Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Great article from City Journal

"One thing that stands out in the United States, however, is how fertility differs among the states—ranging from a low of 1.27 in Vermont to nearly replacement-level in South Dakota. Notably, the states with the highest birthrates are overwhelmingly Republican, and those with the…

— Josh Kraushaar (@JoshKraushaar) April 26, 2024

---

We are going to need every high fertility State in America we can get

The U.S. birth rate is now at the lowest level ever recorded. This is not going to reverse anytime soon: There's a big decline in 18yo who want to have children, esp. young women. (From "The Future" chapter of *Generations.*)https://t.co/OmUr134wmS pic.twitter.com/VK6aJrDyIl

— Jean Twenge (author of GENERATIONS, iGEN) (@jean_twenge) April 25, 2024

---

abortion on demand, no fault divorce, sterilizing adolescents for gender reassignment, etc......

We are doing an awful lot of things that mitigate fertility, so let's just let anyone who wants to walk across our border come and stay here, no visas required.

Imagine being triggered by this. https://t.co/cYHRKJtDfe

— James Lindsay, full varsity (@ConceptualJames) April 28, 2024

boognish_bear said:

---

The number of Americans aged 25–34 living at home has jumped over 87% in the past two decades, according to census data and Axios.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) February 17, 2024

---

Multi generational households have been common in the third world for a long time.

You are already starting to see an increasing number of electric bicycles. People aren't riding these for exercise as they would a traditional bicycle. They are riding them as transportation given the increasing costs (insurance, gas, repair) of keeping a car on the road. My estimate is that as our collective standard of living continues to fall, you will see more "substitution" of cars with two wheel transportation. That's another feature of third world life, where those who can't afford a car ride motorcycles/scooters/bicycles or are relegated to public transport.

Hungary-like fertility policies flatly don't work.

Hungary has dedicated major resources to this - no taxes for 3+ kids, debt forgiveness, major subsidies for homes. It's actually equivalent to ~5% of their GDP. The US military is 3.2%, so big spending.

Nothing happened. https://t.co/ICmu43cieu pic.twitter.com/VNWRctggwc

— Hunter📈🌈 (@StatisticUrban) April 29, 2024

India is below replacement rate too? I hadn't realized that. pic.twitter.com/gW2jDiFFbR

— Random Walk (@MosesSternstein) May 3, 2024

People assume everything will improve if suddenly, lots of women in their late 20 and early 30s shift gears and start “dating to marry”. But that won’t happen – because generationally compounding decisions have generationally compounding responses. pic.twitter.com/JAQtGU8M1r

— ib (@Indian_Bronson) May 22, 2024

Now that we have outlawed abortion I am sure more women will want to step up and perform their duty for the Fatherland.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Now that we have outlawed abortion I am sure more women will want to step up and perform their duty for the Fatherland.

---

Abortion was about right and wrong and if the Child in the womb has a right to Life...and it was about Constitutional issues around States rights to govern themselves.

Abortion is of course NOT in the US Constitution so its open to debate.

It was far less about birth rate collapse. Though that is a good reason to argue for banning the practice since all over the world population collapse is going to be an issue in the 21st century.

For what its worth the legality or abortion does not seem to have much to do with fertility decline...its continues in countries that are very liberal on abortion and it continues to decline in countries that are restrictive of abortion.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Now that we have outlawed abortion I am sure more women will want to step up and perform their duty for the Fatherland.

---

Abortion was about right and wrong and if the Child in the womb has a right to Life...and it was about Constitutional issues around States rights to govern themselves.

Abortion is of course NOT in the US Constitution so its open to debate.

It was far less about birth rate collapse. Though that is a good reason to argue for banning the practice since all over the world population collapse is going to be an issue in the 21st century.

For what its worth the legality or abortion does not seem to have much to do with fertility decline...its continues in countries that are very liberal on abortion and it continues to decline in countries that are restrictive of abortion.

---

....but strictly speaking about policy impacts, abortion on demand is not helpful in slowing the decline or fostering recovery efforts. If one wants to remedy a shortage of pregnancies, the first and most logical thing to do is prevent intentional terminations of pregnancies. You get an immediate increase in the number of births.

Replacement birth rate requires(for the US) about 7.5m births. We had about 3.5m births. We had nearly a million abortions last year. That's a deficit of 4m births. lF a wand could be waived to have stopped all of those abortions, that would closes 25% of the gap.

