Low fertility rates and economics - any solutions?

Question

A problem in many industrialized countries is what is called "below replacement fertility". This means that women have, on average, less than 2.1 children over the course of a lifetime. This leads to some serious economic problems, because a small population of young people cannot adequetly support a large population of old people. In recent years, the UN Population Division (official UN statistical analysts) has sounded the alarm about below replacement fertility, calling for solutions to help countries experiencing this economic problem.

What do you think we should do about this? It is a very real problem, one that can be dealt with from many different angles. I am eager to hear some different ideas.

I will leave a source from a UN press release, but I warn you, it's incredibly dull reading. But to avoid hearing, "that's not true, prove it.", I will provide it for you:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/pop850.doc.htm

Answer 1

Hmmmm...this brings into the debate the immigration factor. We should allow immigration to this country for those who are talented and can add to our economic prosperity.

I think that with economic prosperity comes a low birth rate. It has been proven time and time again throughout history.

At least this country is not in quite the same predicament as Japan and Italy.

Answer 2

Shriner S is right. Part of the reason that Japan is so lacking in children is because they don't allow the young and the fertile from other countries to emigrate there. Also, with improved health care over the years, most everyone has a higher life expectancy.

The solution is to encourage, not bribe, the childless to have more kids, then give them non-taxpayer-funded incentives to do so. For example, employers could do more to emphasize how they allow work-family balance, and of course day care could use some improvement.

Of course, all the incentives in the world couldn't make me breed, but that's just me.

Answer 3

I think it is a good thing. I don't care if it hurts economics, the planet cannot support an ever-increasing human population. It just doesn't work. We need to stop multiplying eventually, and if the economics system can't handle it, that is the fault of the economic system or the fault of ourselves for letting it get out of hand in the first place.

Allowing more immigration, maybe?

I don't know. This isn't really my thing. All I know is, we cannot sustain our current practices(so far as population, consumption, and conservation go) for long.

Answer 4

Hey, guess what? Your information is seriously out-of-date. I need to go shopping so I will just state that

- the lowest fertility rates in Europe are in the economically disadvantaged Eastern European countries - not the wealthier western countries. People don't make babies when the future is uncertain.

- France has managed to raise the birth rate somewhat
- Sweden has out-performed everybody else

The lowest birthrate the world is South Korea (status of women there is low).

There was a direct correlation made between status of women and birthrate. The higher the status of women (Sweden) the higher the birthrate. The lower the status of women (South Korea) the lower the birth rate.

From the article (cited below):

there are TWO 'Europes'
EASTERN EUROPE AND GREECE
'Post-communist countries in eastern and central Europe reached the same point by a different route. Under communism, factories often provided free child care and higher salaries for parents with big families. But when communism collapsed, such policies disappeared. Combined with economic uncertainty, this sent post-communist nations tumbling into uncharted territory, with fertility rates falling even more precipitously than they had in the Mediterranean.'

WESTERN EUROPE
'France is one of three EU countries with a fertility rate above the magic replacement level (Denmark and Ireland are the others).

f you take account of late childbearing, you find that 16 European countries, with a total population of 234m, now have fertility rates of 1.8 or more. Half are above 2.0. Despite near-panic about “inevitably” declining population, then, some European countries are growing quite strongly. They are rare examples of bucking the trend that, as countries get richer, their birth rates fall.

Nor is it just a matter of guaranteeing minimum parental leave—or Germany, with generous provisions, would have lots of babies. Rather, the evidence suggests a whole host of measures, often designed to achieve other social goals, can boost the birth rate almost as a side-effect. These measures include a flexible education system (so parents can go back to school after having children); flexible working hours and, if Scandinavia is anything to go by, a strong emphasis on sexual equality.

All this is a world away from the other rich country with demographic growth: America. Much American debate focuses on the role of marriage and the traditional family in fostering a healthy society. In Europe, by contrast, only countries with many births outside wedlock and with high female participation rates have reasonably high birth rates. Those that have sought to maintain traditional family ties have seen fertility collapse.

Europeans are only starting the process of recovery. Compared with America, even the growing parts of the continent have modest fertility rates and high dependency ratios. But if Europe has a demographic future it lies in Britain, France and Scandinavia, not across the Atlantic."

Population levels are affected by:

- birth rate
- death rate
- immigration levels
- emigration levels

Answer 5

Some countries are paying people to have children. It is a fact that the better the economic situation, the lower the birth rate. Personally I do not worry about it too much, since things tend to take care of themselves.

Answer 6

Those countries that have low birthrates also don't have high child mortality rates. That's the main reason for the high birthrates in developing countries. Many children born there will not live to see their fifth birthday and not only that, those countries also have lower life expectancies. Many adults don't generally live past their 40s.

Answer 7

Is the low fertility you or an guy... nicely for the guy you in common terms have not got intercourse until eventually the time you O...The longer he waits and holds it the extra he builds up..... Sorry no longer lots education yet i've got heard of it my pal did it whats up it labored additionally.... For a women persons..uncertain.... i be attentive to MDS for a women persons.....solid luck..... ~~infant airborne dirt and mud~~

Answer 8

If we all end up financially screwed as old people, at least we led our younger years happy and childfree.

Answer 9

Having children is just a selfish lifestyle choice.
Avoid it and live life to the full!