• jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    The world needs more babies.

    Does it?

    Or do we just need to embrace migrants?

    “A reduction in the share of workers can lead to labor shortages, which may raise the bargaining power of employees and lift wages — all of which is ultimately inflationary,” Simona Paravani-Mellinghoff, managing director at BlackRock, wrote in an analysis last year.

    “Have babies,” said the billionaire, “or else who am I going to exploit in the future?”

  • Feliskatos 🐱@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    There are more people in the world than ever before and we have folks writing news stories telling us there’s a crisis building and that we need to have more kids?

    They’re farming us like ranch animals.

    • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 days ago

      I think our planet would be described as a free-range human labour farm, to anyone who was able to view it independently. Well, lots of it not so free-range. Its why they’re coming for reproductive freedom. They’re doing for the same reason a beef farmer wouldn’t give their cows reproductive freedom.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      Look at long term trends, population is already dropping in East Asia and Europe

      Sure, there might be more people in Nigeria, but they are not paying into your retirement

        • iopq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Obviously, but how do you fix it without getting more workers? No scheme would work without people doing work.

            • iopq@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Where are you going to get new doctors if everyone in your society is 70 years old

              Nurses are now optional? EMTs? Firefighters? Military personnel? Police?

              • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                I’m talking about necessary for the species to carry on existing. And yes I grew up in a place with no police, no military, no EMTs, no firefighters. We had a nurse though. If someone did something that would normally involve the police, it was settled by the parties involved. (If you got drunk and drove through someone’s fence, they’d show you up at your house with a roll of barbed wire and some fence posts and you’d have to fix it. Possibly also round up any escaped sheep)

                • iopq@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Enjoy being conquered by another country if you don’t have a military. Sure, the species will survive, but you may not

  • MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Half my life was spent fearing the result of limitless population growth and contemplating the inevitability of war and famine to shock population levels back down to sustainable levels. They warned us about this starting at least as far back as the sixties.

    I see organic population collapse as a categorically good thing.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Long-term, possibly. But if the collapse happens too quickly it may cause a lot of issues. A slow steady decline would be best but may be difficult to achieve.

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s why I tell hard-right folks that childless homosexuality is the cornerstone of God’s plan to save humanity

  • buzz86us@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 days ago

    It is a basic math problem… they keep raising housing prices ain’t nobody going to have kids when 1500 in rent is due monthly

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      You run out of other people’s money. You can squeeze labor to starvation working in a salt mine. However, if most all people lose all their money, capitalism is done, and currently runaway capitalism is doing everything it can to increase that disparity.

      • gerbler@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        This person was referencing the obtuse and infuriatingly repeated quote from Margaret Thatcher (rot in piss) “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money”.

        I don’t think I need to point out exactly why this quote is stupid.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 days ago

    There’s no economic reason the nominal GDP of any country or the world in general has to continuously increase. The important metric is per capita production. As long as people get continuously more productive through innovation, standards of living will continue to increase.

    At the national level, vying for long term economic power in the world, a higher and younger population is going to be a huge advantage very soon and countries should be trying to get as many immigrants in their borders as they can. But instead they are…going a different direction.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    7 days ago

    HEY WORLD LEADERS: make the world a less shitty place, so I don’t feel guilty about bringing a child into it, and I’ll rawdog more often. Do we have a deal?

  • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    Turns out that whole idea of women being the primary bearers of hundred of years of exploited reproductive labor might have had some weight to it, huh.

    All that labor being redirected into “L’economie” means that, at base, you’ll have less children.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        6 days ago

        Women have been responsible for most of the domestic labor throughout history. Over the last 100 years or so, economies have changed so that women were first able to work outside of the home, then expected to work outside the home, and now need to work outside of the home. (E.g., a single-income household can’t pay the minimum bills in most places in the US.)