There's no single policy that will fix the problem. "you eat an elephant one bite at a time." Eliminating elective abortions would be a pretty big response as far as policies go. And unlike the "incentive/inducement" options, it would have immediate impact.

Legal immigration is about 1m per year. that's another quarter of the solution.....
Illegal immigration is........(well, you can see why our government is pretending it can do nothing about illegal immigration. we are fixing several years of below-replacement birth rate by jet letting people walk across the border).

I was listening to something this morning about increasing levels of microplastics in testicles. It's an environmental contaminant.. No one is blaming that yet but apparently increasing levels call decreased sperm count in dogs. Maybe its playing a role.

For the 2020-2022 period, the survey found a TFR of 1.60 for Mexico, lower than the US for the first time in recorded history. Unfortunately, there is no breakup by state for this period.

— Birth Gauge (@BirthGauge) May 22, 2024

Redbrickbear said:

---

---

why does European history show millennia of successive waves of nomads moving (invading) from the steppes into settled European cultures? Why is it always a story of a massive tide of barbarians swamping civilized societies?

Because those settled societies entered into terminal population decline and became less able to resist invasion from poorer peoples with higher birth rates.......

.@philippilk explains,
"Capitalism’s imperative of work and consumption is at odds with its structural needs as it discourages family and thus stymies the economy’s ability to grow. This is the core contradiction of capitalism - more profound than anything Marx imagined." 3/9 pic.twitter.com/kQku0D5PYH

— More Births (@MoreBirths) June 12, 2024

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

I wonder how mortality rates affect the African population where fertility rates are so high.

---

Rule: Death rates start to fall before birth rates fall.

that leads to a population explosion at the onset of industrial development. FIRST comes the potable water. Then sanitary sewer. Then expansion of the electrical grid. All along that way, distribution of better medical services expands. Old people start living longer. More kids start surviving childhood. That starts putting pressure/incentives for families to reproduce less.

Those trends continue until death rate ticks up....which if sustained over time will spark an increase in birth rates again. It's safe to assume that population could reach a level low enough to cause the same thing. Humans have been around for a good long while now. We are survivors. a lot of things might cause us to die off, but losing the will to screw will probably be pretty low on the list.

whiterock said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

I wonder how mortality rates affect the African population where fertility rates are so high.

---

Rule: Death rates start to fall before birth rates fall.

that leads to a population explosion at the onset of industrial development. FIRST comes the potable water. Then sanitary sewer. Then expansion of the electrical grid. All along that way, distribution of better medical services expands. Old people start living longer. More kids start surviving childhood. That starts putting pressure/incentives for families to reproduce less.

Those trends continue until death rate ticks up....which if sustained over time will spark an increase in birth rates again. It's safe to assume that population could reach a level low enough to cause the same thing. Humans have been around for a good long while now. We are survivors. a lot of things might cause us to die off, but losing the will to screw will probably be pretty low on the list.

---

Yep, and those African fertility rates are already dropping now.

[In 2024, the average number of children per woman in Africa was 4.1, down from 5.24 in 2000. By 2030, it's projected to decline to around 3.8 births per woman]

By 2060 Africa will be below replacement rate (maybe earlier)

BellCountyBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

contrario said:

---

Why must the population sustain itself? Why would it be a bad thing for there to be less people?

---

population growth IS the largest part of economic growth. a shrinking population has to develop ever more sophisticated ways of improving productivity to maintain economic growth.

once an economy starts contracting, all kinds of pathologies set in......eventually becoming systemically fatal. How does a city of 800k maintain street, sewer and water infrastructure for a population of 500k?

There is a reason why places like Angkor Wat, et al....were abandoned.......

---

The majority of baby boomers in this country are not productive anymore and are a drag on the economy. The downside of modern medicine and pharmaceuticals.

---

Kill them!

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BellCountyBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

contrario said:

---

Why must the population sustain itself? Why would it be a bad thing for there to be less people?

---

population growth IS the largest part of economic growth. a shrinking population has to develop ever more sophisticated ways of improving productivity to maintain economic growth.

once an economy starts contracting, all kinds of pathologies set in......eventually becoming systemically fatal. How does a city of 800k maintain street, sewer and water infrastructure for a population of 500k?

There is a reason why places like Angkor Wat, et al....were abandoned.......

---

The majority of baby boomers in this country are not productive anymore and are a drag on the economy. The downside of modern medicine and pharmaceuticals.

---

Kill them!

---

It would be a very Leftist-Marxist solution to our class/generational equality issues.

