Are first world countries doing something about their low population growths?

Question

anti-abortion bills, cash-for-babies, what else have they thought of?

Answer 1

They allow immigration.
As far as I know, abortion is legal in most first world countries, and cash-for-babies works for some people in lower socio-economic groups who could use the few thousand dollars, but is not really useful in the long term, as it obviously does not compensate for the real cost of the baby. People have only one or two children in first world countries because it is expensive to have each child, having a third has an impact, financially. First world countries are driven by capitalist ideals, have excellent education, relatively, have good healthcare ( so the chances of children surviving is high). So there is no pressure to have any more.
Immigration is cheaper, and provides a source of inexpensive, unskilled labour, allowing current residents to live better, have less children, become more educated and retire comfortably. The children of these immigrants will, eventually, become as educated, low producing, and luxury hungry as everyone else, and so the cycle continues.

.

Answer 2

Not in a traditional sense. While a previous answer mentioned some state-sponsored incentives, the underlying crisis starts from the fact that agricultural technological advances, housing needs, lifestyle choices and cost of childcare. We no longer need as many children to work on a family farm, we no longer need as many children to manufacture items (think industrial revolution), the lack of real land in suburbs and urban centers and the cost of childcare/college has skyrocketed. Most of the G8 countries no longer need a large population base to maintain their economies and there's no incentive to have more children. The other answer is correct in terms that immigrants are the only real way for population growth in the G8 countries. Those immigrants also make up a large portion of the minimum wage jobs that most people won't take.

Answer 3

I read that in Japan corporations are giving incentives to workers to have children. I don't think Japan is real keen on immigration as a solution. The US doesn't really have a problem because so many people want to move here. I went to a restaurant today and most of the people there were speaking different languages. The problem is countries that want only boy babies. This is a new problem in China and India. In about 20 years this is going to be a big deal because there won't be enough brides in those countries.

Answer 4

No. When they started social security, each retiree was supported by 5 workers. Now it is 3 workers and soon it will be two. Since the US population isn't expanding as fast as the economy, we need to import 1.6 million people annually. Our politicians will not come up with a reasonable immigration policy which will sustain the economy. That is why we have illegal immigration.

Higher population growth would also solve this problem, but that would require monetary incentives, since raising children is expensive so large families become less common.

Answer 5

low population growth is a sure sign of national sustainability. it is a good thing but if it is too low it could be a bad one. Europe grows at around three percent per year, and the united states at about five. countries like india and china grow at a much much faster rate.

you do bring up a good point that you might not have expected though. In the US we have the worst maternity leave packages in the world for women, and men, in the workplace. There is an average of about one week for maternity leave in the US. That is by far the lowest of any country, and is said to maybe decrease incentive for working women to have children

Answer 6

Why? Most first world countries are overpopulated anyway.

Answer 7

im not sure about that, and i don't know which countries are giving cash for having babies,

Answer 8

Why should they? THE WORLD is overpopulated. The Matrix was right- humans ARE the virus! Stop spreading!

Answer 9

Its not the population, its the lack of economy and social welfare.

Answer 10

No, we're too busy worrying about global warming.