45
Nordic parents have it great—but birth rates are still falling (www.newsweek.com)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Paywall? https://archive.is/QzfXM

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is not a “crisis.”

The only major challenge we face with falling birth rates is figuring out how we care for the elderly. Ok, that’s something we need to figure out and get right.

However, otherwise, falling birth rates is a good thing.

We simply don’t need 8 billion+ people on planet Earth. It’s too many.

I’d rather future generations maintain a smaller population, and enjoy a better quality of life overall. They’d have more space, more clean air and clean water, bigger national parks, fewer crowded spaces, less congestion and traffic, more trees, fish, birds, and critters, and bigger plots of land with more distance between neighbors.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

I'd say yes and no. The strain on the planet would lessen for sure. But then we have the dependency ratio, meaning the amount of people in work related to those out of work, like children, the elderly, disabled etc.

This are getting worse in every European country. More babies won't fix it, at least not in the short term but it'll lessen the impact in about 20 years.

To fix the dependency ratio you either drasticly reduce the welfare state, increase the retirement age, raise taxes, or accept a lot of immigrants. Any of those options appealing to the general public you think?

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

You do need to care for the elderly, but you also need to care for young people. Schools, kindergartens, universities and so forth cost a lot as well. As long as the life expectancy and fertility rate are stable, the population ends up with a stable dependency ratio. A below replacement fertility rate, just means that the population ends up shrinking.

As for funding the welfare state, the problem is GDP per capita. As long as that is stable in real terms, the problem becomes distributing the wealth. There are actually some good things in terms of GDP per capita with a shrinking population. Namely we still inherit the assets from previous generations. We can choose to the best housing, factories, infrastructure and so forth. Not only that, but we still have innovation, so a lot of our economies are still growing.

For Germany for example current UN predictions are at 30% of the population being retired starting around 2035 and until pretty much the end of the century. Currently it is 23%, so the impact is happening today. That is about what Japan has right now.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Or increase taxes on the rich's assets (including houses) to fund the silver sunami (i.e. the large amount of boomers retiring all at once) and therefore encourage more of the value generated to go to the worker's wages. Then you don't have to worry as much about the welfare state because income tax revenues increase, the worker's private pensions also increase, more economic activity happens because more people have money in their pockets, and the economy grows.

Either that or work more people to death to keep expanding the current wealth inequality and hope the population keeps getting distracted with culture wars and fascism.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Either that or work more people to death to keep expanding the current wealth inequality and hope the population keeps getting distracted with culture wars and fascism.

As we in Germany say: "Some of these answers would unsettle the population."

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Well beyond taking care of the elderly, we need still need young healthy people to do the manual physical labor. Like crawling around in attics, laying asphalt, working in hot sun, etc.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

How did humans ever survive before there were 8 billion people? Oh how?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

by using a lot less technologically advanced stuff that needed fewer people to sustain.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Declining birth rates != a complete cessation of births. There will still be young people. Just fewer of them. They will get paid more for doing young people things.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Sure, but with fewer people overall, there will be fewer houses, attics, and roads being built in the first place.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Philosophically I agree, but Kurzgesagt did a video on how population collapse would probably be a terrible experience to live through. The book Sapiens makes a good point that we likely lived better and more fulfilling lives before agriculture but it's a cultural/survival trap we couldn't escape.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I guess. But I think we can do a soft and gentle landing (settling on 2-4 billion, eventually, once everyone sustainably maintains 1.5 kids per family on average) rather than a hard and abrupt collapse. I don’t think we’re stuck between all or nothing here.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Fully agreed. And to add on top of that, the world cannot take adequate care of all the children in it right now, and there are voices shouting we need more?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Right!!!

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

Found Thanos' alternate account! /jk

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

They admit psychological well-being is an issue, in addition to cultural and financial issues, then only suggest mild cultural adjustment and less screentime? I agree screentime reduction can adjust psychological well-being, but until we fix global, systemic issues that cause distraction and dissociation seeking, it's bailing water with a sieve. And that's means we all have to get and stay vocal and action oriented in forcing politicians to address those needs adequately.

[-] [email protected] -5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Finding a girlfriend seems as easy as winning in lottery where you have to first win a lottery to even get a ticket.

I wonder why birthrates are falling.

this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
45 points (97.9% liked)

Europe

6200 readers
614 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in [email protected]. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @[email protected]

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]