Why is it so hard to get the population in the developed world to grow naturally?
I dont think that has EVER been a problem in history before
Why is it so hard to get the population in the developed world to grow naturally? I dont think that has EVER been a problem in history before
It's too expensive especially since the government only helps non natives.
Stupid.
Because you don't need a lot if children in an age of low infant and maternal mortality and developed states have sufficient ways for elderly to not have to rely so much in children such as pensions, housing and retirement homes. Also harder fir parents to dedicate time to kids in a competitive workplace.
This, there's a reason the only people have multiple kids are the poor, the government subsidizes them (provided they aren't white).
>the government subsidizes them (provided they aren't white).
But they do anon.
Definitely not the case here in Germany, unless you call paying higher taxes to help opportunistic economic migrants who view your entire nation as a free meal. If I weren't planning to leave this hellhole I'd be upset that I will never own my house but the state is jumping over itself to give them out to every inbred middle eastern 'refugee', the overwhelming majority of which just happens to be a young man.
yeah, why dont they take in only women for some years? that would evennout a few problems
Are you moronic? You think the government doesn’t help poor white families? You have to be moronic.
Governments in Europe hate helping their own population, they always look for Gypsies, Turks and recently Ukrainians.
Racist morons don't believe that poor white people exist. They have bought into thwir own grifter bullshit entirely and now think that every White person is Elon Musk because Black folk live in the ghetto by comparison.
Just as anti-white as libshits who interestingly enough also believe that Whites can't be poor, because Black folk are already poor lmfao
You have a weird thing going on.
They look after their own quite well contrary to you dishonest narrative
You blame brown people for your problems and then step on poor whites. You are exactly the type of loser LB "Jumbo" Johnson was talking about.
I don't know about the west but in eastern europe being gypsy definitely helps a lot with government gibs. I imagine the west is like this, too, using vague enough language to keep these legal loopholes open to benefit brown people and have reasonable ground to deny the same support to natives.
>legal loopholes open to benefit brown people and have reasonable ground to deny the same support to natives.
Like what? I don't see those denials.
Have you read “Hinterlands”? It’s a book about the state of the rural US in the 2010s. In it the authors (who are leftists btw) go into detail about how the federal government helps natives, refugees, and other groups get aid and assistance while living the whites to rot. It was the book that convinced me that whites are indeed being screwed over by the government. Whether there is malice or just a lack of caring behind it doesn’t matter.
>Whether there is malice or just a lack of caring behind it doesn’t matter.
It's probably not a coincidence that rednecks and hillbillies are the only group remaining that you are allowed to dunk on - they are a prime target to vent frustrations on for brown people/jews, for rich people to express their natural disdain for poor proles, and for urbanites to shit on rural people.
They are practically made to get shat on by the leaders of the current zeitgeist.
When you blame all your problems on minorities while being too moronic to realize that it’s the same people you vote for yourself that have fricked you over and sent your jobs away, you’re gonna get shit on for being moronic.
When you keep voting in the see people that screwed you over, you’re gonna get shit in for being moronic. When you believe in fairy tales, want to codify your fairy tales into law and b***h about “persecution” when nobody wants that shit, you’re gonna be shit on for being moronic.
I'm not even from the US moron, but I guess at least you outed yourself as an anti-white drone, so good job.
I’m not talking about you you fricking idiot, I’m talking about the shitload of moronic conservatives that are the laughing stock of the rest of the world.
There is not a single electoral way out of the current situation in any country.
Agreed, but there’s a difference between voting for a less shit option because there are no good ones and adamantly supporting the shittier side and claiming that they’re actually good.
There is no greater or lesser good. If you wanted to go to the hospital and I told you I've got a guy who can break your arm or break your leg you wouldn't say "i'll go for the arm because then at least I can still walk to the hospital", neither of the options are even remotely good.
Short of a revolution there is not solution but to vote for the least openly anti-white side.
how is california?
>the same people you vote for yourself that have fricked you over and sent your jobs away
I wasn't aware that Democrat-ran areas had huge industrial/manufacturing sectors and were campaigning on protectionism.
>B-BUH MUH RED TRIBE BAD
Indeed. But at least they tell poor working-class Whites what they want to hear, even if they do end up conning them. Democrats boast about how they killed their industries and how privileged the poor White laborer is.
