Da Frauen weitaus weniger Babys haben, stehen die USA und die Welt beispiellose Herausforderungen gegenüber
https://www.npr.org/2025/07/07/nx-s1-5388357/birth-rate-fertility-replacement-pronatalist-politics
Da Frauen weitaus weniger Babys haben, stehen die USA und die Welt beispiellose Herausforderungen gegenüber
https://www.npr.org/2025/07/07/nx-s1-5388357/birth-rate-fertility-replacement-pronatalist-politics
45 Kommentare
> When Sarah and Ben Brewington got married and moved to Los Angeles, they expected their next life step would be having kids. It just seemed like the natural thing to do. Instead, they kept delaying their first child, focusing on their careers, enjoying travel and spending time with friends.
> „I started thinking, ‚What do I want?'“ Sarah Brewington said. Gradually, they reached a decision: „It’s a resounding no. It’s not something I’m interested in or want,“ she said. „This life we’re building together didn’t need this other element in it,“ agreed her husband, Ben Brewington.
> The Brewingtons, both age 35, say they understand they are **part of a wider trend. Far more people in the U.S. and around the world are choosing to have significantly fewer children or opting out of parenthood altogether.**
> Many researchers believe this accelerating global shift is being driven in large part by a positive reality. Young couples, and women in particular, have far more freedom and **economic independence.** They’re weighing their options and appear to be making very different choices about the role of children in their lives.
> „It’s not that people don’t like kids as much as they used to,“ said Melissa Kearney, an economist who studies fertility and population trends, „There’s just a lot of other available options. They can invest in their careers, take more leisure time — it’s much **more socially acceptable.**“
> In nearly every country and culture, women are having fewer children. Worldwide, the number of children born to each woman has dropped from five in 1960 to an average of 2.2, according to the latest United Nations report.
We dont make enough to support a family, thats why.
„As women“ – yeah, we reproduce independently, men are definitely not involved. 🙄
They want to replace all the jobs with outsourcing, automation and AI. There will not be any jobs for the rest of us, let alone future generations.
Challenges for who? The owner class/capitalists/and politicians are the ones that will lose out ? Idgaf
Unprecedented challenges like „offering a social safety net to our population“ and „making poverty not a death sentence“
What like consuming less of the planet? Needing to build less housing and infrastructure? Less unemployment? I’m trying hard to see the bad in the rapid increase in the world’s population the last 80 years clawing back to something more sustainable.
American women have been having “far fewer” babies since like the 70s
Feudal-Capitalist propaganda, we are in need of a drastic reduction in population. Not having kids is the best way to help the ones that do.
I can’t afford a child, I can hardly afford rent and food.
They want everyone to be a full-time employee that will do overtime with no pay, every day, all year round (except legally-mandated holidays) with no sick leave. For every adult. Oh and with a high degree education with special skills that AI hasn’t eaten up yet that you devote most of your younger years to acquire, because those skills are more productive. While living in a rented home whose rent increases continuously.
Then they turn around and do surprised pickahu face when the same people do not have the money, time or security to start making babies. Or if you somehow do, only make one because even that singular one is so much work and extra cost.
When you make an entire society about ***debt***, and spurning the rat race with the ***constant fear*** that, one false move and you’re ruined, that environment is not very conducive to people feeling like they should have a kid.
If you look at the tends, Americans are killing it. Year over year, our “productivity” is world class. Per capita, we have an amazing GDP. That was the goal, and it was paid for by making people perpetually uneasy that they could lose everything at any moment. People really work hard when they feel like they absolutely have to.
Just tying healthcare to insurance. “Should we have a kid? Is there ***any chance*** I might lost my job within the next year?” Oh, there is?
Our government designed our economy to just string people out in order to maximize GDP output, and yeah… that vibe of a slinking going down stairs, paycheck to paycheck, hustling?
That is not the vibe that feels like you should have a kid.
I have kids. We lived, but it’s fucking scary. Having a kid isn’t even free. Hospital bills are… surprise surprise… outrageous and exploitative.
“Welcome to parenthood, here’s an absurd hospital bill. Cross your fingers and hope you insurance covers it”.
That was certainly me. Kid a few weeks old, on paternity leave, using ***hours*** of that precious leave waiting on hold to try to figure out what why insurance had covered so little.
First day of parenting hood, and you get to roll the bankruptcy roulette wheel.
I sure wish we could figure out how to vote better.
It’s ok, we are replacing everyone with robots right ?
We have a population problem that a lower birth rate will fix. I don’t see the issue. Earth can really only hold so many people and we are already over max capacity.
Cool headline subtly putting the blame on women for this
Rephrase that.. Governments and corporations designed for maximum, unstoppable growth will need to re-think and re-tool their systems for different forms of growth not based on adding billions upon billions of people onto an already struggling global ecosystem.
Most countries simply will not need the same amount of human manpower they once supposedly required.
The planet and human race would be better off if the population drops 90%
the global population has doubled since i was born. a little slowdown might be ok.
The primary challenge is inflation. The world’s entire economic system is wholly dependent on everlasting growth to accommodate inflation. Why do we need inflation? To accommodate loans and investments. Inflation reduces the load of a loan over time, which encouraged investment and consumption. Deflation does the opposite.
And everlasting economic growth is entirely dependent on an ever growing population. It is the second biggest driver of the GDP outside of consumption… and we have entirely maxed out consumption. The average consumer is leveraged to the gills.
All which spells a slow burning firestorm on the horizon that has the potential for global devastation unless something changes drastically.
