Falling birth rates are not evidence that humanity is finally “self-regulating”; they are a sign that modern societies are becoming hostile to family life.
In the early 1970s (that terrible decade) the annual wage compared to house prices was 3 to 4 to 1.
By the 2010s (the decade of equality) the annual wage compared to house prices was 8 to 9 to 1).
Effectively priced out of housing (and having kids) the governments of the day doubled down on policies to raise house prices still further by pushing for migration to exacerbate prices still further.
As migrants could ill afford to buy a house, the government(s) gave them rights to effectively prioritise them over locals for social housing.
Of course the coming AI revolution, the deliberate inaction over investing in workforce efficiency (Singapore required 1 worker to do a job it needed 2 British workers to complete) meant Britain’s workforce had twice as many workers as it needed in Singapore.
And after AI takes effect!
It’s an absolute sht fest of economic incompetence and sabotage.
As for the dearth of kids, Parliament continually encourages abortion over life as a means of reducing indigenous births still further.
I'd add the problem of unions here in the US. They hike up wages, increasing prices. They need public funds to manage their pensions, increasing taxes. The list goes on and on. Not to mention how their dus go right back into the political coffers.
A major and neglected problem is that poor and even middle-income families cannot afford any or more children, but if they look down the block they may see immigrants with 5-10 kids in public housing with free medical, food support, etc. etc. So many native-born folks cannot afford to take on the costs of raising any or more kids.
The population density on the planet is not environmentally sustainable. Much of the poverty in the 3rd World can be summed up in the phrase: high birth rates, low productivity. Small families can be warm and nurturing.. Immigrants, especially Islamic ones should be pressured to lower their birth rates. All families should start being taxed , starting with their third child. It's not a matter of western families having more kids. It's stopping Islamist from coming in and out breeding us.
Thank you for this – it is so true. We have entirely lost sight of what matters, which in itself poses a threat to the common good and the continuation of civilisation. The financial situation, the (related) calls for both parents to be in the workforce full-time, the reduction of motherhood to a medical event, and the way in which we view other individuals as entirely interchangeable (we change 'partners', we replace parents with 'child care', mothers can opt for surrogates etc) – all of this leads to a dehumanisation of society, where the devaluing of children and family life is inevitable. We are already seeing serious consequences, and have no choice but to try to reverse this, if as a species, we wish to survive. After all, for all of human history, across races and cultures, babies were thought to be a blessing, and their importance recognised – until now.
The idea that we need more children or more migrants to fill jobs is a myth pushed on us by corporations who want to “grow the economy “ so they can grow their PROFIT. Hyper growth is destroying the planet- depleting finite resources….. Bringing in migrants from the 3rd world is creating massive social problems- fragmenting our culture and eroding democracy. SLOW managed growth is what we need like we had in the 50’s/ 60’s. We managed then and we can manage again.
Another issue is that the lower birth rate among whites won't matter environmentally in the end because it will be negated by migrants from the third world replacing them. The total carbon footprint of society doesn't diminish, especially since the immigrants' footprints increase when they move and they have more children. If anything, the environmental footprint might increase due to mass migration.
I've told our children that they have a place to stay while getting on their adult feet. Too many families have this.concept of "you're out when you turn 18". That's a relatively new idea. We should be supporting our kids and not kicking them out while fostering their work ethic and adult decision making skills. It's only been three generations ago in my family that there were multi generational homes. You didn't "need" government child care, you had grandma downstairs. You didn't need government assistance, you had several people to support the while family. We need to get back to family and Jesus.
Healthy societies make enough children to at least maintain their own population. Healthy societies would have seen through the bullschitt of "The Population Bomb", "Net Zero", Marxism etc.
Both can be true (to varying degrees) at the same time. Many societies do eventually “self regulate” their birth rates (e.g., Japan) with few if any ill effects. And despite the casual dismissal, to believe human populations can continue its exponential growth with massive ill effects is naive to say the least. But the social problems you mention are real and should be addressed regardless of birth rate.
This unwillingness to give up autonomy seems particularly strong among well-educated, successfully employed young women in their thirties. My son has dated some lovely women who clearly express they prefer freedom to travel and do (or spend) as they please over commitment to marriage and family.
In the early 1970s (that terrible decade) the annual wage compared to house prices was 3 to 4 to 1.
By the 2010s (the decade of equality) the annual wage compared to house prices was 8 to 9 to 1).
Effectively priced out of housing (and having kids) the governments of the day doubled down on policies to raise house prices still further by pushing for migration to exacerbate prices still further.