>muh brown people
The system incentivizes work over family in ever single aspect of life. Children are seen as a financial burden now that most adults can live comfortably without the worry that they will suffer in old age without grandchildren, as they now have money to throw at every problem.
This is something that has been noticed recently in developing countries all across the world where birthrates directly correlate to the average person's living conditions.
>spend money on child benefits, education, and support for your own people who want a decent wage
>import third worlders who work for less than the wypipo and shit out a dozen kids who also work for slave wages
the problem is capitalism, i'm not saying socialism functions any better, but at least people like ceausescu in romania at least tried to increase fertility rates, educate them, and benefit society
it didn't fricking work though and they overthrew and killed him lmao
wasnt he a pedo?
not that i know, are you thinking of beria?
Chairman Xi is going to figure out a cure to the post industrial birth rate problem.
There's got to be a way, it might take mass brainwashing but the CCP are going to figure out how to make the Chinese have sex.
He is going to import Africans en masse, much to the horror of Nazbols worldwide
Thing is even African birthrates are slowly declining.
Eventually the tap is going to run dry on births worldwide. Sooner or later someone's going to need to sit down and figure out the science of how to get industrial proles to reproduce.
Just kick women out of college. Keeps their body count low and their options limited. Also the israeliteniversity basically acts as a negative dowry, saddling a woman with half a house worth of debt when she needs a house to start her own family. israeliteniversity is basically designed to crater birth rates.
It's not even the debt, but the sense of entitlement it engenders in women. Women with bullshit degrees will never settle for a man that has anything less than some other university degree, even if he makes a lot of money.
None of his solutions are working.
The CCP only started focusing on birth rates in the past couple of years, it's far too early to tell.
>import third worlders who work for less than the wypipo
They work for the same wages anon. You think a heart doctor is gonna get paid 50k in the UK because he cane from Brazil or Africa?
Unironically not far off because he's going to be working for the NHS.
>skilled workers
Not what I'm talking about, I'm talking fruit-pickers, sanitary workers, restaurant staff.
Hell, do you know how much your average janitor makes? You could quadruple their salary and it would still be nothing.
>I'm talking fruit-pickers, sanitary workers, restaurant staff
And those jobs historically pay like ass, are seasonal, treat workers like shit or prone to job cuts due to low business.
Capitalism eventually causes prices for essentials such as housing to reflect demand of dual-income. People get priced out and feel having too many children is too expensive. So they settle for 1 (maybe 2) and they go all out raising that one particular kid since there's less chance that kid will die of something stupid like diarrhea. Hence tutors, violin/piano lessons, tiger moms, etc...
>I dont think that has EVER been a problem in history before
Yeah, no shit but it's been a longstanding issue since the 70s when people started noticing Japan's population smoothing. Japan is the most famous, but Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea are experiencing the same shit just a decade or two behind Japan which industrialized the fastest. Western European and the US solved this issue via immigration, but if your population is unwilling to do that you'll have to seek alternatives.
For Japan, the problem is unironically boomers. They have the largest voting block (cause, hurr hurr, less young people) and thus continually put themselves first in social welfare benefits. Most of these East Asian democratic republics are trying to solve the population issue for literally decades, but there's not much political will to spend money on the issue (children don't vote, long-term effects aren't appreciated by the public, boomers). Doesn't stop the parties from using it for fear mongering though.
China is gonna get slapped with the same demographic issues except when it took Japan half a century to hit, for China it's going to smash in within 10 years due to the 1-child policy.
Japan actually has huge incentives for children, the problem is the destruction of the idea of women as homemakers, the venn diagram of "countries with female workforce participation" and "countries with low birth rates" isn't just nearly a circle, it is a circle.
It's a very basic equation but some how the majority seem to struggle with it. If you have two people working then who the frick looks after baby? You either put him in nursery all day or simply don't have kids and replace that aspect of your life with consumerism.
There's a lot of vilification of house parents, men obviously but even women, in the modern West it's assumed everyone must have a job, a career, this is your life and identity, to be a housewife is to be a parasite.
I don't think Japan could counter this because the West would lose its shit and scream misogyny, but I could unironically see China holding some sort of "强妇回厨" propaganda movement.
