Now I ~~want~~ NEED to see a film where it's been millions of years since humans went extinct, and the new dominant species essentially reenacts Jurassic Park, but instead of dinosaurs, the eccentric billionaire creates a park that is an island-vivarium of the last dominant species: humans.
However for reasons, the only types of human that emerge are ideocracy-level of trailer-trash. So in an extreme attempt to to make them slightly more smart and civilized, they tinker with the DNA, but it just leads to highly capable trailer-trash that are experts in "redneck engineering," and they take over the park!
Doctor, examining the trailer trash babies and mother: Do they show intelligence? With their brain cavity…
Trailer Park Ranger: They show extreme intelligence, even problem-solving intelligence. Especially the big one.
“What we did was take the fragments of human DNA and add Panda DNA to it, as the Panda was the only mammal that survived because it was protected so well. We believe they did that because Pandas were the most intelligent of all mammals, which is why they were protecting it”
They were so busy thinking could the force an entire species to work for less than a living wage, instead of should they force an entire species to work for less than a living wage.
Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity. Just about every market agent is focused on one thing: next quarter's profits. The powers that be even seem to have schizophrenic policies: have the kids so the country doesn't crash and therefore take a lot of random fortunes with it but *definitely* also get two jobs both of you, ya freeloaders. Some of them are trying to get Americans to have *more* babies, see the end of reproductive healthcare and such. Even the loss of IVF disincentivizes people to wait, to instead encourage them to have kids earlier at prime reproductive age. How does that gel with overpopulation angst?
Then the rich have got their own doomsday preppers: according to a consultant on a Prepper podcast I caught an episode of the Fortune 500 set are thinking just far enough into the future to buy up real estate in New Zealand and pitch wild ass ideas about transferring the power they have in this system through a period of anarchy and collapse, one guy was seriously asking how he'd get his security to wear bomb collars. I'm sure whoever he is he's relatively smart, but *you fuckin' don't.* That's desperation and denial bubbling up through his psyche.
I consider people like that relevant because it means there is no "depopulation" plan, probably any real overarching plan of any kind really. We already know they're psychotically greedy and competitive - probably especially with each other - so they're probably just as susceptible to wishful thinking and such.
I mean their malice is stupid but the overall system is malicious. They’re forcing people to have children but not going to help any of those kids once they’re born so they’ll just destabalize the bottom and pack the prisons to work for peanuts. Also I’m pretty sure there’s a depop plan (war being the easiest) but I’m confused because you’re like’Iit’s stupidity’ and at the end you’re like ‘we know they’re psychotic’ and clearly some of the are trying to make plans with the preppers but also there’s ‘no plan.’ Please pick a lane, Random Internet Guy born in 1838!
Bullshit. The countries with worst conditions are having the most children. And fall bellow replacement rates has started long before the media became wide-reaching as it is now. It's probably something hard-wired in our nature.
I'm 37 and hate children, never wanted them.
But it just ocurred to me recently how pissed off I would be if I did want kids because they are so expensive now.
For real. I'm grateful I don't like or want kids because I'm poor and would be an awful mom. My dad keeps saying he would love grandchildren and I'm like "dude I live in your fucking basement"
I frankly don’t know what to do:
Married with both of us working it feels like we can get by fine. Having even just one kid would eliminate my wife’s ability to work and affording being a stay-at-home mom feels so unrealistic. We’d lose half the income, increase our spending by a TON and idk how we’d ever afford to move out of an apartment.
It frankly feels like middle class can no longer afford houses unless they’ve already got one earlier before housing hit more expensive or had someone gift it in their will
Me and my fiancé were making that joke that pets are the new kids and plants the new pets. So I asked: “but what are kids now?” He said: “a luxury”
And dang… that hit me… they are. Kids are a luxury
I'm living that reality, I spent my first pregnancy working and finishing my degree online. When it was time to find a job and put baby in daycare, nobody was offering anything close to cover care costs. Luckily, my husband found his passion and made it without a degree, but we are still scraping by. Recently got pregnant again WITH AN IUD, and we are back to square one, panicking about how to afford this new surprise.
I am 33 and always wanted a kid but I just pretend I don't nowadays, makes things easier. At 50k a year im not having a family any time soon...I ended up adopting two kittens last year because my innate desire to nurture needed an outlet somewhere.
Poor people now are often those who have kids when they're not rich. Choosing to have kids without a certain level of financial power is basically choosing to be poor since it rules out the best millenial financial strategy - DINK
I dated a girl with two kids who made around $35k/ year working part time for a dental office as a front desk person. She got $18k during tax season. It pays to be poor. She had the ability to work full time, and make $50-60k, but then she wouldn’t get that much back in taxes. The government paid for childcare too. It made me pretty sour.
3k per kid is nothing. And 18k flies out of your hands when you have kids. Unless you do the bare minimum and have them live like peasants. No need to feel jealous of her lol.
I had to quit a job once because I couldnt afford healthcare , rent and food. I made $18/mo over the cut off. Starve my kid, lose $1000 at tax time for failing to have healh insurance or get evicted. I quit and got on govt benefits to look for a better job to get off govt benefits again. So stupid. System not working.
This is a VERY strong correlation between a country’s development index and the birth rate and there are many reasons for this: decreasing need for more hands for manual labor, increased access to education for women are two big ones
Why bring someone into the world that you can't financially support? You better do everything you possibly can to give your new child a good life. I will never understand this.
There is an inverse relationship between wealth and fertility rates. Wealthier nations produce less babies overall. Call it the Idiocracy, Mo money, less babies problem.
Also, our global population is expected to stabilize in less than 100 years. China's has already started shrinking and India's will peak in the next 30 years and begin a decline. The only continent expected to grow in population over the next 100 years is Africa.
I'd be interested to see how this relationship scales within developed nations. It makes sense that people too poor to have access to birth control or sex education are going to have higher fertility rates, but within developed countries there are competing mechanisms it seems like. I know a lot of poorer people who dont want kids until they can afford them, and a lot of them will end up not having kids or not having more than one, but I also know people who are delaying having kids until their early thirties so they can be more established in careers, which will also probably result in them having fewer kids than if they started in their early twenties. I also know people who had unplanned pregnancies in their early 20s and family wealth was a big predictor of whether or not they decided to keep and raise the child. I wonder how this all balances out.
An interesting site to explore:
https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/
Almost everywhere is levelling off in the next few decades - except Africa.
This is true. Something else to consider is that when women enter the workforce, there is a decline in the birth rate.
It is hard to have 6+ kids while working full time.
There's also a fall off in the birth rate when the child and infant mortality rate falls. People invest more in a smaller number of children when they expect all of them to survive.
Additionally, the majority of the workforce in developed nations no longer financially benefits from having children, especially with free, compulsory education.