(*hrrm hrrm… looking at you disgustingly wealthy money hoarders… hrrm*…)
I don’t think they are unprecedented problems. This whole thing is being drummed up by people who have large land holdings and investment portfolios that they expect to continually rise. Less people means less profit and Walmarts closing. Less competition for goods and services. We should all welcome a population decline. Unused land and empty houses. No need to work a 70 hr week.
Wtf is this weird fucking obsession with birth rates?
I think it is a good thing we are making less humans. The world is already past carrying capacity. the earth deserves to stop giving all its parts to us and let it be.
Illuminati: Oh no people arent making babies. This will fk our economy. What can we do?
Common plebs: Make things affordable duh!
Illuminati: mmm…Nah, ai porn is the future and also back to office work.
Technology was supposed to make life easier so that you could have the time for family, but somehow it has done the opposite.
Tbh, I think ppl choosing to have fewer children is contributing more than choosing to have no children. I remember back in my parent’s generation, they had hoards of kids. My mom came from a family of 9 children (2 didn’t make it adulthood), and my dad came from a family of 6.
Nowadays, even if people have kids, the upper limit seems to be 3 kids. Most people seem content with 1-2. Only rarely do I see ppl born locally who have 4+ children.
And I mean, is that a bad thing? Pregnancy takes a huge toll on a woman’s body. I couldn’t imagine going through that kind of bodily trauma 6-10 times. Not to mention resources. Sure, older kids can parent younger kids, but that doesn’t replace a proper education to even get by in this world.
Articles like this are the clearest evidence that the entire global economy is a massive Ponzi scheme. “Quick! We need more suckers at the bottom!”
Tax the living shit out of the rich and use it for healthcare, childcare, and affordable housing
So what. AI and robots will replace us. Billionaires will mass produce designer sons from machines.
Let me translate this for everyone: How will we get slave labor without more slaves? The end of the dark ages and medieval peasants happened because of the plague that killed so many people lords had to start paying wages.
I mean, I just had a baby 3 months ago and this shit is HARD. People don’t have the “village” they once did. Raising kids is really difficult for a just a couple without significant outside help (nanny or daycare) which costs a ton of money. For a lot of women, the financial choice is quit work to be a stay-at-home mom (which some women love but also many women hate- it can be boring, tiring, and thankless) or work full time while also paying for childcare & statistically being more likely to take on more household & child rearing responsibilities despite working.
Compare this absolute GRIND to being financially independent, keeping your body intact, traveling, enjoying a fulfilling career that gives a sense of pride and purpose, doing whatever you want,…. it’s no wonder a lot of women are waking up to the fact that there’s a choice. Parenthood is not easy and not for everyone.
The world population keeps on increasing. So what’s the problem?
Honestly, aside from affordability, I think the biggest reason people don’t have kids is because they have way more access to “stuff” than they used too.
People have more kids when they have nothing else to do, just look at your high school peers who stayed in their small hometown vs the ones who moved to big cities.
Before the internet, moving into a suburban house was basically a death sentence for any semblance of a social life. Fast forward to now and the world is at your fingertips, nobody is ever bored anymore.
If you think we are resource constrained and will be challenged by AI, then this is a good thing and we need to readjust the economy from constant growth / revenue type of mentality.
If you think this is bad, then either offer more incentives to have children, or wait until the labour force becomes so expensive that it demands a higher wage.
What grinds my gears is media flip flopping between these two sides.
I can provide a cheat code hint to get more babies – it’s called make life affordable, and stop forcing almost everybody to just barely scrape by.
There. You’re welcome. Normally my rate is $800/hr for this type of advice but society is really struggling to find the answer. Thought I’d do some charity.
The world can survive with fewer humans. Sorry, some rich people’s stock portfolio will suck. We’ll get over it.
NOBODY CAN AFFORD IT
If they stopped robbing us blind I would gladly have more kids. And they know exactly what they’re doing
Literally saw a post of someone claiming that two people working 48 hours a week would provide more than enough to support themselves and a kid. The disconnect from Boomers making statements like that and corporations bleeding us all dry highlights perfectly why birthrates are declining.
Capitalism has bled us dry. There is no time and no money for children. Even if you are well off, why bring a child into a slow motion climate disaster and a christian nationalist zombie apocalypse?
I think there are people that make the decision to not have kids from a financial point of view, and in that framework it’s the smart choice. But I suspect that many who go that route will regret it later in their lives.
I also think (and I 100% understand this sounds kooky) that there is a rebalancing of the natural order going on. There are too many humans destroying too much land, pushing too many species into extinction. A lower birth rate might be natures way of correcting this imbalance, since humans have figured out how to cure the diseases and ailments that historically have kept our population in check. So ultimately this could be a good thing.
They’ll just use Indians as GDP and skill shortage buffer, that is the future of every country
Why are we worried about it. There are shit ton of people in the world and we can just import them.
I’ll admit naivety when I say, things seemed to be just fine when the population was half what it is now.
You mean the capitalists and billionaires around the world are facing unprecedented challenges? Running outta people to exploit?
Translation: As the world oppresses women and treats them like birthing machines that dont need stable economies, safe partners and adequate healthcare, they will have less babies. Then the U.S and the world face unprecedented challenges.
A world that is hostile towards women and children has no right to demand they exist after the people in power dismantle everything needed for them to do so.
And if you think I’m wrong, tell me who’s wants to have kids when they can’t afford a house? Who wants to have a kid when they’re threatening to criminalize no fault divorce in states. Who wants to have a kid when working two jobs barely leaves you any time or mental to even find someone to be with. Who wants to have a kid when the person required to have said kid, is treated as a afterthought. No one. And because of that this problem will persist until said men in power are removed.
Good, all that means is less people for the wealthy to exploit.