>the destruction of the idea of women as homemakers
Because having your career due when you get married or have kids sucks ass. Also their work environment is toxic as frick to women and men who don't want to fellate work. No amount of incentives will work when the act if having kids kills your career progression
Lol what? That’s not a result of some muh feminism shit, it’s the result of changing economics. Many cities agave fricking absurd housing and rent prices and you need a dual income to support a household. It has nothing to do with vilification of motherhood or the family or whatever other conservative conspiratorial moronation.
Women in the workforce causes that.
>available labor pool doubles
>wages half
>corporations push "empowerment" shit to get a larger labor pool so they can drive wages even lower
>corporations keep minimum wage down
>corporations promote immigration
To understand post WW2 domestic economics you have to understand that it's simply corporations trying to get more money, power, and influence. They have no morals, no spiritual reason for doing this, it's like asking why hornets sting you, it's just what they are and what they do. The larger the labor pool, the lower the wages, the richer the companies. Every force or change in the West today comes from this.
Women did not enter the workforce because housing became expensive. Housing prices rose drastically long after women were in the workforce. Hell my grandparents bought a house for around $100,000 that has since quadrupled in value.
Shit's fricked brehs
>violin/piano lessons
Anon, I…
Too expensive, no need for a ton of kids like in the past, more and more education is needed to make a halfway decent living so people are settling down and getting married later and later
Because those with power are doing everything possible to manipulate it
In the case of modern Western nations, the obvious elephant in the room is radical feminism.
The leftypol memes about late-stage capitalism and polpol memes about immigrant darkies fail to account for how so many people were in the past perfectly willing to breed in much harsher AND much more uncertain conditions.
Because (1) there wasn't much to do for fun except literal have sex and (2) when most of your population is peasant agriculture, having an extra child is an extra pair of hands to do crafts, till fields, and do chores and thus having more children is economic free labor. Plus you really only raised the first few children, who then proceeds to raise the younger children with the mother as support. You can then marry off your kids (3) to other families to cement local alliances and ingrain yourself with the community.
People had more kids in harsher conditions because they had to lol. A lot of their kids would die in infancy and they’d need support in their old age. Now people have more money and somewhat of a safety net (even if it’s constantly eroded by conservative morons) and kids are expensive so they have less. It’s not muh feminism lmao.
Basically the solution is to get rid of the safety net. Force people to have kids to look after them. In this way we will all be saved from extinction, which for most of the world is becoming the inevitable reality.
Not when the same morons who want to cut the social safety net don’t support measures to curb the greed of c**t corporations and drive wages up
Meh, I don’t think it’s needed. Look at Niger, which I consider to be the most healthy country on earth, due to its fertility rate of 6.8. If we can drag the standard of living of places like Sweden and Norway to that of Niger, we will be able to force the people to recreate. Once a huge population boom occurs, we can slowly raise living standards again, lowering them if needed to boost the population.
>Treats humans like sliders in a game of SimCity
When the alternative is extinction, what can be done? I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone outside of Africa eventually voluntarily adopts this pattern.
I think you're conflating gradual population decline with hyperbolics. You're falling into a slippery slope fallacy that the endgame where people will absolutely refuse to procreate to the point of annihilation.
Your solution reeks of Thanos levels of self-grandeur and delusion.
> You're falling into a slippery slope fallacy that the endgame where people will absolutely refuse to procreate to the point of annihilation
Look at
>South Korea
>Japan
>American whites
>Europeans
>Israeli non-Orthodox israelites
There are many groups who refuse to reproduce even though it means their annihilation. Where is the fallacy?
>Japan
>Population goes from 127 million to 125 million over the course of 15 years.
>annihilation
Slow your horses buddy.
And let another generation pass. And another. None of the groups I listed will exist in 2200. Does that not seem alarming? That our societies are driving us to extinction? Can you honestly say that you think East Asians or Whites or Latinos will exist in the future, if current trends continue? You call me delusional for wanting to turn the world into Africa, but Africa is the only part of the world not dying out! To me my position is the only sane one.
You can be poor as shit and still have a collapsing population. Look at Eastern Europe. It’s not wealth, it’s women in the israeliteniversity system.
South Koreans are pretty poor too, actually.
A drop in living standard means a drop in education as well. This too is necessary to raise birth rates.
My solution has an end date: once the population pyramid looks like Niger’s, we can raise living standards again. It is temporary pain for long term gain.
