Falling total fertility rate should be welcomed, population expert says

[PeanutButter]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/26/falling-total-fertility-rate-should-be-welcomed-population-expert-says

“All the evidence is, that if families, households, societies, countries have to deal with large numbers of dependants, it takes away resources that could be put into driving society, the economy etc,” Harper said, adding that the “problem” of an ageing population also needed to be reconsidered, not least because technology to support dependants was advancing while people were staying in good health for longer. “It is much easier to enable older adults to stay upskilled and healthy and in the labour market than it is to say to women ‘oh you have got to have children’.”

 

Interesting article but still talks about 10-12 BILLION humans on the planet by end of century. We’re barely coping with 7.6mil in UK. 

 

If the world wasn’t obsessed with human population growth driving consumption then maybe we wouldn’t be facing such huge inequalities.

[msi]

You've talked about population increases before here.

Why do you feel you need to bring it up again?

 

UK population is close to 70M and is plateauing, as is world population at around 11B.  Population growth rates drop significantly with development progress.  

[thewig]

What kind of lowlife scumbag gets to call themselves a “population expert”?

[MarkG]

A declining population should be welcomed, because tens of millions of people currently alive in the UK will be unable to do anything at all that adds economic value after another twenty years of automation.

But, instead, politicians are flooding shrinking Western nations with foreigners, most of whom are even less likely to be able to do anything of economic value.

Oh, and encouraging the people whose jobs are going to be automated away to have kids, while they discourage the smarter part of the population from having kids, even though they're the ones whose kids are most likely to be able to do something useful by the time they grow up.

Stupidity or plain evil? It's getting hard to tell.

 

On 26/12/2018 at 04:05, PeanutButter said:

“It is much easier to enable older adults to stay upskilled and healthy and in the labour market than it is to say to women ‘oh you have got to have children’.”

But that is nonsense. It's easy to tell women they have to have children, the only thing missing is the will to do so.

[AdamoMucci]

On 26/12/2018 at 10:05, PeanutButter said:

“It is much easier to enable older adults to stay upskilled and healthy and in the labour market than it is to say to women ‘oh you have got to have children’.”

Blasphemy!!! How can we justify mass low skilled immigration if this guy is going around saying things like this!!!!!

[highcontrast]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-31/debt-based-system-cant-succeed-without-population-growth

[Killian]

13 hours ago, msi said:

You've talked about population increases before here.

Why do you feel you need to bring it up again?

 

UK population is close to 70M and is plateauing, as is world population at around 11B.  Population growth rates drop significantly with development progress.  

Probably because it is the most serious issue facing us. The UK population is not plateauing with the current net immigration rates.

The world is way above carrying capacity for our technological developmental levels. We are drawing on future prosperity to sustain current population levels.

 

[Hullabaloo82]

1 hour ago, Killian said:

Probably because it is the most serious issue facing us. The UK population is not plateauing with the current net immigration rates.

The world is way above carrying capacity for our technological developmental levels. We are drawing on future prosperity to sustain current population levels.

 

So what's your solution?

[localhero1983]

Just looking at the UK, it is so rare these days to meet young married couples  who have four children, it was so common in my parents and grandparents day. You still see it on the odd occasion with very well off successful people, but the only time I usually come across it is the various welfare situations you get these days, the bragging drug dealer with several of "his b****s" sprogged up, ethnic demands in some quarters and the welfare single mothers lifestyles that treat kids like puppies.

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

So what's your solution?

The first step to finding a solution is to acknowledge the existence of a problem. "What's your solution?" is something often trotted out by people denying a problem exists and is no sort of counter-argument to it.

From just the UK's perspective saying no to vast numbers of immigrants would do the trick, the birth rate is such that the population would then start to fall. For the rest of the world it's much trickier, education is probably the key although how to achieve that is not simple.

[winkie]

The growing population is as much to do with the population of the developing world living longer than anything else......education also means people learn what to do and what not to do to live longer.......wars, famine, ignorance and poverty shortens life, all a healthy wealthy world needs to do is replace itself.....many who can no longer even do that.

