More Babies or Something

Quote of the Day

People who see the declining population as a good thing tend to ignore the difficulties it will create. Let’s begin with the fiscal havoc. The federal government continues to spend more than it taxes, causing its debt to spiral upward. A low birth rate means more retirees and fewer workers to support them — more people entitled to Social Security and Medicare, but fewer taxpayers — worsening the debt. Even if we were to rein in the debt, a shrinking, aging population means more non-working people wanting to buy things with their savings, but fewer people to produce them, causing rampant inflation. As Stanford economist Charles Jones puts it, declining population has profound implications: “Rather than continued exponential growth, living standards stagnate.”

Robert Whaples
June 18, 2023
We Need More Babies

There are solutions other than more babies.

Robotics and AI will increase productivity. Anti-aging therapies will reduce the number of retirees and increase the number of projected workers.

But just because there are multiple potential solutions doesn’t mean the realization of any of the solutions will be successful.

Prepare appropriately.


6 thoughts on “More Babies or Something

  1. Or as the government solution/lie that’s playing out as we speak. Replacement. Although no one has ever seemed to pencil the math on that costing more than it can ever produce. Were stuck with it.
    And I could never understand the need of aborting 60 million of your own babies. Just to import them from the thurd world.
    But once again, were stuck with it.
    Of all the things that could be done. Why is it always the dumbest crap-ideas that get funding?
    I mean damn, it’s almost like satan is running the place or something.

  2. Unless the retirement laws and regs and ages are changed to reflect increased lifespans caused by “anti-aging” drugs/treatments, those drugs/treatments will only make the problem worse.

    Immigration as a solution is literally population-replacement, and considering 95%+ of the immigrants will not be culturally compatible with anything like a heritage-American flavor “conservative” it’s political suicide for the political right to allow it. Just as a Native American how unrestricted immigration of good family people works out.

    Increasing automation will hit the low-skill jobs hardest, and actually make the employment problem worse. Arguably, automation has led to falling wages at the low end of the scale the most, and has contributed to birthrates falling below replacement because they cannot afford the kids.

    If anything, we need to severely restrict automation and immigration to boost employment, and incentivize smart, decent people to get married and have 2-3 kids, while disincentivizing the stupid and criminal and unmarried from having them.

  3. (Of course, since TPTB are implementing Cloward-Piven deliberately, those things we call “bugs” they call features, and they don’t want to “fix” them)

  4. I’m afraid the death stroke for the United States actually fell during Lyndon Johnson’s administration. That’s when immigration laws were changed to favor unassimilatable third world people instead of the Western European people who founded the nation. It’s not the race of those admitted. It’s the culture. And all the baggage that comes with it. Add in the “great society” changes to the welfare system. Uncle Sam redistributing tax payer dollars from the productive to the non productive and you have a paradigm shift in what the US was. It just took a couple generations for the chickens to come home to roost. Nixon severing us from the last vestiges of an asset based currency was the icing on the cake. Smith said there’s a lot of ruin in a country. I think we’re just about there

  5. Anytime you create a system that subsidizes a portion of the population at the expense of another portion of the population you are creating a future headache.
    The Social Security System is a Ponzi scheme. Always has been. And ALL such schemes eventually collapse. It’s not an if…it’s a when. Anyone under the age of about 60 now should be planning on having little if any income in retirement from the scheme. What cannot continue won’t.

Comments are closed.