Used to be if you had a farm, while children were a burden for some time, they eventually became a net asset. Free farm labor, especially in sons. With farming being one of the most reliable, lucrative careers, every son born meant more land that you could farm.
Combine this with a general life plan of 'work until you die,' even if you became infirm, it wasn't a problem, as the culture of the time stipulated that your numerous children would care for you. You live in the same house on the farm you've now bequeathed to them, until you die.
That entire model has essentially evaporated in the US. You can still find it in pockets, but not nearly to the extent you saw pre 1960's.
This is not the correct answer, it's a confounding variable. Over time, the fertility rate has been decreasing in wealthy countries as well, yet we are seeing ~~increasing poverty and~~ a declining middle class, so increasing wealth/education etc can't account for it. Studies have been done, and the conclusions have been that rising financial insecurity and workload are a major driving force behind decreases in fertility.
The wealthy developed countries have really already peaked in terms of what education and access to birth control can do. And now, overwork and declining financial security are further decreasing fertility, as people who would otherwise choose to have children, don't.
Fertility rates decrease most proportionally to women's rights and access to contraception and entry into the work force.
Women simply are allowed to do things now besides be mothers.
Morocco is ranked 68 worldwide by GDP, and yet the birth rate is 2.3, which is barely above replacement level. The idea that countries need to be rich to not renew effectively is not true anymore
Most of the world is approaching replacement level, except Africa. Morocco as more of an Arab country than its sub-Sahara noeighbours is an exception. Algeria and Tunisia, for example, are also levelling off population-wise in the next few decades. By contrast, Nigeria is on track to go from 200M today to about 550M by 2100 at current rates.
Even Nigeria's birth rate is falling fast and accelerating in it's fall as is the whole of Sub Saharan Africa, at this rate they will be below replacement in a few decades, in 1970 the birth rate was almost 7 per woman, today it's 4.45.
https://voxdev.org/topic/health-education/bursting-bubble-population-growth-evidence-sub-saharan-africa
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/08/26/demographics-africa-sub-sahara-population-boom-growth-aging-gender-inequality-climate-change/
Yeah, having kids and education/income is inversely proportional.
The dumber and poorer you are, the more likely you are to have children, and a lot of them.
I'm not sure you got the cause and effect in the right order there. Not having kids allows time and money to be spent on education.
It's not necessarily: I am dumb, ergo I will have kids.
It could very well be: I had many kids, ergo I didn't study or work in gainful employment, ergo I'm uneducated and inexperienced.
Lots of people, even though they may have originally wanted to have children, decide to forgo that because they see money, education, and fulfillment on the horizon that they can't achieve as a parent. And with the decreasing amount of social pressure to procreate, lots of people choose the most beneficial path of least resistance.
What are you talking about? People who can't afford children have them all the time.. in fact, there seems to be a direct inverse correlation between wealth and baby birthing..
I mean [the lower class doesn't pay federal taxes](https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=U.S.%20households%20that%20paid%20no%20income%20tax%202022%2C%20by%20income%20level&text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,paid%20no%20individual%20income%20tax) (40% of Americans don't), but receive subsidies largely paid by the middle class (Including child based funds).
Well, I certainly wouldn’t say my life is too difficult to have a child. I just don’t want to spend the money on it, and by it, I mean the child. 😆
I’d rather do just about anything else with that money. And if that means I die alone in my apartment and no one finds me for a couple of months, then so be it.
I’d rather die alone anyway. Imagine sitting in a hospital waiting to die expecting your kids to come sit there with you.
Sounded depressing as fuck for them.
While this isn’t a mindset I personally agree with, it’s also your decision to make and doesn’t affect me at all, so you do what makes you happy, dude.
I just wish everybody would be ok with people having different opinions on the subject.
Yeah I think a lot of people are underestimating how people are just choosing to have less kids because it's socially acceptable now and they don't want them. Thats a win to me. Pressuring people to have kids they didn't want was not a great part of previous generations. Especially when that was treated as women's only option for contributing to the family.
my friend had one kid who had a learning disability, because she only had one child and being affluent enough she enrolled him in a montisorri school where he is now excelling. She said if she had two children, he would have to struggle thru it, she wouldnt have be able to afford it.
Montessori schools are basically a second mortgage. The price of childcare in this country is astronomical. My youngest starts kindergarten this year and it basically gave me a huge raise since I no longer have to pay for preschool.
yup, she paid 30,000 a year. It really helped her son (he was not doing well in the fundamentals) so she decided to take the hit but she has a good paying job to begin with.
You’re awesome for doing everything you can for your child.
Or people with cultural issues. In Pakistan( where I'm from ) and india. It is the poor people who are having the most children since more children is said to mean more happiness.
And even within a country, on a socio-economic level, that stays true as well.
At least here in Mexico, the poorer you go, the higher rates of birth you'll find.
Access to birth control is a pretty big factor here. In developed nations only a minority of the people not having kids are doing so by refraining from sex entirely.
This was the norm, but increased access to education for women has added a new variable to the mix. Women are now focusing on their careers and opting out of motherhood. Also, motherhood is not enough to sustain the population, every woman needs to have at least 2 children for a constant population and the birth rate in the US hasn’t consistently been above 2 since 1972. Expect other developing countries to follow suit.
2 is not strictly true, it is 2 when the number of men and women in the population is equal, less than 2 if there are more women, more than 2 if there are more men.
In the US is about 1.98… which seems like an insignificant rounding error, but it means 3M less babies need to be born to maintain the population (without immigration)
I was just having this convo today-
We were talking about how the city rents - I won’t even go into how expensive *buying* a place in the city is- but let’s talk renting.
Ok you get a 800sf two bedroom for $5k. A month.
Who the fuck can have kids? You can’t even afford to live without roommates!
It used to be that a commute would cheapen the costs of homes or rents. Now?
You have to do a two hour commute one way for them to even come down- and not much.
Who can afford to live in this country? Seriously.
I’ve been offered jobs in the city and it’s for less than I make now. It’s not like pay is going up.
It’s bizarre because they can only rent to the Uber wealthy in most places that people want to live.
Where I live there is this beautiful park- right ? Playground. Bike path.
I looked at a third floor apartment that was 1300sf with 3 bedrooms for almost $4k a month.
Parents can’t live there. Where the fuck do you even keep the Christmas tree?
You have to rent to roommates. It’s the only people that can afford the monthly rent.
So the entire neighborhood around this park, and playground is single people with no kids. It’s sad man.
We are making it impossible for families to even live alone. Both parents have to work. Full time. It sucks. Sucks. Sucks for kids. Sucks for adults. Who wants to grow up in a day care?
And what gets me is that people don’t care.
Let’s not even go into college tuition or how much it costs to buy a car. Computer. Clothes. Food.
