Governments becoming more and more desperate to get younger people to breed
Sorry socialists.
You let every other culture into our countries.
You CHEERED THEM ON and PREFERRED THEM TO OUR OWN
You pay parasites and punish producers
And good lord, don't even get me started about what your feminist division has done to men's desire to pro-create.
No, you created this problem and our future would be children will not be the solution to it. This is where the game ends and any (unfortunate enough children) born to socialist parents are the ones who are going to pay for your idiocy.
Enjoy the Decline.
9 comments:
This is pretty much feminists fault. I don't care how much propaganda the ivory tower shoves down my throat; they've ruined the nuclear family. Tough shit, economics always wins.
Is it solely economics?
Well there is also the fact that the modern woman - or maybe I should say the modern LIBERAL woman - doesn't grow up until she's 50 or 60.
They can't care or themselves, never mind a family with children. If I were a young man today I would get a vasectomy right off the bat - but even that is no protection from feral women looking for a meal ticket for themselves and their spawn in some cases.
As you have advised, Cap...the lads are staying frosty indeed. Can't say I blame 'em either.
It really shouldn't be an issue that the birthrate is declining, humanity like all species is reacting to it's circumstances; the cost of living has gone up, there is less slack in the economy to take advantage of, our life expectancy and quality of healthcare are higher than ever, people work for longer. if people were truly independent there would be no need for the birthrate to keep increasing, only those ably to afford it (i.e. people who are actually productive) should be breeding, but sadly the govt needs to keep fuelling their ponzi scheme and where they can't get the parasite class to spew out sprogs with the aid of benefits, they make up the numbers with immigration.
You pay parasites and punish producers
That sums it up right there. I have all of my assets off-shore where I can go and f**k pretty young things in my autumn years. Sure I'll be dead after pumping several kids into each, but so what? The government f**ked things up - till they reverse it, it'll stay f**ked up... Plain and simple... They can take care of my bastards. Hey, I'll burn anything that I have left before I die.
I think Amerika the blog summed it up here
http://www.amerika.org/politics/no-jobs/
Our modern societies have become sufficiently insufferable they want to commit suicide.
That said, each nation has a slightly different reason why birth rates are low and such solutions have to be tailored to each nations needs if such solutions can be had at all.
Japan for example has a brutal and ugly work environment, a lot of low income workers with no stable job and when they do work, no time to actually live. They do not have foreigners or much feminism though.
All of Europe has massive unemployment, underemployment and poor pay among the young (around 50% among peak reproductive age) combined with cultural Marxism and too many foreigners
The US and the Anglo-Sphere also has the same problems as Europe but in different measure.
Russia has a cored out economy but unlike any of the others is recovering a bit. Amusingly don't seem to have a cultural Marxism problem to the same degree as us.
However in no case will ham handed propaganda help. Its been tried in Singapore as well much like shown in Norway there and with no effect. Not even among people who can afford vacations or children.
You can with payouts and incentives sometimes get people to change when the babies are born but not how many
If someone tasked me to do fix it , I'd repatriate almost all foreigners and cut the work week to create jobs gut funding and where allowed punish all cultural Marxism and start with a pro-western civ, tradition propaganda campaign with some modernization
Understand though that if there isn't work, there still won't be children and such a campaign will take a lot of time to bear fruit , several decades.
However its speculation and not going to happen . Also my ideas wouldn't work in the East anyway.
Spot on Mon Capitan - I will be 60 years old in a few months. My mind is still reasonably sharp and I remember the pure freedom and opportunity I had growing up. Jobs were plentiful for anyone with drive and the government pretty much left you alone. Contrast that to the Socialist shithole we now live in. Every day I am glad there are no future slaves with MY dna.
Note to the rulers of the USSA: Slaves are not motivated you short sighted assholes!
Populations do indeed reflect the stresses of the environment. In the roaring 20's, birth rates escalated (kind of a WWI baby mini-boom). In the depression 30's, the birth rate bottomed out, in that our forebears had the wisdom to not make babies you can't feed (novel!).
This was before modern birth control per se, so one presumes they either didn't knock boots, or shot it in orifices that don't make babies.
Compare that with today's total disconnect between procreation and means to support the aforementioned offspring.
Child support? I am making support payments to millions of kids, apparently...
Putting it simply, in an embedded peasant economy, when the unit of production and consumption is the family household, it is sensible to have as large a family as possible, to work the land and to protect against risk in sickness and old age. To increase reproduction is to increase production. Yet as Jack Caldwell and others have shown, when the individual becomes integrated into the market, when wealth flows down the generations, when the cost of education and leaving for an independent economic existence on an open market occurs, children become a burden rather than an asset.23 In other words, capitalistic relations combined with individualism knocks away the basis of high fertility, and if this is combined with a political and legal security so that one does not have to protect oneself with a layer of cousin, the sensible strategy is to have a few children and to educate them well.
A low-pressure demography means that a society avoids the situation where extra resources are automatically absorbed by population expansion. As Malthus argued, the only force strong enough to stand against the biological desire to mate and have children, was the even stronger social desire to live comfortably and avoid poverty.
-- 'Invention of the Modern World, Alan Macfarlane
By capitalistic relations, Macfarlane means voluntary contractual, not group-affiliation, obligations.
In, I suppose a bit of irony, Socialism encourages capitalistic (individual) relations. It also, even more than Capitalism, separates the individual from the family/clan unit, thus reducing further children as an additional economic unit and increasing the children as burden on parental comfort and avoidance of poverty.
While many lament the demographic decline that comes with modernity, it is particularly visceral threat to the Welfare state. We live in a world at the end of a historical demographic anomaly. Namely, the 20th century was unique in the beating back of mortality controls (disease, infant mortality) causing an early 1900s population explosion until the fertility controls (late/non marriage, abortion, birth control) kicked in to lower the birth rate in modern societies. The Welfare state depending on ever growing population of young workers is in big trouble.
BTW, I suspect there is a Nobel prize out there for the first economist to figure out how the economy works with a aging and declining population, which appears to be the future.
That's not strictly true - the dependent classes - that we in the productive classes are forced to support through confiscatory taxes - they are still reproducing. They don't need to be concerned about the cost of raising spawn since others pay for them.
Post a Comment