|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 16, 2021 22:40:00 GMT
How Low Can America’s Birth Rate Go Before It’s A Problem?By Stephanie H. Murray The U.S. fertility rate hit a record low in 2020 — just as it did in 2019, and 2018. Although the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have accelerated this decline, the drop has been underway for years. The total fertility rate — the average number of children a woman is expected to have over her lifetime — now sits at 1.64 children per woman in the U.S. Not only is this the lowest rate recorded since the government began tracking these stats in the 1930s, but it’s well below the so-called “replacement-level fertility” of about 2.1.The latter number is what social scientists and policymakers have long regarded as the rate a country should maintain to keep population numbers stable. When the fertility rate falls below replacement level, the population grows older and shrinks, which can slow economic growth and strain government budgets. Today’s babies are tomorrow’s workers and taxpayers: They’ll not only staff the hospitals and nursing homes we’ll use in old age but also sustain the economy by funding our pensions when we retire, paying the taxes that finance Social Security, Medicare, and many other government programs we’ll rely on, and buying the homes and stocks we invested in to build our savings. But recently, some experts have questioned whether we ought to be so concerned about low fertility. “There’s nothing really magical about replacement-level fertility,” said Erich Striessnig, a professor of demography and sustainable development at the University of Vienna. There are ways to overcome the challenges of low fertility, but it’ll take an investment in the people who have been born already. Replacement-level fertility is a convenient but unrealistic idea. The concept of replacement-level fertility goes back to at least 1929. At the time, birth rates in the U.S. and other industrialized countries had been falling for decades, and people didn’t know why. Attempting to explain this phenomenon, the American demographer Warren Thompson theorized that as these countries industrialized, people gained access to better medicine and sanitation as well as safer drinking water, leading to a sharp drop in death rates. With more children surviving to adulthood, people eventually started having fewer kids. In the final stage of this “demographic transition,” Thompson proposed, the fertility rate would settle at just about replacement level with one baby born for every adult dying. Thompson’s prediction was purely theoretical, but it became foundational to the field of demography. When the United Nations Population Division began projecting world population in the 1960s, its estimates were based on Thompson’s assumption that fertility rates across the world would converge to replacement level, further cementing the concept into demographic thought. This idea was attractive to politicians and policymakers since it meant they wouldn’t have to worry about populations growing or shrinking indefinitely. They could count on new generations of workers and taxpayers to keep the economy humming and government programs funded when older people stopped working. As it turned out, Thompson was only partially correct. Birth rates do decline as countries industrialize, but they don’t stop falling when they reach replacement level. In fact, fertility rates are now below replacement level in every post-industrial society, and it’s not clear where they’ll settle. But just because America’s fertility rate isn’t going to return to that 2.1 number anytime soon doesn’t mean that the fabric of society is going to collapse. In fact, low fertility poses some advantages: easing ecological pressures, preventing overcrowding and reducing the infrastructure costs that come with a growing population.
If they want enough babies to eventually pay for all their current $Spending.........why isn't the number a more realistic 20-1? ![[giveup]](//storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
And if nothing else, wouldn't that situation finally bring about the easing of legal immigration that so many desperately want to occur?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 17, 2021 2:45:10 GMT
1. You prove again how little you understand
2. It IS one of the reasons we need more legal immigration
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 17, 2021 13:05:33 GMT
1. You prove again how little you understand 2. It IS one of the reasons we need more legal immigration
1. So explain it to me.....like I'm dumb
2. Yes, I've heard from the likes of Paul Ryan why even illegal immigration should be embraced.........because Americans just ain't pumping out enough. The thing is I just plain disagree with that notion.
Here's where you tell me how all the experts and economists feel they know best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 17, 2021 14:26:28 GMT
1. You prove again how little you understand 2. It IS one of the reasons we need more legal immigration
1. So explain it to me.....like I'm dumb
2. Yes, I've heard from the likes of Paul Ryan why even illegal immigration should be embraced.........because Americans just ain't pumping out enough. The thing is I just plain disagree with that notion.
Here's where you tell me how all the experts and economists feel they know best.
1. I'm not sure I could conduct an entire macro-economics course on the board. The point of increasing the birthrate has nothing to do with what we have already spent but with what we need to spend now. If the level of debt bothers you, you are free to pay more in taxes.