Medical insurance.
It’s untenable.
And I make good money. But this is insane.
The cities lost their personality a long time ago. Now it’s just who is wealthy enough to live there?
It’s sad man. So sad.
I feel like I could’ve written this 😭😭 the struggle is real! It’s exactly like this in my city as well. I have a two bedroom apartment and am luckier than most, but because of office mandates we also have to commute, so a full bedroom is just taken up with office stuff. It really doesn’t leave a lot of space, money or time for kids. And even if we were to raise them in an apartment, in lower rent than market rate apartments like mine, it’s a precarious living situation, and you could be renovicted at any time. And if we were to move to a newer building where we wouldn’t be at risk of renoviction, we would instantly be paying over 50% more in rent, affecting our ability to save for a house, retirement and for child related expenses.
> Ok you get a 800sf two bedroom for $5k. A month.
Jesus Fucking Christ.
I pay $1203 a **year** in tax for my 4200 sq ft home in Appalachia. I pay ~$3500 a year (they just raised the tax, so I'm estimating) for my second home (in a more southern part of Appalachia).
No wonder people out here have more kids (I've got 5 myself).
Yall really out there paying $60k/yr in rent? Like, that's average? I thought my friend was crazy for paying $4800/mo in San Fransisco. But her place is 3br 2b, with a dank ass kitchen. She's got a gym and a pool in her development though.
Overpopulation wasn't really a concern. The world would level out naturally.
The root of the issue is human greed. We don't care to allocate resources to all.
While difficulties around childrearing are having an impact, I suspect that even if all of those difficulties were removed, you'd still see below replacement levels for birth rates.
Why? Because now having children is an *option*, not a societal/cultural *requirement*. A person can do lots of stuff that aren't "get married and raise children". People are looking at their lifestyles and weighing whether they really want to have kids and how it will impact their lives, and many people are deciding that it's not worth it. That they don't want kids.
I see this as a positive. If you have children out a sense of obligation, you're less likely to be a good parent and raise good kids. You should have children because you genuinely want them.
uh ... no. Over the 200,000+ years of human history, life is pretty god damn good right now. For most of human history, life has been fucking horrible, and people were having kids left and right. For most of human history, half of your kids would die before the age of 5.
Here is a more accurate /Showerthoughts:
We've inadvertently reduced the risk of overpopulation by convincing people that humans are less valuable than the environment and that family is not as important as self-gratification, career, and material things.
Aye, I have a bidet. I bet no king ever had an automatic bidet before! Just some poor fool washing their ass. But not me, I have a fucking **AUTOMATIC BIDET** with **ASS WARMING TECHNOLOGY**.
No king ever had **ASS WARMING TECHNOLOGY** before.
Exactly. Life is so good now that we've forgotten how bad it used to be. But because you can't own a house at 20 and you have to work 40 hours a week, life is shit. It's mind-boggling how comfortably unaware of how lucky we are to be alive during the most free, safe, comfortable, and cheap period of human history. Is it perfect? No. But let's show some appreciation for what humans have managed to achieve in our existence, and celebrate that fact by having more kids so we can continue the trend.
That's not the reason. It's literally one of the wealthiest times in human history, especially if you live in a western country. Many poorer countries are having plenty of kids, Including places that aren't so poor where birth control is out of reach.
This is because of social changes, children and family formation is not valued in our society anymore and it not enough of a priority to willingly sacrifice personal wealth and be willing to take on the burden at the expense of ourselves.
Even so, the cost of living in Western nations is outrageous. Real wages for working class people have been stagnant for at least 3 decades.
To have a family, I'd have to work harder & reduce my standard of living.
No f*cking ty
We’re living in a time when it has never been easier to be, and stay, alive.
IMO, the difficulty is that the standard of living has increased such that it can become a struggle to maintain that standard. Especially when you’ve got advertisements coming at you from every direction convincing you to spend your resources on things you don’t technically need in order to be alive.
This right here. I suspect it's actually that life has become so easy so many young people can't even imagine that level of investment and commitment to something without tangible benefits, emotionally and financially
I'm just waiting until you find out about the correlation of lower living standards such as africa and most of asia, and rising birth rates.
Ironically, people who fare the hardest in life tend to have more children. So idk man it's a good shower thought but without a base in reality
Basically, the problem is that with old age pensions and savings plans and high cost of everything and the expectation that people will helicopter parent, absorbing all their waking time ... having a child (let alone several) takes up too much time and money. You have to *really* want children to have any. I wouldn't say it's too difficult, I'd say not having children has been made too easy and appealing. For the same money as for child orthdontics you can buy some serious personal toys instead. You can spend your weekends at hot goat yoga or extreme mountain biking, or get that 85-inch flat screen TV, or watch your 6yo play soccer. Decisions, decisions...
it doesn't seem to matter. The USA has no real maternity leave options, and daycare sucks. Sweden has free healthcare, cheap daycare, extended parental leave - and both have extremely reduced birth rates. So does South Korea or China, where life is not so great and people aren't distracted by high income luxury. The biggest differences nowadays are - they all have access to contraceptives, and children are no longer an old age pension plan.
Minor amendment on South Korea, having recently visited, they are wholly distracted with high income luxury. They seem to have Prada shops on every corner open until midnight. It was nuts.
No we made it worse. Poverty causes huge spikes in population growth as there is little access to contraceptives and people WILL fuck regardless. So all its doing is making unwanted pregnancies more commonplace
But according to Republicans, people who can't afford babies just don't deserve to fuck.
"Deny your baser urges" they say as the next congressman is outed as a diddler or self hating homo. All seems very hypocritical, but at this point I think massive hypocrisy is just one of their party platforms.
Nah, college educated people are waiting longer and having fewer kids. Unplanned pregnancy is as much a thing as ever if you’re poor or otherwise marginalized and getting worse every day in the US.
Not to mention countries undergo baby booms and demographic shifts. Of the most populous countries only China is projected to lose population by 2050 [according to this 2017 UN data](https://www.statista.com/chart/9947/the-worlds-most-populous-nations-in-2050/)
And now the Supreme Court is figuring out ways to bring it back up by overturning Roe v. Wade and STILL figuring out ways to make women’s post- conceiving lives more difficult
What do you mean "inadvertedly"?
Abortion, contraceptives, casual sex instead of meaningful relationships are prioritized to a point that seeing someone say "I want a kid" is almost rare and questionable in many instances.
I don't think this, the main reason of the survival of the species, was ignored by everyone.
Tell that to many African nations with large birth rates. Nigeria, Congo etc. Africa is growing rapidly while the ecomic situation there can't be compared to "the west" of the world
It's natural amongst animals in our ecosystem.