[Riedquat]

29 minutes ago, winkie said:

The growing population is as much to do with the population of the developing world living longer than anything else......education also means people learn what to do and what not to do to live longer.......wars, famine, ignorance and poverty shortens life, all a healthy wealthy world needs to do is replace itself.....many who can no longer even do that.

Generally speaking there's a correlation between higher levels of education and lower birth rates. The population of the developing world is increasing because medical improvements have still made some inroads there, so living longer, but people are still having a lot of children - only now most of them aren't dying young.

[Hullabaloo82]

49 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The first step to finding a solution is to acknowledge the existence of a problem. "What's your solution?" is something often trotted out by people denying a problem exists and is no sort of counter-argument to it.

From just the UK's perspective saying no to vast numbers of immigrants would do the trick, the birth rate is such that the population would then start to fall. For the rest of the world it's much trickier, education is probably the key although how to achieve that is not simple.

The UK birth rate, including migrants, is below the replacement rate. 

The concept that we are globally over populated is heavily disputed, as is the idea that population will grow exponentially rather than plateau. 

Under the circumstances, I think it's perfectly valid to ask what somebody'sproposed solution to the supposed problem is. Usually a pretty good indicator of what their actual agenda. 

Population paranoia is a great example of the kind of confused, contradictory thinking you see on this site; "climate change is a liberal left conspiracy but we must halt population growth before we destroy the world. The young have been ******ed over by the baby boomers but they're also feckless idiots whose problems are their own fault. Brexit is essential to stop socialists meddling with the free market yet we also cheer lead for regulatory influence on the housing market (section 24, MMR, etc)."

There are cartoon dogs less confused than some of the posters on the site. 

For what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree about immigration but mainly because I think we should be automating drudgery out of existence and using the surplus generated to support our society instead of allowing modern serfs to continue to be exploited. 

[Killian]

2 hours ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

So what's your solution?

Reduce immigration

Change benefits and tax structure 

Increase investment in education and research and development

Pretty simple but won't be done as will collapse capitalism and pensions and the incompetents in power will be removed

[cnick]

57 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The first step to finding a solution is to acknowledge the existence of a problem. "What's your solution?" is something often trotted out by people denying a problem exists and is no sort of counter-argument to it.

From just the UK's perspective saying no to vast numbers of immigrants would do the trick, the birth rate is such that the population would then start to fall. For the rest of the world it's much trickier, education is probably the key although how to achieve that is not simple.

But immigration is but an effect ...... the root cause being the fractional reserve banking system that is encouraged to create 'money' from thin air ...... to stimulate an artificial demand for stuff ....... demand that would not otherwise exist.

Free sh1t & money is being given away ...... and people, some of whom are from overseas, want some of it.

[Killian]

3 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

The UK birth rate, including migrants, is below the replacement rate. 

The concept that we are globally over populated is heavily disputed, as is the idea that population will grow exponentially rather than plateau. 

 

We are already not self sufficient in energy and food, two rather important things.

Population can increase but standard of living will decline

[BorrowToLeech]

1 hour ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Population paranoia is a great example of the kind of confused, contradictory thinking you see on this site; "climate change is a liberal left conspiracy but we must halt population growth before we destroy the world. The young have been ******ed over by the baby boomers but they're also feckless idiots whose problems are their own fault. Brexit is essential to stop socialists meddling with the free market yet we also cheer lead for regulatory influence on the housing market (section 24, MMR, etc)."

 

Yes. It’s almost as if different people with different opinions are writing the posts. 

[winkie]

2 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Generally speaking there's a correlation between higher levels of education and lower birth rates. The population of the developing world is increasing because medical improvements have still made some inroads there, so living longer, but people are still having a lot of children - only now most of them aren't dying young.

What people are having more children?......all I see is more people choosing to have no children or people waiting longer to have children, those that do have children having one or two not five or six like many had as a norm only a few decades ago......

[MarkG]

5 hours ago, winkie said:

What people are having more children?

The r-selected population, particularly in Africa.