2. Sorry, dude. You went from "legal" to "illegal"
Pick one.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 17, 2021 15:07:26 GMT
1. So explain it to me.....like I'm dumb
2. Yes, I've heard from the likes of Paul Ryan why even illegal immigration should be embraced.........because Americans just ain't pumping out enough. The thing is I just plain disagree with that notion.
Here's where you tell me how all the experts and economists feel they know best.
1. I'm not sure I could conduct an entire macro-economics course on the board. The point of increasing the birthrate has nothing to do with what we have already spent but with what we need to spend now. If the level of debt bothers you, you are free to pay more in taxes.
2. Sorry, dude. You went from "legal" to "illegal"
Pick one.
1. They're expecting future children to pay for the current and future spending, no?
2. I was merely willing to toss in both sets of people.......to point out that the burden costs is still larger than the benefits of tax revenues. In a similar way some people view Welfare Spending as a good thing for the economy? I'm sure it all looks good on paper.........but only with selective focus.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jun 18, 2021 0:21:40 GMT
1. I'm not sure I could conduct an entire macro-economics course on the board. The point of increasing the birthrate has nothing to do with what we have already spent but with what we need to spend now. If the level of debt bothers you, you are free to pay more in taxes.
2. Sorry, dude. You went from "legal" to "illegal"
Pick one.
1. They're expecting future children to pay for the current and future spending, no?
2. I was merely willing to toss in both sets of people.......to point out that the burden costs is still larger than the benefits of tax revenues. In a similar way some people view Welfare Spending as a good thing for the economy? I'm sure it all looks good on paper.........but only with selective focus.
Read up on Japan's problem Who is going to keep society humming along? Future doctors, etc. Problem is, as people get better off the fail to see the value of children. Farms needed them, but doctors, etc, they're just an investment which may or.may not make sense. You don't have any as I recall. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 0:27:38 GMT
Read up on Japan's problem Who is going to keep society humming along? Future doctors, etc. Problem is, as people get better off the fail to see the value of children. Farms needed them, but doctors, etc, they're just an investment which may or.may not make sense. You don't have any as I recall.
Japan's problem? as opposed to India's problem or China's problem? or the Earth's problem?
It's an opinion/viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jun 18, 2021 0:32:19 GMT
Read up on Japan's problem Who is going to keep society humming along? Future doctors, etc. Problem is, as people get better off the fail to see the value of children. Farms needed them, but doctors, etc, they're just an investment which may or.may not make sense. You don't have any as I recall.
Japan's problem? as opposed to India's problem or China's problem? or the Earth's problem?
It's an opinion/viewpoint.
Japan has had a problem with falling birthrate for couple decades. Women don't see the point of having munchkins. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 0:42:55 GMT
Japan has had a problem with falling birthrate for couple decades. Women don't see the point of having munchkins.
Why is that necessarily a problem, though? Y'know what they've also had?........a Middle Class that's hung around, unlike other areas where babies are more plentiful.
This, to me, is the greatest inconsistency of all of this New Green Deal nonsense. Whatever happened to the very obvious truth that LESS people will automatically lead to less pollution, resource demands, overcrowding, suffering and on and on and on.
I just read a piece on your area of the country.........they bragged about the SUCCESS of getting people to use 40% less water during times of drought and shortages....... but then they also mentioned that while that 'improvement' was achieved (likely thru Govt mandates) the population had grown by over 50%. This is simple Math, isn't it? You're deeper in the hole than you were before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 18, 2021 0:47:01 GMT
1. I'm not sure I could conduct an entire macro-economics course on the board. The point of increasing the birthrate has nothing to do with what we have already spent but with what we need to spend now. If the level of debt bothers you, you are free to pay more in taxes.
2. Sorry, dude. You went from "legal" to "illegal"
Pick one.
1. They're expecting future children to pay for the current and future spending, no?
2. I was merely willing to toss in both sets of people.......to point out that the burden costs is still larger than the benefits of tax revenues. In a similar way some people view Welfare Spending as a good thing for the economy? I'm sure it all looks good on paper.........but only with selective focus.