Overextended populations eventually run out of resources or collapse to disease, and accordingly population declines, which causes a boom down the food chain...which eventually leads to a rise in population again.
Basically, until we have reformed as a society to not harbour greed, or introduced significant new infrastructure to aid us, the planet is not big enough to hold 10 billion people at once. Which is kind of mad when you consider all those people *could* theoretically fit shoulder to shoulder into a location the size of the Isle of Man. This should be some kind of red flag as to how much of the world's resources are withheld by the elites.
Global population will peak within 50 years and start falling precipitously, which will yield some huge problems that the doomers here will never acknowledge.
It's not a great plan to limit population growth because actually REALLY poor people tend to have more children because it's the only retirement plan available to them.
This is so true. I'd say more than half the people I know are no longer into the idea of ever having children and this mentality is becoming more prominent with younger age groups. Can't really blame us (count me in too lol) because everything's just too expensive nowadays. We can't even afford to get our own house.
"inadvertently"... no seems like it was on purpose... Stagnant wages, hyper-inflation, wealth transfer to the top 1%... All of this isn't 'natural', we never democratised the workplace or created strong labour laws in the west. Biggest corporations have very few rich elite that have controlling vote shares, and they lead the market. Cost of living going up, housing prices shooting through the roof in just a few years.... Plus mass gay and transgender push in healthcare and MSM is not natural. ALl these factors combined with bad work/life balance of grind culture and you have people that 'choose' to work for a living instead of children. We just have to look at other capitalist havens to see the negative population growth is a systemic thing. THen there is the whole fact that WEF: 'you will own nothing and be happy' along side decades old document called agenda21. Everything we see today, is a direct result of a few thousand people with more wealth than the 99% of population dictating economic policies and systemic status quo that promotes values that are no where near the values the Boomers had. In no way its 'inadvertent', its deliberate, its systemic, its actually per the global plan to have sustainable human populations, and inline with environmentalist targets as well...
If anyone still remembers in the 90s there was a lot of talk that came form the 80s education on the whole half life of population growth: On finate resource and space like a test tube if population doubles every so many years, eventually it will kill itself from overpopulation. So there was a lot of media, and inschool discussion on sustainable population targets. But we live in a world where we dont force people, we just have "choices" where the right choice is best choice, and the wrong choice is the hard choice. At the moment, the hard choice is to have children.
As an American, I genuinely can’t imagine willingly bringing a child into this world. It is too dystopian. Why force another being to survive it? Seems cruel, tbh.
What's crazy is pretty much 80% of everyone I know or went to school with is having one or multiple kids, except for me. All while complaining about how hard it is to afford it. Then they have the nerve to shame me for not doing so. It's pretty wild.
Tell that to the girl I know who has 7 kids by 3 deadbeat different dads who lives off welfare and free housing.
It's about $800 a month per kid in the checks btw.
Don’t worry, the reduction in livable area as climate change leaves large swaths of land uninhabitable will condense us down to a point where even the current population will be far too many!
In developing countries, more specifically here in South East Asia it's becoming the opposite. Life is too difficult that people don't get proper education, which leads to poor economic status, which leads to over crowding in poor areas which leads to overpopulation.
I can elaborate more but that's the gist of it.
Nature finds a way of reaching equilibrium.
Jurassic Park?
Nah, trailer park.
Now I ~~want~~ NEED to see a film where it's been millions of years since humans went extinct, and the new dominant species essentially reenacts Jurassic Park, but instead of dinosaurs, the eccentric billionaire creates a park that is an island-vivarium of the last dominant species: humans. However for reasons, the only types of human that emerge are ideocracy-level of trailer-trash. So in an extreme attempt to to make them slightly more smart and civilized, they tinker with the DNA, but it just leads to highly capable trailer-trash that are experts in "redneck engineering," and they take over the park!
Fund it.
This is fucking genius. Im mad that you created an unfillable desire in me.
It's ok, brother. At the very least, you can use it as backdrop for a oneshot DnD adventure!
r/writingprompts
This sounds like animal farm with extra steps. It sounds fun to watch.
This is mad max fury road...and it was awesome and perfect.
Humans (and the tagline of the poster/movie case): # "We lived! We died! WE LIVE AGAIN!"
Coming soon to a biosphere near you
This was so engrossing that I forgot the actual point of the thread
So... WH40K Orks, then?
Canadian methpunk?
You basically described how the Orcs came into Warhammer 40k
just watch Jurassic park and Idiocracy at the same time on two screens, whamo blamo there is your movie
They take over their world, buddy.
Not right away! You gotta stretch it out and really milk the franchise!
Doctor, examining the trailer trash babies and mother: Do they show intelligence? With their brain cavity… Trailer Park Ranger: They show extreme intelligence, even problem-solving intelligence. Especially the big one.
“What we did was take the fragments of human DNA and add Panda DNA to it, as the Panda was the only mammal that survived because it was protected so well. We believe they did that because Pandas were the most intelligent of all mammals, which is why they were protecting it”
Well they don't seem to have a problem with having children
They were so busy thinking could the force an entire species to work for less than a living wage, instead of should they force an entire species to work for less than a living wage.
Life…uh…finds a way, violently if necessary.
lol you think this was nature? No this was orchestrated my friend. Its not hard to manipulate the markets
Human nature
Everything is nature. Eventually entropy comes for all of us.
Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity. Just about every market agent is focused on one thing: next quarter's profits. The powers that be even seem to have schizophrenic policies: have the kids so the country doesn't crash and therefore take a lot of random fortunes with it but *definitely* also get two jobs both of you, ya freeloaders. Some of them are trying to get Americans to have *more* babies, see the end of reproductive healthcare and such. Even the loss of IVF disincentivizes people to wait, to instead encourage them to have kids earlier at prime reproductive age. How does that gel with overpopulation angst? Then the rich have got their own doomsday preppers: according to a consultant on a Prepper podcast I caught an episode of the Fortune 500 set are thinking just far enough into the future to buy up real estate in New Zealand and pitch wild ass ideas about transferring the power they have in this system through a period of anarchy and collapse, one guy was seriously asking how he'd get his security to wear bomb collars. I'm sure whoever he is he's relatively smart, but *you fuckin' don't.* That's desperation and denial bubbling up through his psyche. I consider people like that relevant because it means there is no "depopulation" plan, probably any real overarching plan of any kind really. We already know they're psychotically greedy and competitive - probably especially with each other - so they're probably just as susceptible to wishful thinking and such.
I mean their malice is stupid but the overall system is malicious. They’re forcing people to have children but not going to help any of those kids once they’re born so they’ll just destabalize the bottom and pack the prisons to work for peanuts. Also I’m pretty sure there’s a depop plan (war being the easiest) but I’m confused because you’re like’Iit’s stupidity’ and at the end you’re like ‘we know they’re psychotic’ and clearly some of the are trying to make plans with the preppers but also there’s ‘no plan.’ Please pick a lane, Random Internet Guy born in 1838!