As migrants could ill afford to buy a house, the government(s) gave them rights to effectively prioritise them over locals for social housing.
Of course the coming AI revolution, the deliberate inaction over investing in workforce efficiency (Singapore required 1 worker to do a job it needed 2 British workers to complete) meant Britain’s workforce had twice as many workers as it needed in Singapore.
And after AI takes effect!
It’s an absolute sht fest of economic incompetence and sabotage.
As for the dearth of kids, Parliament continually encourages abortion over life as a means of reducing indigenous births still further.
They are truly satanic.
I'd add the problem of unions here in the US. They hike up wages, increasing prices. They need public funds to manage their pensions, increasing taxes. The list goes on and on. Not to mention how their dus go right back into the political coffers.
If you listen to Elon, the advance of AI and robotics will soon lead to the demise of unions.
Half of white collar workers could be replaced by AI systems right now.
Robots guided by AI computers will be capable of replacement of physical jobs within 10 years.
There’s no point in a union if there’s no job.
A major and neglected problem is that poor and even middle-income families cannot afford any or more children, but if they look down the block they may see immigrants with 5-10 kids in public housing with free medical, food support, etc. etc. So many native-born folks cannot afford to take on the costs of raising any or more kids.
if a supposedly conservative parlimentarian thinks this way, we have a lot of educating to do, even in-house.
Johnson is conservative in name only. He was always working for the globalists, not the people.
It's worth noting that one rising demographic, Muslims, have a birth rate well above replacement level.
And thus, they are the future of British society.
And with that comes... The West is self destructing. But collecting SO much virtue in the process.
The population density on the planet is not environmentally sustainable. Much of the poverty in the 3rd World can be summed up in the phrase: high birth rates, low productivity. Small families can be warm and nurturing.. Immigrants, especially Islamic ones should be pressured to lower their birth rates. All families should start being taxed , starting with their third child. It's not a matter of western families having more kids. It's stopping Islamist from coming in and out breeding us.
Thank you for this – it is so true. We have entirely lost sight of what matters, which in itself poses a threat to the common good and the continuation of civilisation. The financial situation, the (related) calls for both parents to be in the workforce full-time, the reduction of motherhood to a medical event, and the way in which we view other individuals as entirely interchangeable (we change 'partners', we replace parents with 'child care', mothers can opt for surrogates etc) – all of this leads to a dehumanisation of society, where the devaluing of children and family life is inevitable. We are already seeing serious consequences, and have no choice but to try to reverse this, if as a species, we wish to survive. After all, for all of human history, across races and cultures, babies were thought to be a blessing, and their importance recognised – until now.
The idea that we need more children or more migrants to fill jobs is a myth pushed on us by corporations who want to “grow the economy “ so they can grow their PROFIT. Hyper growth is destroying the planet- depleting finite resources….. Bringing in migrants from the 3rd world is creating massive social problems- fragmenting our culture and eroding democracy. SLOW managed growth is what we need like we had in the 50’s/ 60’s. We managed then and we can manage again.
Another issue is that the lower birth rate among whites won't matter environmentally in the end because it will be negated by migrants from the third world replacing them. The total carbon footprint of society doesn't diminish, especially since the immigrants' footprints increase when they move and they have more children. If anything, the environmental footprint might increase due to mass migration.
I've told our children that they have a place to stay while getting on their adult feet. Too many families have this.concept of "you're out when you turn 18". That's a relatively new idea. We should be supporting our kids and not kicking them out while fostering their work ethic and adult decision making skills. It's only been three generations ago in my family that there were multi generational homes. You didn't "need" government child care, you had grandma downstairs. You didn't need government assistance, you had several people to support the while family. We need to get back to family and Jesus.
Healthy societies make enough children to at least maintain their own population. Healthy societies would have seen through the bullschitt of "The Population Bomb", "Net Zero", Marxism etc.
Boris is a tired, outdated Globalist as all Globalists are, and should leave public life until he discovers the truth that’s worth sharing.
Both can be true (to varying degrees) at the same time. Many societies do eventually “self regulate” their birth rates (e.g., Japan) with few if any ill effects. And despite the casual dismissal, to believe human populations can continue its exponential growth with massive ill effects is naive to say the least. But the social problems you mention are real and should be addressed regardless of birth rate.
This unwillingness to give up autonomy seems particularly strong among well-educated, successfully employed young women in their thirties. My son has dated some lovely women who clearly express they prefer freedom to travel and do (or spend) as they please over commitment to marriage and family.
Boris is a world-class con artist.
Boris Johnson is nobody to wax lyrical about having no children considering his own vast brood.
Spot on