News > General News

Well known Intel organization predicts massive depopulation

<< < (2/2)

David in MN:
There is some research that there will be a depopulation coming. From a purely historical model we know that a shift from agrarian lifestyle to industrialization reduces the number of children. With China and India (the largest populations) going through this right now we should see a declining birth rate. Most modern first world economies in Western Europe and Asia already have negative population growth.

The mystery right now is the COVID impact. It horrifies me but I expect the number of children in Africa and Asia who starve to death as a result of "our" choices to number in the 10s of millions and the far out estimate is 100 million. That would be a significant global impact. Much less devastating but pointing in the same direction is the impact of people in first world countries simply not getting married and having kids. For people riding the fence on having kids some of the "safety" protocols in place are a big deterrent. That's on top of plenty of people in places like NYC or Japan where space is at a premium and they can be priced out of having children.

It's important to bear in mind that most of this shift is a really good thing. We should be delighted how many millions have escaped poverty globally and improved their station in life. The onerous laws and extra costs might be an issue we in the first world should lax on but if Americans are making conscious decisions about how many kids they can afford that's a pretty good problem to have. It's showing that our standard of living is leaping forward. That's not to say that we shouldn't be using that wealth to help our bretheren who go hungry. What's going on in Yemen and Malawi should make make Americans sick with how awful we are. But the real tagline here is generally better lives with less infant mortality and making the choice to have children one that requires more forethought.

Americans are already depopulating.  There aren't enough children born to replace the ones passing away (fertility rate of about 1.7).  Only immigration is keeping the number of people at current levels. We see this most in areas of US and territories with low immigration.  For example, look at the population crash of American Samoa.  There the birth rate has fallen by about half and the population is declining by a percent of two each year which is leading to huge problems coupled with their net emigration.

David in MN:
Oh I see it in my hometown. When I grew up I was next to a corn farm and it was a big deal when the city got its first stoplight. Fast forward from the 80s to the 2010s and the city, with its aging demographic passed all crazy manner of projects to upgrade and beautify the city. It underscores that they wanted a very cute main drag where the retirees could get a $20 martini. The farms all sold to be subdivisions, the gravel road I grew up on became well paved with British style signposts, and the costs were passed on to taxpayers. It resulted in closing one of the two middle schools.

You can have a hard scrabble gravel road with young families or you can have streets paved in gold where only the last generation with a pension can afford it. The fact that we're making the choice for the latter is telling.

I don't know what a child cost my great grandparents but I know my grandfather was born in a house in one of maybe 4 counties in Wisconsin. I am looking at a much higher cost to birth and raise a child. Raising a child is a prohibitive cost. But that just means we need to be smarter with our resources. I *might* prefer a world where family costs are minimized and we have more kids and easier community support but that's not the way the world (and I do mean globally) is going.

I should add there is one amazing fiscal event that we don't discuss because it's impolite. Eventually there will be no baby boomers. I feel the tail of that will have a very marked impact on the finance of our society. We don't yet know what (lack of) pension and retirement looks like for the heavily muted gen X. When gen Z sees what the future is like they may be encouraged to never have kids.

Sorry to be morose but this is economics. In all fairness I have a child and I wouldn't trade her for anything. At the end of the day any human who isn't a parent has missed a vital part of humanity.

Absolutely.  The greatest transfer of wealth in history is happening now. Baby boomers are passing away and their wealth is transferring to gen x.  Because gen x is much smaller than the baby boomers this is concentrating wealth in their hands.  This is what is driving the change in wealth distribution.  And this will lead to the big conflict in the future.  Since gen x has been excluded from the halls of power they have been abused.  But soon they will control the government, corporations, and the majority of wealth.

Natural decline in population is not a bad thing but the deagel site I believe predicts economic collapse followed by huge numbers of suicides. It feels like they just want the idea of large scale population reduction to be out there for some reason and they are trying to spin it anyway they can. It seems to be part of their psychology, them being some kind of elites

Maybe they think that by having it out there or will somehow help make it happen or they want to create fear or the expectation of such. If certain people in power have an expectation of population reduction or the attitude that masses of people are largely irrelevant then it will create the mindset they desire. Maybe they want to let you know that they are out there


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version