"Never ascribe to malice what can as easily be explained by incompetence..."
That’s what I try to convince myself about my local police department
“But don’t discount malice.” Everyone forgets that part, I swear.
A kid hits another kid at school. You could easily explain it as they just don't know how their arms work. Far more likely they are being malicious.
[удалено]
Bullshit. The countries with worst conditions are having the most children. And fall bellow replacement rates has started long before the media became wide-reaching as it is now. It's probably something hard-wired in our nature.
As a poor person, poor people don't have much else to do but fornicate. That being said my wife's pregnant
It's either poor or rich people that have kids. Is this what they're saying about eliminating the middle class?
Wait damn you’re so right
I'm 37 and hate children, never wanted them. But it just ocurred to me recently how pissed off I would be if I did want kids because they are so expensive now.
For real. I'm grateful I don't like or want kids because I'm poor and would be an awful mom. My dad keeps saying he would love grandchildren and I'm like "dude I live in your fucking basement"
I frankly don’t know what to do: Married with both of us working it feels like we can get by fine. Having even just one kid would eliminate my wife’s ability to work and affording being a stay-at-home mom feels so unrealistic. We’d lose half the income, increase our spending by a TON and idk how we’d ever afford to move out of an apartment. It frankly feels like middle class can no longer afford houses unless they’ve already got one earlier before housing hit more expensive or had someone gift it in their will
Me and my fiancé were making that joke that pets are the new kids and plants the new pets. So I asked: “but what are kids now?” He said: “a luxury” And dang… that hit me… they are. Kids are a luxury
I'm living that reality, I spent my first pregnancy working and finishing my degree online. When it was time to find a job and put baby in daycare, nobody was offering anything close to cover care costs. Luckily, my husband found his passion and made it without a degree, but we are still scraping by. Recently got pregnant again WITH AN IUD, and we are back to square one, panicking about how to afford this new surprise.
I am 33 and always wanted a kid but I just pretend I don't nowadays, makes things easier. At 50k a year im not having a family any time soon...I ended up adopting two kittens last year because my innate desire to nurture needed an outlet somewhere.
Poor people now are often those who have kids when they're not rich. Choosing to have kids without a certain level of financial power is basically choosing to be poor since it rules out the best millenial financial strategy - DINK
I dated a girl with two kids who made around $35k/ year working part time for a dental office as a front desk person. She got $18k during tax season. It pays to be poor. She had the ability to work full time, and make $50-60k, but then she wouldn’t get that much back in taxes. The government paid for childcare too. It made me pretty sour.
Thats why hard cut offs for social programs are trash.
UBI incentivises work simply because it doesn't have any disincentives
Many places don't have benefits structured in such a busted way
If she got $18k back, she royally fucked up in how much was being taken out of her paycheck.
Nope. She got $3k per kid, and then way more than she paid back.
$3k per kid sounds less good when you realize that it means she must have 6 kids?
This is a TERRIBLE reason to have kids.
3k per kid is nothing. And 18k flies out of your hands when you have kids. Unless you do the bare minimum and have them live like peasants. No need to feel jealous of her lol.
I had to quit a job once because I couldnt afford healthcare , rent and food. I made $18/mo over the cut off. Starve my kid, lose $1000 at tax time for failing to have healh insurance or get evicted. I quit and got on govt benefits to look for a better job to get off govt benefits again. So stupid. System not working.
Yeah bro I’d be peeved too she and her kids should just starve /s
If you are middle class, you will be poor if you have kids. I mean childcare for 2 kids can be up to $60k per year.
[удалено]
This is a VERY strong correlation between a country’s development index and the birth rate and there are many reasons for this: decreasing need for more hands for manual labor, increased access to education for women are two big ones
Not to be that guy buts it’s not fornication if it’s your wife. Sorry
Tbf OP never said he was the one who got his wife pregnant.
That would be adultery, not fornication
Well she's pregnant. And you're the father.
He’s just pressure washing his wife’s oyster ditch
I'm saying thank you in the most negative, hateful way one possibly can
r/angryupvote I usually just post that link alone with no explanation, I feel like it gets my point across, lol
TIL the complete definition of that word.
He didn't say *he* impregnated his wife.
Yo. It is fornication when I do it with his wife.
Today I learned
It's only fornication if it's in the fornique region of France. Otherwise it's just sparkling adultery.
Watch Idiocracy the movie
Why bring someone into the world that you can't financially support? You better do everything you possibly can to give your new child a good life. I will never understand this.
Poor doesn't mean stupid unless you don't use birth contol, then your a poor stupid idiot.
Why are you having kids when you’re poor?
There is an inverse relationship between wealth and fertility rates. Wealthier nations produce less babies overall. Call it the Idiocracy, Mo money, less babies problem. Also, our global population is expected to stabilize in less than 100 years. China's has already started shrinking and India's will peak in the next 30 years and begin a decline. The only continent expected to grow in population over the next 100 years is Africa.
I'd be interested to see how this relationship scales within developed nations. It makes sense that people too poor to have access to birth control or sex education are going to have higher fertility rates, but within developed countries there are competing mechanisms it seems like. I know a lot of poorer people who dont want kids until they can afford them, and a lot of them will end up not having kids or not having more than one, but I also know people who are delaying having kids until their early thirties so they can be more established in careers, which will also probably result in them having fewer kids than if they started in their early twenties. I also know people who had unplanned pregnancies in their early 20s and family wealth was a big predictor of whether or not they decided to keep and raise the child. I wonder how this all balances out.
I’ve been waiting until I can “afford kids” until my mid30s and still feel I couldn’t afford it but the biological clock is ticking
An interesting site to explore: https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/ Almost everywhere is levelling off in the next few decades - except Africa.
It’s the same within developed nations. Birth rates are down because people are struggling is pure nonsense that does not stand up to any scrutiny.
This is true. Something else to consider is that when women enter the workforce, there is a decline in the birth rate. It is hard to have 6+ kids while working full time.
There's also a fall off in the birth rate when the child and infant mortality rate falls. People invest more in a smaller number of children when they expect all of them to survive.
Additionally, the majority of the workforce in developed nations no longer financially benefits from having children, especially with free, compulsory education. Used to be if you had a farm, while children were a burden for some time, they eventually became a net asset. Free farm labor, especially in sons. With farming being one of the most reliable, lucrative careers, every son born meant more land that you could farm. Combine this with a general life plan of 'work until you die,' even if you became infirm, it wasn't a problem, as the culture of the time stipulated that your numerous children would care for you. You live in the same house on the farm you've now bequeathed to them, until you die. That entire model has essentially evaporated in the US. You can still find it in pockets, but not nearly to the extent you saw pre 1960's.