1. In many cases, yes. As you are fond of reminding us: everybody is going to die.
2. The only way for you to understand would be for me to run through every type of visa and you'd still try to conflate it with "illegals" so I think I'll just let you wallow in ignorance and racism by yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 0:49:43 GMT
1. In many cases, yes. As you are fond of reminding us: everybody is going to die.
2. The only way for you to understand would be for me to run through every type of visa and you'd still try to conflate it with "illegals" so I think I'll just let you wallow in ignorance and racism by yourself.
2. Sometimes it's just like having that grinning prick Obama here with the many, many, many accusations of racism whenever there's a difference of opinion. You should have thrown in a 'For the Children' to truly cement your point with me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 18, 2021 1:19:43 GMT
1. In many cases, yes. As you are fond of reminding us: everybody is going to die.
2. The only way for you to understand would be for me to run through every type of visa and you'd still try to conflate it with "illegals" so I think I'll just let you wallow in ignorance and racism by yourself.
2. Sometimes it's just like having that grinning prick Obama here with the many, many, many accusations of racism whenever there's a difference of opinion. You should have thrown in a 'For the Children' to truly cement your point with me.
You know why everyone thinks Trump is a racist?
Because he says all the things that racists like to hear and repeat.
Like this: "I like the good, legal immigrants like the ones from Norway," (or however he said it) which translates to, "I want more white people in America."
It's sort of how I never hear you complain about all the fucking illegal Canadians in the US but you're always on about the southern border.
If you don't want people to think that you're a racist, stop whistling for your dog, which I assume is named "Duke" after David and not Marion Michael Morrison.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 1:29:37 GMT
You know why everyone thinks Trump is a racist?
Because he says all the things that racists like to hear and repeat.
Like this: "I like the good, legal immigrants like the ones from Norway," (or however he said it) which translates to, "I want more white people in America."
It's sort of how I never hear you complain about all the fucking illegal Canadians in the US but you're always on about the southern border.
If you don't want people to think that you're a racist, stop whistling for your dog, which I assume is named "Duke" after David and not Marion Michael Morrison.
or that's the way people like yourself translated it? Words matter? Or the source of those words matter more? Trump is a clear racist......yet Obama is not?
Also, supporting Trump might just not include absolute support for every word and syllable uttered, but general ideas instead. Legal immigration versus illegal, for instance. Since the US has had a vast majority non-white immigration numbers for years........wouldn't you think the people being called racists would be against all legal immigrants, too? Even better, are all those who came here legally, that believe illegals immigration is a problem, racists, too?
This makes no sense and falls apart in so many ways. Trump's policies helped out the yearly income of millions of Americans.....a lot of them brown and black people! That doesn't count for anything?
It should be a given........ if I don't care about the race of people....... and I'm against all illegal immigration, then the Canadians, Irish, Russians and whatevers that come illegally are just as wrong as those coming from south of the border. It's not my fault the numbers are heavily skewed south of the border though..... is it?
Who's throwing out the baby with the bath water in this equation? Because the vast majority are not white, they should be given amnesty and a pass? otherwise it's racist?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 18, 2021 1:55:37 GMT
You know why everyone thinks Trump is a racist?
Because he says all the things that racists like to hear and repeat.
Like this: "I like the good, legal immigrants like the ones from Norway," (or however he said it) which translates to, "I want more white people in America."
It's sort of how I never hear you complain about all the fucking illegal Canadians in the US but you're always on about the southern border.
If you don't want people to think that you're a racist, stop whistling for your dog, which I assume is named "Duke" after David and not Marion Michael Morrison.
or that's the way people like yourself translated it? Words matter? Or the source of those words matter more? Trump is a clear racist......yet Obama is not?
Also, supporting Trump might just not include absolute support for every word and syllable uttered, but general ideas instead. Legal immigration versus illegal, for instance. Since the US has had a vast majority non-white immigration numbers for years........wouldn't you think the people being called racists would be against all legal immigrants, too? Even better, are all those who came here legally, that believe illegals immigration is a problem, racists, too?
This makes no sense and falls apart in so many ways. Trump's policies helped out the yearly income of millions of Americans.....a lot of them brown and black people! That doesn't count for anything?
It should be a given........ if I don't care about the race of people....... and I'm against all illegal immigration, then the Canadians, Irish, Russians and whatevers that come illegally are just as wrong as those coming from south of the border. It's not my fault the numbers are heavily skewed south of the border though..... is it?
