>if the birth rate continues to drop around the world at its current pace, economic growth and workers’ retirement prospects will go the way of those projections: adjusting every few years to a smaller, sadder, poorer future.
Nah. Robots. AI. Economic growth will do the opposite of that.
Why would a rational young person take the risk (of becoming a parent), when the system they face has been optimized to "crushing costs on me, most benefits to others"?
First, while we have eliminated the "family wage", which was what allowed American working class families to be supported on one income alone in the 1950s, and we have made things like the housing market cost prohibitive, and wrecked community life, we also have different priorities today. For example, among those who can afford an annual vacation to the Caribbean or a new car or whatever, many would not be willing to give that up if they had to in order to have another child. Keeping up with the Jones's is a thing, and we simply view children as burdensome sacrifices that deprive us of empty self-indulgence rather than great riches and an occasion to grow as a human being.
Second, the obsession with finances is unjustified. What's "enough" to have a child? And will you ever get there? You might hit infertility sooner and then it'll be too late. Having a child is an incredible motivator, because you have a firm and clear and worthy purpose. Your whole life is rearranged, and in a good way. You have descendants and in that sense, you are not alone or the end of the line. When children are a mere possibility, mere phantoms that you hope to afford one day, you won't have the same drive, and it becomes easy to get sidetracked or fall into resignation.
Aversion to risk taking is usually due to a cost benefit analysis. You don't take risks that you are unwilling to accept the consequences for. I call it the Chris Farley decision tree. Do I want to take the risk of ending up homeless in a van, down by the river. Except, good luck finding a van to live in now and it will probably be impounded.
I've noticed that stories about the birth-rate crisis - or about the affordable housing crisis, or similar "the old and the 1% impose ever-heavier burdens on the young and the 99%" trends - always assume that social stability is unbreakable.
Sadly, I suspect that comforting assumption will prove horribly wrong.
>if the birth rate continues to drop around the world at its current pace, economic growth and workers’ retirement prospects will go the way of those projections: adjusting every few years to a smaller, sadder, poorer future.
Nah. Robots. AI. Economic growth will do the opposite of that.
> Rich countries will all have become like Japan, stagnant and aging.
Stagnation comes from an aversion to risk-taking.
I do not know that it is foregone conclusion that slowing birthrates necessarily has to lead to risk aversion.
Why would a rational young person take the risk (of becoming a parent), when the system they face has been optimized to "crushing costs on me, most benefits to others"?
First, while we have eliminated the "family wage", which was what allowed American working class families to be supported on one income alone in the 1950s, and we have made things like the housing market cost prohibitive, and wrecked community life, we also have different priorities today. For example, among those who can afford an annual vacation to the Caribbean or a new car or whatever, many would not be willing to give that up if they had to in order to have another child. Keeping up with the Jones's is a thing, and we simply view children as burdensome sacrifices that deprive us of empty self-indulgence rather than great riches and an occasion to grow as a human being.
Second, the obsession with finances is unjustified. What's "enough" to have a child? And will you ever get there? You might hit infertility sooner and then it'll be too late. Having a child is an incredible motivator, because you have a firm and clear and worthy purpose. Your whole life is rearranged, and in a good way. You have descendants and in that sense, you are not alone or the end of the line. When children are a mere possibility, mere phantoms that you hope to afford one day, you won't have the same drive, and it becomes easy to get sidetracked or fall into resignation.
11 replies →
The risk I'm talking about is trying new things that move civilization forward. That is the risk-taking that prevents stagnation.
3 replies →
Aversion to risk taking is usually due to a cost benefit analysis. You don't take risks that you are unwilling to accept the consequences for. I call it the Chris Farley decision tree. Do I want to take the risk of ending up homeless in a van, down by the river. Except, good luck finding a van to live in now and it will probably be impounded.
I've noticed that stories about the birth-rate crisis - or about the affordable housing crisis, or similar "the old and the 1% impose ever-heavier burdens on the young and the 99%" trends - always assume that social stability is unbreakable.
Sadly, I suspect that comforting assumption will prove horribly wrong.
https://archive.ph/UY7Xj
Still, cotton underwear.