In the old days, they had lots of kids, but most of those kids died of starvation, disease or war, or were eaten by lions, so the population stayed fairly stable. Now they've killed off most of the wild animals and Western food and medicine has kept them alive.

So the population is exploding far, far beyond any natural carrying capacity, and few of those people will have any economic value in a post-industrial world. The Western food and aid is going to go, and the best they can hope for is that the Chinese find some value in them as they loot Africa's resources.

The boomers who demanded we "fe-ee-ed tha w-oo-rr-ld because aging pop stars tell us to" in the 80s have created what may well be be the greatest humanitarian disaster in the history of the planet.

[msi]

All immigration debates reduce to 'get rid of the others'.   Dog whistle pure and simple.

 

Ban immigration - fine, but close the border on the biggest gateway of them all - the womb (and sperm for all the SJWs)

 

If you want a controlled decline - educate. It is the biggest contraceptive and increased education leads to increased automation.

 

 

[chronyx]

22 minutes ago, msi said:

All immigration debates reduce to 'get rid of the others'.   Dog whistle pure and simple.

 

Ban immigration - fine, but close the border on the biggest gateway of them all - the womb (and sperm for all the SJWs)

 

If you want a controlled decline - educate. It is the biggest contraceptive and increased education leads to increased automation.

 

 

Haven't got kids, don't want any, and the sheer arrogance of your post still made me draw breath.

To conflate government controlled and enforced immigration with 'native' people starting families...astounding.

Cut back on the Isaac Asimov books...

[Orb]

11 hours ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

So what's your solution?

For me, it's less about solution, and more about prayer...

prayer for a fooking savage plague!

[msi]

1 hour ago, chronyx said:

Haven't got kids, don't want any, and the sheer arrogance of your post still made me draw breath.

To conflate government controlled and enforced immigration with 'native' people starting families...astounding.

Cut back on the Isaac Asimov books...

Erm no. The argument at the beginning of the article was:

Quote

Interesting article but still talks about 10-12 BILLION humans on the planet by end of century. We’re barely coping with 7.6mil in UK...If the world wasn’t obsessed with human population growth driving consumption then maybe we wouldn’t be facing such huge inequalities.

Population growth is via Immigration and by Birth.  If you truly want to limit it, then both channels need addressing.  Otherwise you are leveraging an argument to limit immigration - see my first point.

 

If you want zero immigration, that's your choice - just don't use the justification for population control or house price control.

[PeanutButter]

Here’s the thing. It’s all baked in already.

Climate chaos. Huge overpopulation. Droughts. Mass migrations. Wars. 

We can try and slow it, buy some time, but eventually we will break the natural systems. 

I’m mainly dispondent about losing so many beautiful animals. 

 

 

[Riedquat]

20 hours ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

The UK birth rate, including migrants, is below the replacement rate. 

The concept that we are globally over populated is heavily disputed, as is the idea that population will grow exponentially rather than plateau. 

Under the circumstances, I think it's perfectly valid to ask what somebody'sproposed solution to the supposed problem is. Usually a pretty good indicator of what their actual agenda.

I've always been clear that my agenda, as far as the UK goes, is that I really don't want population growth, that it's caused a right bloody mess with all that's necessary to support it, and that it would be a rather more pleasant place to live in without it. For example fewer people removes all the pressure on housing, and without having to fvck up places further by building more - win win! Ditto with traffic, energy supplies, food etc. etc.

I  know the UK's birth rate is below the replacement rate, which is why I say that clamping down on insane levels of immigration is what I'd do about it, in order to bring about the highly desirable state of a falling population.

The only reason it's debated globally is because of people with their heads in the sand, who aren't thinking long term, who aren't considering developing countries actually developing, and who seem to think that there's a high-tech solution for everything, that because something has always come up before it always will. There are no benefits and a lot of downsides, both potential and real, to current global population levels, let alone what they may or may not grow to. There are no real downsides and a lot of benefits to reduction (as long as it doesn't happen too fast).

If you want to know what someone's agenda is then ask them. The "what's your solution?" question remains a transparent attempt at dismissal - the agenda that it shows up is yours.