind can do.

There is no point. Capitalism requires workers. Your life is yours to do what you wish with it. Children don't enhance your life, they change it. It's not for the faint hearted. It's a shame that the older generations are dependent in such a heavy way on the younger generations. Not fair.

Who told you you could have it all?

This ^
its not easy to have children physically and financially.

2 years salary wouldn't convince me if they implemented here in UK. I'd spend more than that on just childcare before the child is even school age if full time. If I went part time or stayed home until they're school age 2 years salary wouldn't cover the loss of earnings, pension contributions, loss of career progression etc. It's not really an incentive when it doesn't even allow you to break even.

No, it hasn't convinced Russian women either 😀

I've got a sneaking suspicion that a lot of women have one child discover that their partner is not helpful, and stop there.

I think it's a good thing. The world's population is growing and resources are reducing.

If we need more babies to support the pensioners, then we need to come up with an alternative. Because one day those babies will be pensioners, where does it end?

Given that science seems intent on prolonging life to the nth degree, people routinely living longer and longer with multiple complex medical issues. Some tough choices in the future...

We equally also have vaccines, the ability to provide safe, clean water en masse, medicines to cure or treat an enormous variety of diseases, renewable energy sources.I could go on.

We obviously face massive challenges, but I'm more interested in humanity sticking around to try and tackle these problems then just...giving up? It isn't virtuous to cheer a declining population while living an energy intense western lifestyle and hope the problems get fixed by essentially inaction.

Russian policy also seems centred around "have lots of children so they can die in wars for us". Which is surprisingly not hugely motivating.
Have more children so they can keep the wheels of capitalism turning by providing the low cost labour we need is better but also not hugely inspiring on an individual level.

I would not have a third child if you paid me £1million.

Finances are a big factor for many, but for other women, it’s so much more. Exhaustion being a big one!

However 1 in 5 women aged 45 remain childless, in only 10% is that by choice. So that is 18 women in every hundred who would have liked to have a child but didn't. This is not largely an active and positive choice.

I have 2 and 2 years salary probably would have swung it for me for at least one more.

Indeed, prolly why the Taliban ban educating women. What educated woman is going to have lots of babies to grow up and become taliban fighters eh?

From an environmental perspective, we are doing the right thing as a species. The western carbon footprint is the world's highest, so having fewer of us will have a compounding effect on reducing carbon pollution. It's worth noting that the African nations are nowhere near as crowded as the UK and they have a lot of natural resources. It's also worth noting that the UN has just reduced it's predictions for Africa again and there's a good chance that the continent has already started it's demographic transition. This could be a Very Good Thing as fewer babies tend to correspond with urbanisation, better female education, better healthcare and fewer wars. Call me selfish, but I want Africa to get richer - and this is a good stepping stone. One quarter of the human race lives there, after all..

I also think that the pension and healthcare problem in the West will only be acute for the next two generations until we work out how to account for it in the future. I don't believe for one minute that the birthrate will keep dwindling - there will come a point when bigger families become popular again and humans are good at expanding quickly. We managed for most of history with less than a billion humans and the idea of an ever growing, massive population has only been true for the past two centuries. It's an historical anomaly.

Men

But isn't that the point?

You and other workers were paying for other people's pensions. Which was fine as there were lots of workers.

But there soon won't be because people aren't having babies and so, for a couple of generations, those who have paid into the system won't be paid out. And it doesn't matter how deserving they are, the money just won't be there.

This isn’t going to be an issue though long term. State retirement ages are increasing every few years. Probably those born now will be working til 80! Plus, I don’t think there will be an NHS a few decades from now. Everything will be private and paid for privately. Likewise the state pension - eventually most people will be funding their retirement on private pensions.

I don’t think I have anything to add, except that I’ve never seen an AIBU poll before that was a perfect 50:50 split!

It will be fine because state pension age will be 85 and lots of people won’t even make it to that age

It was a phrase originating from the 1970s that has been much satirised.