Birth Rates Low In Industrialized Countries
May 25th, 2006 | by Paul Merda |Except the U.S., Industrialized countries birthrates are lower than the 2.1 births per woman replacement rate.
Birthrates: Germany, 1.4; Greece, 1.3; Italy, 1.3; Japan, 1.4; Spain, 1.3; and Russia, 1.3. The U.S. is close to 2.1 births per female, just enough to keep our population constant.
What does this mean? For starters, as these populations age there will be fewer people to pay for their care, fewer people to actually help care for them and general labor shortages all while tax bases decline. Even though out of all the countries listed the US provides the least in “birthing” incentives, we are on top. It appears that it is NOT Economics that keep people from having children, but “greater optimism, greater patriotism and stronger religious values.”
What’s scary to me about this is, the religious folks tend to be the ones that are making up for the “dearth in births” in the US. While these other countries might find economic hardship due to the low birthrates, we’ll find ourselves living in a near Theocracy if the major reproductive group is the Talibangelists. Too bad I’m fixed, or I would consider having more children just to offset the inevitable…
5 Responses to “Birth Rates Low In Industrialized Countries”
By steve on May 25, 2006 | Reply
Oh my God!!!
By liberal vet on May 25, 2006 | Reply
Time to spread the use of condoms and other safe BC methods to the third world. OOPS! I forgot the godbots object and want the uneducated to practice abstinence. What a friggin joke, our government is incompetant and godbots are thusfar having their way. LVB
By steve on May 25, 2006 | Reply
The only thing this post proves is:
Socialism is a failure.
By liberal vet on May 25, 2006 | Reply
Bull shit it proves republicans are short sighted and only interested in their own agenda. Why give a shit about starving children Mr repb? Why try and stop the spread of aids Mr. repub. Why because in general the right wingers are assholes. LV
By The Cranky Brit on May 25, 2006 | Reply
How does it prove socialism is a failure, steve? I can’t see it. Unless you’re saying that because the socialists figure they need to take care of their old people rather than leave them out on the ice, they’re screwed?