Liquidate the Baby boomers.

They are sitting on a lot of wealth.

[As of the fourth quarter of 2023, baby boomers owned 51.8% of the total wealth in the United States, which is worth $76 trillion. This is due to a combination of factors, including strong earnings...Baby boomers are also 10 times wealthier than millennials and twice as wealthy as Gen X]

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BellCountyBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

contrario said:

---

Why must the population sustain itself? Why would it be a bad thing for there to be less people?

---

population growth IS the largest part of economic growth. a shrinking population has to develop ever more sophisticated ways of improving productivity to maintain economic growth.

once an economy starts contracting, all kinds of pathologies set in......eventually becoming systemically fatal. How does a city of 800k maintain street, sewer and water infrastructure for a population of 500k?

There is a reason why places like Angkor Wat, et al....were abandoned.......

---

The majority of baby boomers in this country are not productive anymore and are a drag on the economy. The downside of modern medicine and pharmaceuticals.

---

Kill them!

---

It would be a very Leftist-Marxist solution to our class/generational equality issues.

Liquidate the Baby boomers.

They are sitting on a lot of wealth.

[As of the fourth quarter of 2023, baby boomers owned 51.8% of the total wealth in the United States, which is worth $76 trillion. This is due to a combination of factors, including strong earnings...Baby boomers are also 10 times wealthier than millennials and twice as wealthy as Gen X]

---

the old folks are always the ones sitting on the wealth.

Today, the Census bureau released the population by age and sex for 2024 which incorporates the huge immigration wave that was missing in the 2023 estimates.
Instead of a TFR for 2024 of 1.627 that was published earlier, the TFR based on today's released data is 1.592. pic.twitter.com/P26aY6vZHH

— Birth Gauge (@BirthGauge) April 10, 2025

Realitybites said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

The number of Americans aged 25–34 living at home has jumped over 87% in the past two decades, according to census data and Axios.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) February 17, 2024

---

Multi generational households have been common in the third world for a long time.

You are already starting to see an increasing number of electric bicycles. People aren't riding these for exercise as they would a traditional bicycle. They are riding them as transportation given the increasing costs (insurance, gas, repair) of keeping a car on the road. My estimate is that as our collective standard of living continues to fall, you will see more "substitution" of cars with two wheel transportation. That's another feature of third world life, where those who can't afford a car ride motorcycles/scooters/bicycles or are relegated to public transport.

---

Scooters are not just a third world thing. Many people have both a car and scooter. Scooters are often much more convenient, all because of space and parking, plus they cost much less.

Say you need to go to the doctor 2 miles away. Why pay for the cost of running a car? Average car cost is $34,000, average scooter $3,300. Scooters cost about $.20-$.40 to operate, cars about $.60-$1.00.

A 4 door sedan is simply a ton of real estate to move around, and therefore costs much more, is far less efficient.

Scooters will eventually take off in certain parts of the U.S. They already are. Of course they are less suited for very cold climates, but go to southern Europe and they are everywhere. Asia too.

The sole reason I don't have one, is the fact that Americans don't know what the heck to do about a motorcycle or bicycle on the road, much less a scooter. People don't leave you space, road rage if you sneak up between cars at a stop light, etc. Where I live, driving is dangerous period, and there is a significant % chance I'd die on a scooter. Safer to be surrounded by a fortress of steel.

Porteroso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

The number of Americans aged 25–34 living at home has jumped over 87% in the past two decades, according to census data and Axios.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) February 17, 2024

---

Multi generational households have been common in the third world for a long time.

You are already starting to see an increasing number of electric bicycles. People aren't riding these for exercise as they would a traditional bicycle. They are riding them as transportation given the increasing costs (insurance, gas, repair) of keeping a car on the road. My estimate is that as our collective standard of living continues to fall, you will see more "substitution" of cars with two wheel transportation. That's another feature of third world life, where those who can't afford a car ride motorcycles/scooters/bicycles or are relegated to public transport.

---

Scooters are not just a third world thing. Many people have both a car and scooter. Scooters are often much more convenient, all because of space and parking, plus they cost much less.

Say you need to go to the doctor 2 miles away. Why pay for the cost of running a car? Average car cost is $34,000, average scooter $3,300. Scooters cost about $.20-$.40 to operate, cars about $.60-$1.00.

A 4 door sedan is simply a ton of real estate to move around, and therefore costs much more, is far less efficient.

Scooters will eventually take off in certain parts of the U.S. They already are.