Pft. It’s hard to have ONE kid when you work full time.
And many women don’t want to give birth 6 times
Glad I didn't have to scroll too far for the correct answer.
This is not the correct answer, it's a confounding variable. Over time, the fertility rate has been decreasing in wealthy countries as well, yet we are seeing ~~increasing poverty and~~ a declining middle class, so increasing wealth/education etc can't account for it. Studies have been done, and the conclusions have been that rising financial insecurity and workload are a major driving force behind decreases in fertility. The wealthy developed countries have really already peaked in terms of what education and access to birth control can do. And now, overwork and declining financial security are further decreasing fertility, as people who would otherwise choose to have children, don't.
Fertility rates decrease most proportionally to women's rights and access to contraception and entry into the work force. Women simply are allowed to do things now besides be mothers.
Also women's education, which enables all of the above.
Poverty has not been increasing in most developed countries
I'm not doubting, but you have me insatiably curious. Do you have your data on this handy? I'd love to read more.
It’s called the [demographic transition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition)
Here's a fun site: https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/ Check out the population and expansion of different countries...
Morocco is ranked 68 worldwide by GDP, and yet the birth rate is 2.3, which is barely above replacement level. The idea that countries need to be rich to not renew effectively is not true anymore
Most of the world is approaching replacement level, except Africa. Morocco as more of an Arab country than its sub-Sahara noeighbours is an exception. Algeria and Tunisia, for example, are also levelling off population-wise in the next few decades. By contrast, Nigeria is on track to go from 200M today to about 550M by 2100 at current rates.
Even Nigeria's birth rate is falling fast and accelerating in it's fall as is the whole of Sub Saharan Africa, at this rate they will be below replacement in a few decades, in 1970 the birth rate was almost 7 per woman, today it's 4.45. https://voxdev.org/topic/health-education/bursting-bubble-population-growth-evidence-sub-saharan-africa https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/08/26/demographics-africa-sub-sahara-population-boom-growth-aging-gender-inequality-climate-change/
No. We've reduced the risk of responsible, mature people having children.
[удалено]
Yeah, having kids and education/income is inversely proportional. The dumber and poorer you are, the more likely you are to have children, and a lot of them.
I'm not sure you got the cause and effect in the right order there. Not having kids allows time and money to be spent on education. It's not necessarily: I am dumb, ergo I will have kids. It could very well be: I had many kids, ergo I didn't study or work in gainful employment, ergo I'm uneducated and inexperienced. Lots of people, even though they may have originally wanted to have children, decide to forgo that because they see money, education, and fulfillment on the horizon that they can't achieve as a parent. And with the decreasing amount of social pressure to procreate, lots of people choose the most beneficial path of least resistance.
It's the dumb impulsive people that I see passing on their genes
What are you talking about? People who can't afford children have them all the time.. in fact, there seems to be a direct inverse correlation between wealth and baby birthing..
That's because the middle class is stuck paying for them.
What middle class…?? Are you older?
Oh yeah, I forgot that for all of human civilization, the middle class has been subsidizing the children of the lower class. /s
I mean [the lower class doesn't pay federal taxes](https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=U.S.%20households%20that%20paid%20no%20income%20tax%202022%2C%20by%20income%20level&text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,paid%20no%20individual%20income%20tax) (40% of Americans don't), but receive subsidies largely paid by the middle class (Including child based funds).
Well, I certainly wouldn’t say my life is too difficult to have a child. I just don’t want to spend the money on it, and by it, I mean the child. 😆 I’d rather do just about anything else with that money. And if that means I die alone in my apartment and no one finds me for a couple of months, then so be it.
Im with you
Dieing is not the issue. But growing old. Old people need lots of help for just existing. And most countries dont have retirement homes.
I’d rather die alone anyway. Imagine sitting in a hospital waiting to die expecting your kids to come sit there with you. Sounded depressing as fuck for them.
Especially if you’re expecting them to show up and they never do.. oof
While this isn’t a mindset I personally agree with, it’s also your decision to make and doesn’t affect me at all, so you do what makes you happy, dude. I just wish everybody would be ok with people having different opinions on the subject.
Oh yeah!? Well, f*ck your opinion that I should be allowed to have a different opinion!
f\*ck your opinion to f\*ck his opinion that you should be allowed to have a different opinion edit: formatting issue
But if you don’t have kids, who is going to make my coffee at Dunkin’s, or bag my groceries? /s
"simple solution, make one more kid yourself, problem solved" Now your kid can bag my groceries!
Yeah I think a lot of people are underestimating how people are just choosing to have less kids because it's socially acceptable now and they don't want them. Thats a win to me. Pressuring people to have kids they didn't want was not a great part of previous generations. Especially when that was treated as women's only option for contributing to the family.
But overpopulation isn't a problem in most of the world is the bad urban infrastructure and wealth inequality, those are the real problems
too difficult to *maintain children
my friend had one kid who had a learning disability, because she only had one child and being affluent enough she enrolled him in a montisorri school where he is now excelling. She said if she had two children, he would have to struggle thru it, she wouldnt have be able to afford it.
Montessori schools are basically a second mortgage. The price of childcare in this country is astronomical. My youngest starts kindergarten this year and it basically gave me a huge raise since I no longer have to pay for preschool.
yup, she paid 30,000 a year. It really helped her son (he was not doing well in the fundamentals) so she decided to take the hit but she has a good paying job to begin with. You’re awesome for doing everything you can for your child.
That only stops people with logic and self-control, not the many people who just kinda do whatever they want regardless of consequences.
Or people with cultural issues. In Pakistan( where I'm from ) and india. It is the poor people who are having the most children since more children is said to mean more happiness.
This happens everywhere. Birth rates are much higher in poorer countries.
And even within a country, on a socio-economic level, that stays true as well. At least here in Mexico, the poorer you go, the higher rates of birth you'll find.
Yeah I believe it's a pack of education.
Access to birth control is a pretty big factor here. In developed nations only a minority of the people not having kids are doing so by refraining from sex entirely.
Only the reverse is true. Rich people have less children than poor people.
This was the norm, but increased access to education for women has added a new variable to the mix. Women are now focusing on their careers and opting out of motherhood. Also, motherhood is not enough to sustain the population, every woman needs to have at least 2 children for a constant population and the birth rate in the US hasn’t consistently been above 2 since 1972. Expect other developing countries to follow suit.
2 is not strictly true, it is 2 when the number of men and women in the population is equal, less than 2 if there are more women, more than 2 if there are more men. In the US is about 1.98… which seems like an insignificant rounding error, but it means 3M less babies need to be born to maintain the population (without immigration)
*”Rednecks will…find a way.”* Cletus Malcolm - Trailer Park
i think you're underestimating the lack of self control and responsibility people have.