Who's throwing out the baby with the bath water in this equation? Because the vast majority are not white, they should be given amnesty and a pass? otherwise it's racist?
1. Yes. That's how intelligent people like me translated it. And based on how many cheers he got from his racist supporters, that's how they translated it as well.
As for Barry... I'm not really sure. Could you point o something he said that was overtly racist so that I can make a preliminary determination?
2. I think you forgot how Trump tried to stem immigration from non-white countries but tried to entice people from white countries.
As for the years of non-white immigration, are you referring to the slave trade or the Chinese diaspora that we countered with the "Chinese Exclusion Act"?
3. Trump added an average of about $600 a year to people's paychecks... $11.50/week... a small pizza. Then his trade war cost them an average of $1,000 a year. It's no wonder the guy went bankrupt so often.
And let's not forget waiting months to take action on Covid which ended in severe lockdowns and huge unemployment numbers.
4. But I'm betting that those nice, white, English-speaking Canadians will scramble back across the border for their health care and not contribute to that aspect of our economy... even though they'll be offered better jobs with nary a glance at their falsified I-9s.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 2:11:39 GMT
1. Yes. That's how intelligent people like me translated it. And based on how many cheers he got from his racist supporters, that's how they translated it as well.
As for Barry... I'm not really sure. Could you point o something he said that was overtly racist so that I can make a preliminary determination?
2. I think you forgot how Trump tried to stem immigration from non-white countries but tried to entice people from white countries.
As for the years of non-white immigration, are you referring to the slave trade or the Chinese diaspora that we countered with the "Chinese Exclusion Act"?
3. Trump added an average of about $600 a year to people's paychecks... $11.50/week... a small pizza. Then his trade war cost them an average of $1,000 a year. It's no wonder the guy went bankrupt so often.
And let's not forget waiting months to take action on Covid which ended in severe lockdowns and huge unemployment numbers.
4. But I'm betting that those nice, white, English-speaking Canadians will scramble back across the border for their health care and not contribute to that aspect of our economy... even though they'll be offered better jobs with nary a glance at their falsified I-9s.
1. No.........if you haven't seen it yet..........you likely never will.
2. You mean mostly 3rd world uneducated people? versus 1st world higher educated people? That might have nothing to do with skin color? Silicon Valley is very fond of Indians with higher education to replace the typical dopey American worker. Racist?
3. The number I saw was $6,000. Which could easily be argued is still a pittance.......but it was certainly better than his predecessor who often spoke about the 'new norm' of sucky economy and not having a magic wand to wave to improve things.
Covid response? Yet another subjective opinion
4. That's for them to choose.I do know that Trudeau suddenly had to interest in all the 'refugees' fleeing into Canada from the US. Several 'dream countries' have similar hesitations and even hard and fast rules when daring to enter their countries. They're not too keen on taking on the burden of Net Loss types either, despite the rhetoric
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jun 18, 2021 2:30:55 GMT
1. Yes. That's how intelligent people like me translated it. And based on how many cheers he got from his racist supporters, that's how they translated it as well.
As for Barry... I'm not really sure. Could you point o something he said that was overtly racist so that I can make a preliminary determination?
2. I think you forgot how Trump tried to stem immigration from non-white countries but tried to entice people from white countries.
As for the years of non-white immigration, are you referring to the slave trade or the Chinese diaspora that we countered with the "Chinese Exclusion Act"?
3. Trump added an average of about $600 a year to people's paychecks... $11.50/week... a small pizza. Then his trade war cost them an average of $1,000 a year. It's no wonder the guy went bankrupt so often.
And let's not forget waiting months to take action on Covid which ended in severe lockdowns and huge unemployment numbers.
4. But I'm betting that those nice, white, English-speaking Canadians will scramble back across the border for their health care and not contribute to that aspect of our economy... even though they'll be offered better jobs with nary a glance at their falsified I-9s.
1. No.........if you haven't seen it yet..........you likely never will.
2. You mean mostly 3rd world uneducated people? versus 1st world higher educated people? That might have nothing to do with skin color? Silicon Valley is very fond of Indians with higher education to replace the typical dopey American worker. Racist?
3. The number I saw was $6,000. Which could easily be argued is still a pittance.......but it was certainly better than his predecessor who often spoke about the 'new norm' of sucky economy and not having a magic wand to wave to improve things.
