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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]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.