Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

In most of the developed world, fertility rates are incredibly low. Developed countries have a fertility rate of around 1.6 children per woman, which corresponds to negative population growth (we're going to ignore immigration since its a band aid).

The highest fertility rate is in the US, around 2.1 children/woman. Some of the lowest are in Europe and Canada:

Canada 1.7
France 1.6
UK 1.6
Germany 1.3
Italy 1.2
Spain 1.2

Now certain countries I can understand wanting less people. Japan, Hong Kong, and China for instance could use alot more space. But for North America and Europe there seems to be plenty of land and food.

In fact, it is the wealthier countries where the fertility rate is low. The third world can't have enough children it seems.

Is having a negative fertility rate, when you have ample resources, a cause for alarm?

Are our societies saying they don't want to continue?

Why don't people want to have kids?

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why don't people want to have kids?

[/ QUOTE ]

Kids are annoying and require much work, work that isn't paid for.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

Kids are beneficial in poor economies - they take care of you when you are older. You also need more to guarante some survive. In richer countries, people are more likely to be able to support themselves.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why don't people want to have kids?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think there are more people today in the wealthier countries who don't want kids. It's just that years ago, people had them whether they wanted them or not. Wealth, education, and women's equality are all factors.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

Ok, but without kids a society can't continue. Rich people die some day.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

Western society has chosen slow cultural suicide. The reasons are many and few. The many include birth control, selfishness, high taxes forcing women to work and some others. The few is simply the growth of secularism. Godless people tend to have a lot less kids.

If you ask the 'enlightened' European about the imminent death of his 2500 year old culture you get a shrug. They don't see a problem. An Islamic Europe is but a couple generations away. I don't see that as a positive move forward. Really, if you were asked to list the ten greatest contributions to the species from Islamic culture in the past 200 years it's not much of a list.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Western society has chosen slow cultural suicide. The reasons are many and few. The many include birth control, selfishness, high taxes forcing women to work and some others. The few is simply the growth of secularism. Godless people tend to have a lot less kids.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. Why can't we go back to the good ole' days where women knew their place and everyone lived by the bible.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, but without kids a society can't continue. Rich people die some day.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but who cares?

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

Well, this is a politics forum. If a society is committing suicide, it's probably not a good social model.

Re: Fertility Rates: Is Western society self sustaining?
 

Surely dismissing imigration as the fix entirely negates any true reflection of how modern societies, economies and countries work.

Within 1 generation imigrants are fully integrated into the host nations society (speaking in broad terms).

This is why negative birth rates arent a problem as there are always imigrants willing to come and do the work the natives consider 'beneath' them and so the cycle continues.