Is the drop in birthrate and relationships (in the west) actually a bad thing
An interesting post I saw and i interested to see if anyone agrees or partly agrees with this
'I have heard in the western world, a lot of countries are in stage 4 and some countries are in stage 5 like Japan which has a great economy. A lot of people attribute this to the lack of incentives to getting in a relationship, I have heard in the UK, there are now new rules where the state has to much involvement in relationship with some easily exploited laws, can anyone in the UK confirm this to me.
Back to the point, is it really a bad thing, considering the lack of resources and the difficult and near impossible way to fairly distribute these resources, is a drop in the planets population really that bad (based on low birth rate rather than high death rate). I Am aware of the disadvantages to this as the elderly dependent increases but considering the earth has not got many viable years left for good quality of life for humans, is it not better just have fun now and not introduce a new generation that will ultimately be f*cked.
If you look at western world where Most women can work full time, the rates of domestic abuse, the cost of bring up a child, other payments need on tampons birth Control, most European countries have free health care and abortion included under that and is true of some USA states etc. It makes you wander what legal incentive their is to get married or go into relationships and have children.
On the other side for most men, if you have heard of Dr Helen Smith and her research, it honestly makes me question why on earth they would get married, have children or go into a relationship outside of being blackmailed with the lack of DV shelters, bias family court and decent chance of you being imprisoned for a payment that quite frankly they might not be able to, is not being spend properly or may being going to someone abusive or is to high for something like a no fault divorce, Prenups are not as strong as you would think.
Don't get me wrong the celebration and cake is fantastic but all the legal parts and risks of it sound, quite terrible. I have heard of the high amount of children in the foster care system and the fact some people still don't want same sex adaption(say what you want about the disadvantages of having 2 parents of the same sex, until hetro couples adopt at a higher rate, it's better than nothing). I think to be Frank the government should give initiatives for people to become sterile, like what apparently Germany does where they give out cars and washing machines if a child is born with in a certain time period but in this case it would be for them choosing to not have kids as their would then be more money for current children and those in the fostercare system.
There would be more tax ready for police. Firefighter and medical services and there night be room to get things like birth control and tampons covered by tax heck maybe finical abortion if were are really going there especially if the child is not the son or daughter of the father. You can always freeze sperm, get IVF or adopt if you change your mind latter. I Am aware that this change is technically not helping evolution but lets face it, with how little time the earth has left with a high enough quality of life, I ask, is it worth it and considering evolution would have all men as vicious killers and resource gathers and all women as baby makers is it really bad for us to go against that considering most men don't kill and most women are not seen as baby makers.
Tldr-is the fall in birth rate and relationships actually bad considering all of the legal deterrents and should the government give bonuses for not having children as the earth does not have many viable years left?'
'I have heard in the western world, a lot of countries are in stage 4 and some countries are in stage 5 like Japan which has a great economy. A lot of people attribute this to the lack of incentives to getting in a relationship, I have heard in the UK, there are now new rules where the state has to much involvement in relationship with some easily exploited laws, can anyone in the UK confirm this to me.
Back to the point, is it really a bad thing, considering the lack of resources and the difficult and near impossible way to fairly distribute these resources, is a drop in the planets population really that bad (based on low birth rate rather than high death rate). I Am aware of the disadvantages to this as the elderly dependent increases but considering the earth has not got many viable years left for good quality of life for humans, is it not better just have fun now and not introduce a new generation that will ultimately be f*cked.
If you look at western world where Most women can work full time, the rates of domestic abuse, the cost of bring up a child, other payments need on tampons birth Control, most European countries have free health care and abortion included under that and is true of some USA states etc. It makes you wander what legal incentive their is to get married or go into relationships and have children.
On the other side for most men, if you have heard of Dr Helen Smith and her research, it honestly makes me question why on earth they would get married, have children or go into a relationship outside of being blackmailed with the lack of DV shelters, bias family court and decent chance of you being imprisoned for a payment that quite frankly they might not be able to, is not being spend properly or may being going to someone abusive or is to high for something like a no fault divorce, Prenups are not as strong as you would think.
Don't get me wrong the celebration and cake is fantastic but all the legal parts and risks of it sound, quite terrible. I have heard of the high amount of children in the foster care system and the fact some people still don't want same sex adaption(say what you want about the disadvantages of having 2 parents of the same sex, until hetro couples adopt at a higher rate, it's better than nothing). I think to be Frank the government should give initiatives for people to become sterile, like what apparently Germany does where they give out cars and washing machines if a child is born with in a certain time period but in this case it would be for them choosing to not have kids as their would then be more money for current children and those in the fostercare system.