---

Its a big thing in France for middle class families to have 1 car and 1 bike/scooter/mopeds for transport

Wife takes the car and the kids in the morning....husband takes the bike/scooter/moped

Because of that huge cost of keeping two cars

Helps that the French often live close to work.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

The number of Americans aged 25–34 living at home has jumped over 87% in the past two decades, according to census data and Axios.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) February 17, 2024

---

Multi generational households have been common in the third world for a long time.

You are already starting to see an increasing number of electric bicycles. People aren't riding these for exercise as they would a traditional bicycle. They are riding them as transportation given the increasing costs (insurance, gas, repair) of keeping a car on the road. My estimate is that as our collective standard of living continues to fall, you will see more "substitution" of cars with two wheel transportation. That's another feature of third world life, where those who can't afford a car ride motorcycles/scooters/bicycles or are relegated to public transport.

---

Scooters are not just a third world thing. Many people have both a car and scooter. Scooters are often much more convenient, all because of space and parking, plus they cost much less.

Say you need to go to the doctor 2 miles away. Why pay for the cost of running a car? Average car cost is $34,000, average scooter $3,300. Scooters cost about $.20-$.40 to operate, cars about $.60-$1.00.

A 4 door sedan is simply a ton of real estate to move around, and therefore costs much more, is far less efficient.

Scooters will eventually take off in certain parts of the U.S. They already are.

---

Its a big thing in France for middle class families to have 1 car and 1 bike/scooter/mopeds for transport

Wife takes the car and the kids in the morning....husband takes the bike/scooter/moped

Because of that huge cost of keeping two cars

Helps that the French often live close to work.

---

Even the small roads help keep scooters safe. On big roads it is too easy to pick up speed.

Map of countries where more people died (red) than were born in 2024 pic.twitter.com/V6nhRRHtT9

— Demographic Doomer (@DemoDoomer) April 20, 2025

BREAKING: The Trump Administration has been mulling ways to get more Americans married and having kids — including a $5,000 “baby bonus” for every new mom after delivery, per NYP.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) April 22, 2025

Redbrickbear said:

---

BREAKING: The Trump Administration has been mulling ways to get more Americans married and having kids — including a $5,000 “baby bonus” for every new mom after delivery, per NYP.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) April 22, 2025

---

Can I get retro pay on this?

Elon Musk is certainly doing more than his part to repopulate the earth. Even NBA players are saying, "Dayum!!!"

RFK JR: Our fertility is dropping dramatically. Teenagers in this country have the same testosterone levels as 68 year old men pic.twitter.com/U5xOUhpfSh

— Acyn (@Acyn) April 22, 2025

The Orban experiment looks like a failure. They answered the question of what happens if you subsidize births beyond what other countries have done. The answer is not much. https://t.co/24FjtVgy2V

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) April 26, 2025

Americans married by age 30. Where's the bottom?

1975:
- Women: 91.0%
- Men: 81.0%

1985:
- Women: 77.5%
- Men: 67.7%

1995:
- Women: 64.0%
- Men: 54.4%

2005:
- Women: 50.5%
- Men: 41.1%

2015:
- Women: 37.0%
- Men: 27.8%

2025:
- Women: 25.6%
- Men: 16.5%

— thad🥛☀️ (@turbothad) April 27, 2025

New monthly birth update. There isn't much else to say but there being a lot of red (even more than in 2024 at this point). Many countries will record the lowest TFR ever recorded this year (again). pic.twitter.com/jUBGn6PKWQ

— Birth Gauge (@BirthGauge) May 2, 2025

An extraordinarily detailed map of global fertility in 2024 created by @ZebelysL.

This is without a doubt the central problem of our age. Given that the dark red areas encompass most of the economically leading parts in the world, it is a wonder how little attention is paid. https://t.co/qhdvh7qJWI pic.twitter.com/JfJ4S54oxm

— More Births (@MoreBirths) June 18, 2025

Without modern technology, we could only have a meager 6 kids per woman.

Now with the help modern technology we have bumped that number to a whopping 1.2

— pls (@pls_dont_lie) May 5, 2026

No matter what your theory about birth rate collapse is, there’s some data point that disproves it. Japan didn’t have the pill when fertility collapsed. There are highly patriarchal countries where fertility is collapsing. It’s collapsing in countries that are still poor. It’s… https://t.co/R849QBqUGd

— Hunter Ash (@ArtemisConsort) June 7, 2026