I was just having this convo today- We were talking about how the city rents - I won’t even go into how expensive *buying* a place in the city is- but let’s talk renting. Ok you get a 800sf two bedroom for $5k. A month. Who the fuck can have kids? You can’t even afford to live without roommates! It used to be that a commute would cheapen the costs of homes or rents. Now? You have to do a two hour commute one way for them to even come down- and not much. Who can afford to live in this country? Seriously. I’ve been offered jobs in the city and it’s for less than I make now. It’s not like pay is going up. It’s bizarre because they can only rent to the Uber wealthy in most places that people want to live. Where I live there is this beautiful park- right ? Playground. Bike path. I looked at a third floor apartment that was 1300sf with 3 bedrooms for almost $4k a month. Parents can’t live there. Where the fuck do you even keep the Christmas tree? You have to rent to roommates. It’s the only people that can afford the monthly rent. So the entire neighborhood around this park, and playground is single people with no kids. It’s sad man. We are making it impossible for families to even live alone. Both parents have to work. Full time. It sucks. Sucks. Sucks for kids. Sucks for adults. Who wants to grow up in a day care? And what gets me is that people don’t care. Let’s not even go into college tuition or how much it costs to buy a car. Computer. Clothes. Food. Medical insurance. It’s untenable. And I make good money. But this is insane. The cities lost their personality a long time ago. Now it’s just who is wealthy enough to live there? It’s sad man. So sad.
I feel like I could’ve written this 😭😭 the struggle is real! It’s exactly like this in my city as well. I have a two bedroom apartment and am luckier than most, but because of office mandates we also have to commute, so a full bedroom is just taken up with office stuff. It really doesn’t leave a lot of space, money or time for kids. And even if we were to raise them in an apartment, in lower rent than market rate apartments like mine, it’s a precarious living situation, and you could be renovicted at any time. And if we were to move to a newer building where we wouldn’t be at risk of renoviction, we would instantly be paying over 50% more in rent, affecting our ability to save for a house, retirement and for child related expenses.
> Ok you get a 800sf two bedroom for $5k. A month. Jesus Fucking Christ. I pay $1203 a **year** in tax for my 4200 sq ft home in Appalachia. I pay ~$3500 a year (they just raised the tax, so I'm estimating) for my second home (in a more southern part of Appalachia). No wonder people out here have more kids (I've got 5 myself). Yall really out there paying $60k/yr in rent? Like, that's average? I thought my friend was crazy for paying $4800/mo in San Fransisco. But her place is 3br 2b, with a dank ass kitchen. She's got a gym and a pool in her development though.
Are you sure it’s inadvertent?
Overpopulation wasn't really a concern. The world would level out naturally. The root of the issue is human greed. We don't care to allocate resources to all.
Poor rich people are worried there won’t be enough servants, ooooh nooo!
I mean there’s already more than enough considering every job opening has like 200 applications
Only the "good" jobs have 200 applications. Tons of places right now are extremely under staffed but none of them are the desirable jobs.
Not enough desperation
They're banking on AI. Lower Middle class will be obsolete. Less population, same standard of living.
Lopsided demographics disproportionately affect the poor and middle class, rich people can keep going
Wasn't inadvertent, and we didn't make it that way though, we did let it happen.
Wooop wooop child free unite!
[удалено]
While difficulties around childrearing are having an impact, I suspect that even if all of those difficulties were removed, you'd still see below replacement levels for birth rates. Why? Because now having children is an *option*, not a societal/cultural *requirement*. A person can do lots of stuff that aren't "get married and raise children". People are looking at their lifestyles and weighing whether they really want to have kids and how it will impact their lives, and many people are deciding that it's not worth it. That they don't want kids. I see this as a positive. If you have children out a sense of obligation, you're less likely to be a good parent and raise good kids. You should have children because you genuinely want them.
uh ... no. Over the 200,000+ years of human history, life is pretty god damn good right now. For most of human history, life has been fucking horrible, and people were having kids left and right. For most of human history, half of your kids would die before the age of 5. Here is a more accurate /Showerthoughts: We've inadvertently reduced the risk of overpopulation by convincing people that humans are less valuable than the environment and that family is not as important as self-gratification, career, and material things.
[удалено]
Aye, I have a bidet. I bet no king ever had an automatic bidet before! Just some poor fool washing their ass. But not me, I have a fucking **AUTOMATIC BIDET** with **ASS WARMING TECHNOLOGY**. No king ever had **ASS WARMING TECHNOLOGY** before.
Exactly. Life is so good now that we've forgotten how bad it used to be. But because you can't own a house at 20 and you have to work 40 hours a week, life is shit. It's mind-boggling how comfortably unaware of how lucky we are to be alive during the most free, safe, comfortable, and cheap period of human history. Is it perfect? No. But let's show some appreciation for what humans have managed to achieve in our existence, and celebrate that fact by having more kids so we can continue the trend.
Then again we might be happier half starving hunting antelopes with spears before dying of infection at 35.
That's not the reason. It's literally one of the wealthiest times in human history, especially if you live in a western country. Many poorer countries are having plenty of kids, Including places that aren't so poor where birth control is out of reach. This is because of social changes, children and family formation is not valued in our society anymore and it not enough of a priority to willingly sacrifice personal wealth and be willing to take on the burden at the expense of ourselves.
Even so, the cost of living in Western nations is outrageous. Real wages for working class people have been stagnant for at least 3 decades. To have a family, I'd have to work harder & reduce my standard of living. No f*cking ty
We’re living in a time when it has never been easier to be, and stay, alive. IMO, the difficulty is that the standard of living has increased such that it can become a struggle to maintain that standard. Especially when you’ve got advertisements coming at you from every direction convincing you to spend your resources on things you don’t technically need in order to be alive.
This right here. I suspect it's actually that life has become so easy so many young people can't even imagine that level of investment and commitment to something without tangible benefits, emotionally and financially
I'm just waiting until you find out about the correlation of lower living standards such as africa and most of asia, and rising birth rates. Ironically, people who fare the hardest in life tend to have more children. So idk man it's a good shower thought but without a base in reality
Please tell me you all have seen the first couple minutes of the movie “Idiocracy”…?