>My solution has an end date: once the population pyramid looks like Niger’s, we can raise living standards again. It is temporary pain for long term gain.
Literally Thanos' plan.
>Short-term kill half a planet's population
>Long-term we bring propserity!
>Rinse and repeat as needed
> My solution
Ukraine has a per capita gdp of 3.7k and a TFR of 1.23. When is your “poverty increases birth rate” theory going to start kicking in?
Niger’s per capita GDP is $560. When Ukraine’s is similar, and if then the birth rate does not rise, I will admit something more will be needed.
Is this No True Scotsman (but weeeelll it's not reeaaaallyyyy my plan 1:1!) like 'communism has never been tried' or is it moving the goal post?
What? I have you a condition. If Ukraine’s GDP per capita falls to $500, the country will be saved as the population booms. People will have many kids out of economic necessity. This is good and needed to avoid extinction, which everyone from China to Europe to parts of India are headed towards.
>None of the groups I listed will exist in 2200.
My dude, 170 years is a LONG fricking time for shit to happen, historically speaking. The Communist Manifesto by Marx went from the 1840s to taking over Russia by 1920s and establishing a world nuclear superpower by the 1950s.
A lot can happen in 170 fricking years. Slow your horses.
>You call me delusional for wanting to turn the world into Africa, but Africa is the only part of the world not dying out! To me my position is the only sane one.
Protagonist-centric morality
And yet nothing, absolutely nothing will save birthrates. Look at France, which passed its demographic event horizon in the 1800s. It has relied on immigration ever since, and now is risking it all to survive just a generation more. Eventually internal stabilization of the population will have to happen.
that is still like 2 million old people who dont have at least one person to pay taxes for their survival
>annihilation
Is not as common as you think. Often what simply happens is that one fading group is more-or-less peacefully absorbed into another outright.
And in that society, culture people are replaced. It was a failure of a society which drove its people to extinction and now parasitically feeds on another group. How can that be worth striving towards?
>Your solution reeks of Thanos levels of self-grandeur and delusion.
I'm not the guy you're arguing with, just asking a question, do you think making analogies to marvel characters makes your argument seem more or less rational?
You look as goofy as the Mandalorian when he blasted his wookie.
>Meh, I don’t think it’s needed. Look at Niger, which I consider to be the most healthy country on earth, due to its fertility rate of 6.8. If we can drag the standard of living of places like Sweden and Norway to that of Niger, we will be able to force the people to recreate. Once a huge population boom occurs, we can slowly raise living standards again, lowering them if needed to boost the population.
>Thanos-Anon suggests we lower standards of living to literal African-tier to force people to have kids and procreate
>Actual Thanos suggests killing half of the population of a planet for prosperity
Both Thanos-Anon and actual Thanos suggested radical solutions that basically said "we're going to make a lot of people suffer a fricking lot" for a solution that may or may not work.
If you don't see the resemblence between Thanos-Anon's and Thanos' plan, then oh well. Whatever, get over it.
I don't know what Thanos is, I assume from the youtube thumbnails I've ignored he's some evil purple guy, my point is I don't see how you think references to pop culture fictional characters for children helps you, very few people will have a deep understanding of what you're alluding to, and even those that do will think less of you for it. Your brain is as underdeveloped as baby shark's.
>I don't know what Thanos is
You're salty because you didn't get a reference?
I got it, I just thought it was childish and weakened your argument. You could have come up with something rivaling Plato and had you ended it with "just like when spongebob increased the price of the krabby patty" I would have similarly thought you were moronic.
>I got it
>I don't know what Thanos is, I assume from the youtube thumbnails I've ignored he's some evil purple guy
Sure buddy... I totally know that rock band everyone is talking about that I knew before they were cool and popular.
You have to be 18 to post here, spiderman.
Children are more expensive today than in the past, though. You can't just toss them some food in the corner, you have to get them nice clothes, buy them schoolbooks, save money for a college fund and all that bullshit.
If you got rid of the state pension, you might actually lower the fertility rate, since people will feel pressure to divert cash they might otherwise have spent on little burdens of joy to private pensions or personal savings accounts.
Shortage of marriageable women. How are you supposed to be tender with a woman who has fricked 5 dudes? This is special? Give me a break. That is as ridiculous as falling in love with a prostitute.