There would be more tax ready for police. Firefighter and medical services and there night be room to get things like birth control and tampons covered by tax heck maybe finical abortion if were are really going there especially if the child is not the son or daughter of the father. You can always freeze sperm, get IVF or adopt if you change your mind latter. I Am aware that this change is technically not helping evolution but lets face it, with how little time the earth has left with a high enough quality of life, I ask, is it worth it and considering evolution would have all men as vicious killers and resource gathers and all women as baby makers is it really bad for us to go against that considering most men don't kill and most women are not seen as baby makers.
Tldr-is the fall in birth rate and relationships actually bad considering all of the legal deterrents and should the government give bonuses for not having children as the earth does not have many viable years left?'
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Lackluster5678
An interesting post I saw
I have heard in the western world, a lot of countries are in stage 4 and some countries are in stage 5 like Japan which has a great economy. A lot of people attribute this to the lack of incentives to getting in a relationship, I have heard in the UK, there are now new rules where the state has to much involvement in relationship with some easily abuseable laws, can anyone in the UK confirm this to me. Back to the point, is it really a bad thing, considering the lack of resources and the difficult and near impossible way to fairly distribute these resources, is a drop in the planets population really that bad (based on low birth rate rather than high death rate). I Am aware of the disadvatanges to this as the elderly dependent increases but considering the earth has not got many viable years left for good quality of life for humans, is it not better just have fun now and not introduce a new generation that will ultimately be f*cked. If you look at western world where Most women can work full time, the rates of domestic abuse, the cost of bring up a child, other payments need on tampons birth Control, most European countries have free health care and abortion included under that and is truebof some USA states etc. It makes you wander what legal incentive their is to get married or go into relationships and have children. On the other side for most men, if you have heard of Dr Helen Smith and her research, it honestly makes me question why on earth they would get married, have children or go into a relationship outside of being blackmailed with the lack of DV shelters, bias family court and decent chance of you being imprisoned for a payment that quite frankly they might not be able to, is not being spend properly or may being going to someone abusive or is to high for something like a no fault divorce, Prenups are not as strong as you would think. Don't get me wrong the celebration and cake is fantastic but all the legal parts and risks of it sound, quite terrible. I have heard of the high amount of children in the fostercare system and the fact some people still don't want same sex adaption(say what you want about the disadvantages of having 2 parents of the same sex, until hetro couples adopt at a higher rate, it's better than nothing). I think to be Frank the government should give initiatives for people to become sterile, like what apparently Germany does where they give out cars and washing machines if a child is born with in a certain time period but in this case it would be for them chosing to not have kids as their would then be more money for current children and those in the fostercare system. There would be more tax ready for police. Firefighter and medical services and there night be room to get things like birth control and tampons covered by tax heck maybe finical abortion if were are really going there especially if the child is not the son or daughter of the father. You can always freeze sperm, get IVF or adopt if you change your mind latter. I Am aware that this change is technically not helping evolution butets face it, with how little time the earth has left with a high enough quality of life, I ask, is it worth it and considering evolution would have all men as vicious killers and resource gathers and all women as baby makers is it really bad for us to go agaisnt that considering most men don't kill and most women are not seen as baby makers. Tldr-is the fall in birth rate and relationships acutally bad considering all of the legal deterrents and should the government give bonuses for not having children as the earth does not have many viable years left?
I have heard in the western world, a lot of countries are in stage 4 and some countries are in stage 5 like Japan which has a great economy. A lot of people attribute this to the lack of incentives to getting in a relationship, I have heard in the UK, there are now new rules where the state has to much involvement in relationship with some easily abuseable laws, can anyone in the UK confirm this to me. Back to the point, is it really a bad thing, considering the lack of resources and the difficult and near impossible way to fairly distribute these resources, is a drop in the planets population really that bad (based on low birth rate rather than high death rate). I Am aware of the disadvatanges to this as the elderly dependent increases but considering the earth has not got many viable years left for good quality of life for humans, is it not better just have fun now and not introduce a new generation that will ultimately be f*cked. If you look at western world where Most women can work full time, the rates of domestic abuse, the cost of bring up a child, other payments need on tampons birth Control, most European countries have free health care and abortion included under that and is truebof some USA states etc. It makes you wander what legal incentive their is to get married or go into relationships and have children. On the other side for most men, if you have heard of Dr Helen Smith and her research, it honestly makes me question why on earth they would get married, have children or go into a relationship outside of being blackmailed with the lack of DV shelters, bias family court and decent chance of you being imprisoned for a payment that quite frankly they might not be able to, is not being spend properly or may being going to someone abusive or is to high for something like a no fault divorce, Prenups are not as strong as you would think. Don't get me wrong the celebration and cake is fantastic but all the legal parts and risks of it sound, quite terrible. I have heard of the high amount of children in the fostercare system and the fact some people still don't want same sex adaption(say what you want about the disadvantages of having 2 parents of the same sex, until hetro couples adopt at a higher rate, it's better than nothing). I think to be Frank the government should give initiatives for people to become sterile, like what apparently Germany does where they give out cars and washing machines if a child is born with in a certain time period but in this case it would be for them chosing to not have kids as their would then be more money for current children and those in the fostercare system. There would be more tax ready for police. Firefighter and medical services and there night be room to get things like birth control and tampons covered by tax heck maybe finical abortion if were are really going there especially if the child is not the son or daughter of the father. You can always freeze sperm, get IVF or adopt if you change your mind latter. I Am aware that this change is technically not helping evolution butets face it, with how little time the earth has left with a high enough quality of life, I ask, is it worth it and considering evolution would have all men as vicious killers and resource gathers and all women as baby makers is it really bad for us to go agaisnt that considering most men don't kill and most women are not seen as baby makers. Tldr-is the fall in birth rate and relationships acutally bad considering all of the legal deterrents and should the government give bonuses for not having children as the earth does not have many viable years left?
