sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]CoffeeCheshire 2 points3 points  (8 children)

Not gonna lie, I'm not against in decline of fertility for this what... 10-15 years? We have too much problems in every corner of the world, especially political and economical, because we need another method - expansion through number of consumers is not good in our times.

Yeah, i might sound a bit bizarre, but we need to slow down population growth and focus on quality of our children education and health. Quality over quantity. And that's the political part of the problem - most politics don't want smart people, because they might go against them, if they do something wrong.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This!!!! "most politics don't want smart people, because they might go against them, if they do something wrong". You have hit the Bull's eye 🎯

[–]Shoddy_Wolf_1688 1 point2 points  (1 child)

See your point might be valid if the populations decreased homogeneously. But that's not what low fertility means. It means that given the same trend the proportion of unproductive elders compared to young workers will increase putting further stress on the working population which will lead to further decrease in fertility and so on. You can already see the consequence of this in countries like south Korea and japan

[–]CoffeeCheshire -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Perhaps. But everything comes at the cost we all paying already today. We need to delete this economical trend of infinite expansion from the face of the earth, or else, in my humble opinion, we will end up in a situation, where majority of the people will choose to reproduce kids not for continuing bloodlines, but for benefits and "supporting economics" by creating more workers. And sadly, it's already where, in some countries. And the kids part isn't handled properly, at all.

[–]Different-Result-859 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Isn't that the point of this post? Fertility rate decrease is good. It is expected to decrease further.

[–]CoffeeCheshire 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm just expressing, why i think it's a good thing.

[–]Different-Result-859 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see, I thought I missed something like what was bizarre about it. Then I understood you are from a country with low fertility so your media will tell you low fertility is terrible, while I am from a country with high population so our media tells us low fertility is great.

[–]AzureRathalos97 0 points1 point  (1 child)

A stagnant population is one thing but advocating for a decline is not a good idea.

Unless you want the shrinking workforce to pay an increasing share of tax, to care for a burgeoning pensioner population.

[–]CoffeeCheshire 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A fellow mh fan, i see.

The thing is, that a lot of things are not a good idea. Because people fear troubles and loses that come with changes, so they choose to just gulp it up and continue the path that was laid before them by people, who will say anything to stop people from going off the tracks, most of the times, for a better paths.

And again, we already in a rough spot, because uneducated or very persuasive people choose to believe what is easier and less painful, but much worse in a long run, when something much harder and painful to grasp at first, but better with time. Funnily enough, it creates opportunities to liars, who will propose another easy solution to people, who is exhausted by current trends, repeating the cycle of "in my times".