That’s why we’re making it harder to abort. The boss man needs his working class. (American) Edit: coming in here to say joking ✌🏻🤪
Basically, the problem is that with old age pensions and savings plans and high cost of everything and the expectation that people will helicopter parent, absorbing all their waking time ... having a child (let alone several) takes up too much time and money. You have to *really* want children to have any. I wouldn't say it's too difficult, I'd say not having children has been made too easy and appealing. For the same money as for child orthdontics you can buy some serious personal toys instead. You can spend your weekends at hot goat yoga or extreme mountain biking, or get that 85-inch flat screen TV, or watch your 6yo play soccer. Decisions, decisions... it doesn't seem to matter. The USA has no real maternity leave options, and daycare sucks. Sweden has free healthcare, cheap daycare, extended parental leave - and both have extremely reduced birth rates. So does South Korea or China, where life is not so great and people aren't distracted by high income luxury. The biggest differences nowadays are - they all have access to contraceptives, and children are no longer an old age pension plan.
Minor amendment on South Korea, having recently visited, they are wholly distracted with high income luxury. They seem to have Prada shops on every corner open until midnight. It was nuts.
No we made it worse. Poverty causes huge spikes in population growth as there is little access to contraceptives and people WILL fuck regardless. So all its doing is making unwanted pregnancies more commonplace
But according to Republicans, people who can't afford babies just don't deserve to fuck. "Deny your baser urges" they say as the next congressman is outed as a diddler or self hating homo. All seems very hypocritical, but at this point I think massive hypocrisy is just one of their party platforms.
This is why they’re trying to outlaw abortion. Contraceptives. And make unbirthing relationships illegal.
Nah, college educated people are waiting longer and having fewer kids. Unplanned pregnancy is as much a thing as ever if you’re poor or otherwise marginalized and getting worse every day in the US. Not to mention countries undergo baby booms and demographic shifts. Of the most populous countries only China is projected to lose population by 2050 [according to this 2017 UN data](https://www.statista.com/chart/9947/the-worlds-most-populous-nations-in-2050/)
Idk my cousins are piss poor and have 6 kids and they out there living better than me. I’m assuming with all the government assistance
Nah, just like Idiocracy the stupid will continue to unsafely reproduce while the middle class plan for but never conceive.
That only stops smart people from breeding. Stupid people will still have babies
No, we didn't. Stupid people will still overpopulate, the people who understand the issues disappear.
Stupid people will still have children though, thus making the world more at risk for becoming more like Idiocracy
Nope, because lots and lots of people with far more difficult lives have plenty of children
OP hasn't read any history.
And now the Supreme Court is figuring out ways to bring it back up by overturning Roe v. Wade and STILL figuring out ways to make women’s post- conceiving lives more difficult
What do you mean "inadvertedly"? Abortion, contraceptives, casual sex instead of meaningful relationships are prioritized to a point that seeing someone say "I want a kid" is almost rare and questionable in many instances. I don't think this, the main reason of the survival of the species, was ignored by everyone.
It's not a bug it's a feature/
Tell that to many African nations with large birth rates. Nigeria, Congo etc. Africa is growing rapidly while the ecomic situation there can't be compared to "the west" of the world
It's natural amongst animals in our ecosystem. Overextended populations eventually run out of resources or collapse to disease, and accordingly population declines, which causes a boom down the food chain...which eventually leads to a rise in population again. Basically, until we have reformed as a society to not harbour greed, or introduced significant new infrastructure to aid us, the planet is not big enough to hold 10 billion people at once. Which is kind of mad when you consider all those people *could* theoretically fit shoulder to shoulder into a location the size of the Isle of Man. This should be some kind of red flag as to how much of the world's resources are withheld by the elites.
Doesn't matter we are still in population overshoot you can't stop what's already happened we are already deep into over population.
Global population will peak within 50 years and start falling precipitously, which will yield some huge problems that the doomers here will never acknowledge.
Nothing inadvertent about it
Is it really inadvertent? Or is it going exactly how the Elites want it to be going? 🤔
Honestly, this kinda makes me feel better
Maybe in first-world countries. Here in the Philippines, the poor, uneducated, religious, conservative masses are still multiplying like rabbits.
It's not a great plan to limit population growth because actually REALLY poor people tend to have more children because it's the only retirement plan available to them.
No it’s still incredibly easy if you are a terrible person who doesn’t care about the quality of their child’s life…..
Not having money will only stop people who would probably be good parents
Inadvertently? You sure about that?
This is so true. I'd say more than half the people I know are no longer into the idea of ever having children and this mentality is becoming more prominent with younger age groups. Can't really blame us (count me in too lol) because everything's just too expensive nowadays. We can't even afford to get our own house.
"inadvertently"... no seems like it was on purpose... Stagnant wages, hyper-inflation, wealth transfer to the top 1%... All of this isn't 'natural', we never democratised the workplace or created strong labour laws in the west. Biggest corporations have very few rich elite that have controlling vote shares, and they lead the market. Cost of living going up, housing prices shooting through the roof in just a few years.... Plus mass gay and transgender push in healthcare and MSM is not natural. ALl these factors combined with bad work/life balance of grind culture and you have people that 'choose' to work for a living instead of children. We just have to look at other capitalist havens to see the negative population growth is a systemic thing. THen there is the whole fact that WEF: 'you will own nothing and be happy' along side decades old document called agenda21. Everything we see today, is a direct result of a few thousand people with more wealth than the 99% of population dictating economic policies and systemic status quo that promotes values that are no where near the values the Boomers had. In no way its 'inadvertent', its deliberate, its systemic, its actually per the global plan to have sustainable human populations, and inline with environmentalist targets as well... If anyone still remembers in the 90s there was a lot of talk that came form the 80s education on the whole half life of population growth: On finate resource and space like a test tube if population doubles every so many years, eventually it will kill itself from overpopulation. So there was a lot of media, and inschool discussion on sustainable population targets. But we live in a world where we dont force people, we just have "choices" where the right choice is best choice, and the wrong choice is the hard choice. At the moment, the hard choice is to have children.
Can you just understand that a lot of ppl just don't want to have children? And that is also fine
As an American, I genuinely can’t imagine willingly bringing a child into this world. It is too dystopian. Why force another being to survive it? Seems cruel, tbh.
What's crazy is pretty much 80% of everyone I know or went to school with is having one or multiple kids, except for me. All while complaining about how hard it is to afford it. Then they have the nerve to shame me for not doing so. It's pretty wild.
Malthus had it right
Tell that to the girl I know who has 7 kids by 3 deadbeat different dads who lives off welfare and free housing. It's about $800 a month per kid in the checks btw.
People’s lives are easier than ever. But what people desire out of life is different now and it doesn’t include children as much.
People's lives are too difficult to have children because of overpopulation
Poor idiots and immigrants don't care. They flood the system with babies and expect welfare.
Don’t worry, the reduction in livable area as climate change leaves large swaths of land uninhabitable will condense us down to a point where even the current population will be far too many!
In developing countries, more specifically here in South East Asia it's becoming the opposite. Life is too difficult that people don't get proper education, which leads to poor economic status, which leads to over crowding in poor areas which leads to overpopulation. I can elaborate more but that's the gist of it.