        But doing labor outside the home means that labor can’t be done inside the home, because time is a finite resource; if you’re working 40 hours a week (plus commuting time), that’s 40 hours you don’t have for raising a family. That makes raising a family significantly more difficult.

        The solution is to change the structure of the economy so that it’s entirely reasonably possible to raise a family on a single income without living in grinding poverty.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 days ago

            Well first, they claim ownership over all women, then rent them out to men.

            I want to say that’s just cynical sarcasm, but I’m not certain.

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 days ago

            Well, TBF it’s hard to maximize profit when you’re head is in a basket in front of the guillotine, sooooooooo I guess they need to figure shit out before then?

            • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 days ago

              Billionaires are like an appendix. They don’t really do anything but as long as everything works normally no-one cares, but right now they’re causing a lot of pain and have to be removed. Society will function as normal just like your gut post appendectomy.

  • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 days ago

    Does anybody think about the fact that every year on average 9-10 million people die every year from starvation and malnutrition related deaths. The vast majority of these numbers are children under 5 years old. The 9-10 million number was pre-covid. There was an uptick due to the supply chain issues. I think I read an article saying the number for 2021 was around 14 million. Again, mostly children.

    It’s mostly kids in 3rd world Africa, middle east, India, etc.

    We over here need to have more kids though. Because profits.

    Idk I just think all this is dumb. Fuck capitalism and the system we have. It’s all fucked.

      • pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Except the population (at least in my country) is quickly growing anyway because so many refugees come. And there will be far more if climate change continues at this speed.

        Edit: this comment isn’t directed against immigration (judging by the downvotes you probably interpreted it that way), I’m just stating the way it is rn

        • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          3 people in a 737 don’t make 100people non matter what side they seat at or how many times they change seats…but if they seat at the right place near an emergency exit with no seatbelt on, they could make it 2 people or even 1 person in the plane!

  • Delta_V@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    In a world with too many humans already, can you imagine painting a drop in the birth rate as somehow a bad thing?

    lol

    • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      I don’t really care about its impact on the economy, but I do feel for those who are attempting to have a child to no avail. I can only imagine how soul crushing that process can be.

      • androogee (they/she)@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        “Fertility crisis” in the headline doesn’t refer to anyone’s inability to have children. It refers to the fertility rate, which is just statistics about how many kids are popping out.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        I don’t, those people are selfish. Creating an unwilling life destined to be yet another cog in the machine while the world burns just to satisfy one’s own animalistic desire to have some form of genetic spawn. I silently cheer every time “struggling” couples miscarry and are unwittingly forced to do the right thing and not have kids.

          • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            MFW my parents didn’t even attempt to invent a time machine to ask if it was cool to conceive me or not

        • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Those people do not share your perspective. I do view it as largely subconsciously selfish, but your take is fucked up.

          • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            My take is fucked up only because we continue to ascribe reproduction as some noble, precious thing; rather than a wildly irresponsible and selfish act.

            Imagine a couple is driving a truckload of garbage to dump in the ocean. They have no reason to do this except some primal instinct that tells them to, all so they can point at the pile of floating garbage afterwards and say “look, that is MY garbage”.

            Now imagine on the way to the ocean, the truck loses a tire and they crash off the road next to a garbage dump, and all the garbage in their truck goes flying over the fence and into the dump.

            Then these people want and expect sympathy from others because they lost their garbage. They were really looking forward to standing on the beach and watching their garbage float free into the ocean and cause more of a mess. Oh no, boo hoo, fate accidentally caused them to do the right thing.

        • Copernican@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Lol. There is nothing in existence which has a choice of its being thrown into existence. Is all existence immoral?

    • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      The problem is the average age increases, and you’ll have more of an elderly population, meaning barely any people actually working while a ton of people are on pensions

      • Frokke@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s why I’m living now, not waiting for retirement. I got a good 15 years left, maybe 20 if I push it. Then I’m tapping out. Not a fan of keeping on living just for the sake of breathing.