Lol nobody cares about your puritanical religious bullshit
>t. guy who donates to pornstars
just kick women out of college. He’ll that’s why gates push “female education “ in the third world so hard. Women compete with one another on their bullshit jobs. If they couldn’t get excel jockeys, they’d compete with one another based on how handsome their Christmas photos are.
>women in the workplace
>destruction of the extended family/ community
don't get me wrong, those two have done extreme harm to the birth rate, but what really killed it was industrialization and the shift away from farm work where anyone can pitch in and take care of you when you're old to an post child labor environment where your kid isn't paying for it self til 20, and even then it not quite like they paying you but the government who pays all retirees, even the freeloaders who didn't have kids. I just doesn't make sense to pop them out if you are still getting the same treatment in the end(getting dumped into some home).
The future is brown and black. Deal with it, chuds.
I was thinking about this recently while not wanting to cook while living alone. To be a complete modern person you should learn to cook and prepare 3 meals a day, go to gym, cultivate hobbies, keep house clean and ideally repair/maintain as much as possible, socialize with friends, work a full ambitious job with upward mobility yet creeping overtime, allot some hours to personal vice a la games/TV/Internet/drugs, maybe some time to personal spirituality or growth a la meditation and books. Then if you get married you work in raising kids too. Is it even actually possible to do all that in a day or does everyone just fail the ideal somewhere and feel secretly inadequate? I don't know.
Anyway it seems having a dedicated division of labor for cooking and house chores in ye old days is just very efficient. There is this article of faith that the great change of making women soft men has no significant consequences to time management and therefore quality of life, but is it really true? We can just take over the role of the housewife for ourselves plus work normal jobs so easily. It wasn't a real job that needed dedication and systematic social roles.
What's more the economic model of the average pre-industrial farmer just seems to make more sense for natural living. When the housewife isn't or can't help at the local workplace (farm) the kids are raised as essential free indentured servants to assist the local boss (patriarch). The unit produces for itself plus a surplus that can then be exchanged, ideally, for further use of outside specialized labor. The economic model of the average man today doesn't much account for a family since that's an unwanted externality for corporations - which is now the unit of wealth production rather than the farm.
You forgot that historically there were three generations living under one roof rather than only two. Grandparents didn't get dumped in homes for the elderly until the boomers introduced the practice.
convince people that having kids is something worth it at the individual level
stop with all this fear mongering apocalypticism
stop pushing the age of consent up and get away with the over moralistic cultural position regarding sex
>Why is it so hard to get the population in the developed world to grow naturally?
It isn't
>naturally
People bred like rabbits after WW2. War is natural.
So you're saying I need to take in a Ukrainian refugee?
Yes.
the frick is wrong with france
reminder white genocide isn't real and you're a racist
replacement then
Being Black in Europe must be heaven on Earth lmao
plot twist : the Black folks are the frenchmen welcoming the ukrainian girls
>People bred like rabbits after WW2. War is natural.
But we're not at war? Unless you are suggesting the average modern western life is now comparable to living through a war.
YOUR ASCENT TO THE GENETIC SUMMIT HAS HALTED, MY MICROCEPHALIC RACE-SERVANT. PINKNESS IS A RACIAL QUALITY THAT HAS TO BE EARNED THROUGH CENTURIES OF ADVANCED BALLISTIC WARFARE AND CULTURAL DOMINATION THAT THE SLAVIC PEOPLE HAVE UNDERGONE FOR DRINKING AL GUL AND SMOKING THE DEGENERATE *TABAC* HERB...
*pauses in heroic contemplation*
AND FOR EATING *POTATO*
man neutered lefties trying to be edgy is so lame
he doesnt know...
OP IS A MAN OF VISION AND MEANS. HE HAS THE WILL TO CONFRONT INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL, WHICH IS SOMETHING YOUR RACE NAIVISTIC COMMUNISTS NEVER DID.
homie what the frick
Actually it was a problem in history at some point. During the late Republican / early Imperial Roman era birthrates were collapsing among the upper class due to them favoring a hedonistic lifestyle over parenthood. Augustus enacted laws to force them to breed though taxation of childlessness but it failed. People preferred to pay the tax.
So forcing society to collapse is the only solution. Otherwise the human species will die out.
is it simply decadence? I feel like I have not been to enough orgies to have my civilization fall for decadence
Why do we need to grow? Replacement should be good enough at this point