If you really expect people to read this, then learn to use paragraphs.otherwise they just wont bother.
What is the fall in relationships?
Did you list the legal deterrents?
Original post by 999tigger
If you really expect people to read this, then learn to use paragraphs.otherwise they just wont bother.
What is the fall in relationships?
Did you list the legal deterrents?
What is the fall in relationships?
Did you list the legal deterrents?
It's not me who has written it, its a post i have copied and pasted, although i should of remember the quotation marks.
Original post by Lackluster5678
It's not me who has written it, its a post i have copied and pasted, although i should of remember the quotation marks.
Then insert your own paragraphs.
I've read the first 3 lines and its very rambling too.
I read the first sentence and then just scrolled past the rest. Please edit to include paragraphs.
I don't think a drop (or rise) in birth rates is necessarily a good thing or a bad thing.
As far as I'm concerned, "good" is simply when people who want children and are able to look after them properly are having them, and when people who don't want children or can't look after them properly are not having them. "Bad" is the reverse of this.
After that, it is up to society to determine a fair way to distribute work and resources given the population that exists.
As far as I'm concerned, "good" is simply when people who want children and are able to look after them properly are having them, and when people who don't want children or can't look after them properly are not having them. "Bad" is the reverse of this.
After that, it is up to society to determine a fair way to distribute work and resources given the population that exists.
Original post by tazarooni89
I don't think a drop (or rise) in birth rates is necessarily a good thing or a bad thing.
As far as I'm concerned, "good" is simply when people who want children and are able to look after them properly are having them, and when people who don't want children or can't look after them properly are not having them. "Bad" is the reverse of this.
After that, it is up to society to determine a fair way to distribute work and resources given the population that exists.
As far as I'm concerned, "good" is simply when people who want children and are able to look after them properly are having them, and when people who don't want children or can't look after them properly are not having them. "Bad" is the reverse of this.
After that, it is up to society to determine a fair way to distribute work and resources given the population that exists.
How would account for the fact that distributing them is almost never fair and almost impossible to do
A drop in birthrate would mean a great burden on younger generations to uphold a larger population of elderly, retired people. It is also bad for the economy.
Original post by Lackluster5678
How would account for the fact that distributing them is almost never fair and almost impossible to do
Then it should just be done as far as practically possible.
Original post by SpicyPotato373
A drop in birthrate would mean a great burden on younger generations to uphold a larger population of elderly, retired people. It is also bad for the economy
I think the net effect will not hurt the economy, with less children, there is more freedom on what people spend on and you have to remember the earth does not have thatany viable years left so the younger generation Is f*cked either way.
It is a disaster. Western civilization is on the brink of becoming irreversibly extinct.
https://youtu.be/6LA5xhXk_4U
https://youtu.be/6LA5xhXk_4U
(edited 5 years ago)
In terms of the natural environment, it's not bad it's happening in the West.
The problem, however, is that it happens only in the West.
The presumption that improvement of living standards will decrease birthrates is wrong on the basics, there are only few occasions when that happen, and the better living standards is neither a sufficient or a necessary factor.
(and the birthrates often also make such improvement more difficult if not impossible)
There are only two effective ways of dealing with overpopulation, and one is changing the culture both in terms of birth control technology, and their approach to birthrates, family, and role of children.
The other way is no longer, acceptable by standards of the modern Western civilization.
The problem, however, is that it happens only in the West.
The presumption that improvement of living standards will decrease birthrates is wrong on the basics, there are only few occasions when that happen, and the better living standards is neither a sufficient or a necessary factor.
(and the birthrates often also make such improvement more difficult if not impossible)
There are only two effective ways of dealing with overpopulation, and one is changing the culture both in terms of birth control technology, and their approach to birthrates, family, and role of children.
The other way is no longer, acceptable by standards of the modern Western civilization.
Definitely yes, a drop in birth rate will also lead to closing universities and schools and therefore more jobs will be lost.
Original post by Jordan Schmidt
Definitely yes, a drop in birth rate will also lead to closing universities and schools and therefore more jobs will be lost.
what are thoughts on the idea that by that time, the earth would be to ruined for it to matter?
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