Covid response? Yet another subjective opinion
4. That's for them to choose.I do know that Trudeau suddenly had to interest in all the 'refugees' fleeing into Canada from the US. Several 'dream countries' have similar hesitations and even hard and fast rules when daring to enter their countries. They're not too keen on taking on the burden of Net Loss types either, despite the rhetoric
1. Do you think I'm an Obamaniac?  
2. The fact that you think 3rd world countries have no educated people is exactly why I think you and Trump are racists
3. Did you or your wife see an extra $115 in your paychecks every week? It was $600.
Countries that responded to the Covid threat early and with near complete compliance fared much better economically... as did several US states.
4. "The American Dream is dead. Stay in your own nightmare." Is that the new message? It sounds an awful lot like, "We got ours and we're not sharing."
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 18, 2021 12:03:31 GMT
1. Do you think I'm an Obamaniac?
2. The fact that you think 3rd world countries have no educated people is exactly why I think you and Trump are racists
3. Did you or your wife see an extra $115 in your paychecks every week? It was $600.
Countries that responded to the Covid threat early and with near complete compliance fared much better economically... as did several US states.
4. "The American Dream is dead. Stay in your own nightmare." Is that the new message? It sounds an awful lot like, "We got ours and we're not sharing."
1. No, I know you at least well enough to know that you can't stand most of the Dems.....almost as much as you despise the GOP. With me it's about the same just in reverse.
2. Of course they have educated people.......but by percentages? Even some of the worst places in the US manage to do better in that regard to keeping kids in schools. In fact, it's illegal for kids here to work until a certain age or with a permit, so that alone keeps them in school.
3. No, as a matter of fact, my wife took about a $5,000 hit when Gov Walker was elected because of the 'Right to Work' thing......but she still felt it was good pay and benefits. Since then she's become more aware of her own political beliefs and shocked me by being more hardcore than I.
We wouldn't have had to recover economically nearly to the same degree if we'd simply honored the request to close down for 14-21 days........to keep the hospitals supposedly from getting wrecked......and then allowed everyone that wanted to go about their business get back to it. Curve flattening is a funny argument all by itself.
4. The American dream is still attainable......but it's getting much more difficult as the Govt grows ever larger. Sharing? Is that how you sleep at night? By calling it sharing? That's like calling rape "Undocumented Speed Dating"
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jun 18, 2021 15:29:43 GMT
You know why everyone thinks Trump is a racist?
Because he says all the things that racists like to hear and repeat.
Like this: "I like the good, legal immigrants like the ones from Norway," (or however he said it) which translates to, "I want more white people in America."
It's sort of how I never hear you complain about all the fucking illegal Canadians in the US but you're always on about the southern border.
If you don't want people to think that you're a racist, stop whistling for your dog, which I assume is named "Duke" after David and not Marion Michael Morrison.
or that's the way people like yourself translated it? Words matter? Or the source of those words matter more? Trump is a clear racist......yet Obama is not?
Also, supporting Trump might just not include absolute support for every word and syllable uttered, but general ideas instead. Legal immigration versus illegal, for instance. Since the US has had a vast majority non-white immigration numbers for years........wouldn't you think the people being called racists would be against all legal immigrants, too? Even better, are all those who came here legally, that believe illegals immigration is a problem, racists, too?
This makes no sense and falls apart in so many ways. Trump's policies helped out the yearly income of millions of Americans.....a lot of them brown and black people! That doesn't count for anything?
It should be a given........ if I don't care about the race of people....... and I'm against all illegal immigration, then the Canadians, Irish, Russians and whatevers that come illegally are just as wrong as those coming from south of the border. It's not my fault the numbers are heavily skewed south of the border though..... is it?
Who's throwing out the baby with the bath water in this equation? Because the vast majority are not white, they should be given amnesty and a pass? otherwise it's racist?
Not racist at all. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jun 19, 2021 1:03:36 GMT
Think of both locations/properties like houses..........which one seems like a bigger mess to clean up?
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jun 19, 2021 2:17:37 GMT
Think of both locations/properties like houses..........which one seems like a bigger mess to clean up?
But Greenland wasn't on the market. And we've been involved with Puerto Rico for some decades so we could have done something, surely. |
|
![[giveup]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
![[cheers]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/engyBVslEdpmpmdnBwZQ.gif)