AIBU The global fertility crisis is the biggest crisis humanity has ever faced?

[plantsdieinmyhouse]

We’re in a ‘global fertility crisis’.

I’m astounded that global (even UK/European) fertility decline to below the replacement rate of 2.1 (thought to have happened now) isn’t in the forefront of most people’s radar. There are barely even any politicians acknowledging it let alone devising policies to tackle it.

Thee are even people who still think we’re in the 70s/80s/90s and ‘overpopulation’ is still an issue.

Once everyone who’s alone now is dead the human race will be in terminal decline.

Nothing else matters if there’s none of us left!

Even on a personal level a large proportion of women don’t have the number of DCs they expect to.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/43a9bd63-25c9-4941-bc99-fc9f7e42c12a?shareToken=29bf27cb9dafe9af7a006bc25355e411

We are not really killing the planet, just making it inhospitable to our species.
Once our sad little parasitic existence has gone, the planet will do something else.
Every Homo has been about for, at best, 8m years.
The simple, lovely frog is 30 times older.
Good fucking riddance to us.

I agree with pp AI and robots will start to fill the gap anyway.

@Womblingmerrily

As a society we need to protect our young people and provide them with a life worth living, jobs worth doing and a reason to have their own children.
At the moment we are asking them to bear a massive burden of paying for non working people to have a better standard of living than them.

Nail on the head. We need to start offering the young something to work towards. At the moment, our young workforce is being shafted from all directions. That's why so many have either "opted out" to a life of unemployment, or working in the black economy to avoid taxes etc., or emigrating. Those who are likely to get a decent inheritance will be OK in the end, though they'll have to wait decades for it - in the meantime, they may too wonder why they bother working. Those without inheritances on the way will feel the whole thing is just pointless as they'll never be able to own a home, unless they're higher earners - certainly not a chance on minimum wage or even average wages really if all their wages are going on rents and other living costs.

Yes I agree.
I remember seeing some passengers interviewed on a bus route that had recently been reinstated with a Polish driver saying they'd rather do without the bus than have immigration.

Planet Earth still matters, and will have a better chance to thrive, when there's none of "us" left.

Why does it matter if there’s none of us left through people’s choice? Not that that’s likely to happen. The demographic problem with a smaller working population supporting a large elderly population is a real problem, and is at the forefront of many politicians minds. It’s part of what is driving things like the increase in state pension age, and the issue will get worse before it starts to get better

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/un-population-2024-vs-2022?time=earliest..latest

Even compared to 2022 the UN has had to change its population projections because the global birth rate has decreased more than predicted.

Most people are unaware how much birth rates have plummeted globally even in developing countries.

eg even Iran’s fertility rate is only 2.1.

It might prove a useful tool to mitigate some of the effects but I think it'd be reckless to bank on it (particularly as a way of justifying an ongoing refusal to make sacrificies now).

I don't know we 'need' to continue, necessarily? Like I don't think it's some crying shame that there's the potential that we die off, as a species. It's not a concern for me because I don't see the continuance of the human race as something particularly necessary. Of course, I don't have children of my own (and don't want them - another one contributing to the stats, soz) so the survival or quality of life of my lineage isn't something I'm considering in a potential dramatically ageing and shrinking population - maybe it's different for those that do, but I see no reason to take action to ensure humanity keeps going.

The reason most countries need population to keep increasing is to fund the Ponzi scheme that is defined benefits pension; In the UK, the absolute number of earning and taxpaying population needs to keep increasing to fund the benefits budget

@Valeriekat You say what do you owe us (our our children/grandchildren actually)

What do we owe you? What have you done for society?

Why on earth should you not pay for the care you receive as you get older. It is entirely predictable that getting older means needing help. Why did you not plan for this? Have you downsized and made sensible decisions to minimise the help you need? If not, why not?

Why should you not use your own resources first before taking other peoples?

Has the fact the planet is being ravaged by war, genocide and climate change completely bypassed you?

No. We are, as a species, massively overpopulated. I am child free by choice and a net contributor by a very long way. My retirement and any needs I have as I age are already fully funded by me and I haven’t retired yet. I can pay all the tax in the world but I cannot change other peoples choices.

All economies are built on the assumption of more workers than dependents. For the first time in human history this won’t be the case & we aren’t prepared for it.

We absolutely need to move away from population being needed to feed a Ponzi scheme for workers providing for the age above. It means population has to increase and increase and increase with absolutely no ability to step back and say we can’t sustain this!

the world is overpopulated. It managed just fine 200 years ago. If the population shrank to that level again in 100 years then everyone will be happier. More resources, more space per person and better for the environment.

eventually if things get better and people are happier, my money is on they will start having more babies. At the moment people don’t feel inclined to have lots of kids as they know they need to provide for each one and 2 is probably the most the majority can provide for comfortably.

I look at that and think phew!

Sure but, as I imagine you'd acknowledge, thats a selfish position, and you probably couldn't reasonably complain is younger generations acted with similar self interest and withdrew all support for retirees.

(Not that thats going to happen given voting demographics...).

Tbh the end of humans doesn't mean the end of the planet, quite the contrary. We're a parasite on Earth, all other beings will benefit from us being gone 🌱🌿🌳🌴

This is awful.
Would you say the same about children or adults who are unable to contribute to the economy due because they have disabilities?

Where do you draw the line?
How do you say to someone who has worked and contributed all their life, perhaps had children who contribute, 'Sorry nan, you're FUBAR and like costing us quite a bit. We're going to put you to sleep now so we can pour the money in to more regular bin collections.'

Its hard to phrase this right, without making it sound like a hostile suggestion, but honestly - a genuine question.

Based on your above comment, why not kill yourself?

There is another way. If successive governments had encouraged better investment in systems, business, training, facilities and education then workers could actually be much more efficient, productive and lucrative and less workers needn't mean less economic growth.

People have been told for years that having children was destroying the planet, how selfish it is to have children and that they should be ashamed of their climate footprint, that natural habits are being destroyed to make way for housing and agriculture for the increasing population, not to fly, the horrors of overconsumption by an ever growing population etc. No wonder fertility has dropped. Yet now there is a pivot to an apparent crisis of not enough people being born. Seems like there are conflicting messages being put out. Which is it?

Well, what do you suggest?

The aging population crisis is getting exponentially worse, and will continue to do so.

Failing a radical solution - its either hard decisions now, or even harder decisions for the next generation.

Elon? Is that you?

Well I would if/when I feel the time is right. I come from a country where euthanasia has been legal for a long time, and it is something that I will state very clearly I want in certain circumstances. I have no desire to be living as long as possible, and/or with zero independence (physical and intellectual), zero pleasures in life, and being a burden to those I love the most and to society. I see no point at all in living this way myself (I would never dictate or judge anyone for doing so or for having elderly family members who do).

It does actually. It's precisely what it means.