Überall auf der Welt stehen Regierungen vor dem gleichen Problem: Die Geburtenraten sinken schneller und die Bevölkerungsstrukturen altern in einer Weise, die die Staatshaushalte belastet.
Die weltweite Fruchtbarkeitsrate sank von 5 Kindern pro Frau im Jahr 1960 auf 2,2 im Jahr 2024, Prognosen gehen von 1,8 bis 2100 aus.
Dieser demografische Wandel wirkt sich auf Arbeitsmärkte, Renten, das Gesundheitswesen und die langfristige Wirtschaftsplanung aus. Als Reaktion darauf setzen die Länder eine Reihe von Maßnahmen um:
- China: 3.600 Yuan (500 US-Dollar) pro Neugeborenes ab Juli 2025
- Südkorea: Ein engagiertes Ministerium für die Erholung der Geburtenrate
- USA (2025): Neue Programme „Babybonus“ und „Mutterschaftsmedaille“.
Diese Maßnahmen sind sehr unterschiedlich, haben aber das gleiche Ziel: den Bevölkerungsrückgang zu verlangsamen und den wirtschaftlichen Druck zu mildern, der mit der schrumpfenden jüngeren Bevölkerung einhergeht.
Datendiagramm und Quellenlink: https://yodest.com/p/global-birth-rates-are-falling-faster
Verwendetes Werkzeug: Excel
Von Yodest_Data
23 Kommentare
As far as I know there hasn’t been a single money for children scheme which has promoted birthrates to return to replacement let alone raise beyond that.
I think money is a factor, but it is very low down the list of things causing this decline in birthrates and the largest factors imo are all social in nature.
Nothing governments are willing to do will change the situation. It’s either import foreigners (UK strategy) or accept a larger elderly population (Japanese/Korean strategy). I’m curious to see Korea in 30 years, it will be interesting to see what happens considering they are ahead of everyone else.
Sure looks like it’s been below replacement level since 2008.
I am more surprised about India!
I know china is not having kids because the cost of having one is just too much, Social issues.
In the long run this is for the best. The current human population is a historical anomaly brought on by a near endless supply of food and advanced medicine. With current technology, we cannot sustain it without negatively affecting the environment to the point that the environment turns against us.
I wouldn’t have kids in America even with a SUBSTANTIAL monetary incentive.
School shootings (republicans won’t implement gun control), terrible education (republicans are gutting education), terrible healthcare (republicans have zero healthcare plans), climate change (republicans actively ignore), etc.
This country sucks.
>“motherhood medal” programs
[https://www.holocaust.org.uk/gold-mothers-cross](https://www.holocaust.org.uk/gold-mothers-cross)
Hell, it’s even gold to appeal to the aesthetics of the current administration.
Good. We’ve overpopulated.
Warmongers are the only people who have a stake in continual birth rate increase.
Why would anyone want to rear a child in the state of this world currently? The past decade has been absolutely atrocious when it comes to public spending, public health, the overall economy, inflation… Like, even speaking from only the US pov, we just had a government shutdown that was because *checks notes* people didn’t want to spend money on affordable healthcare and thus millions lost the ability to feed their children effectively with SNAP.
Why would we care about having children when the government dictates when we can eat or have medical coverage and holds it over our heads to further their power struggle? It just doesn’t make sense.
Immigration. Can always offset that risk versus a place like Japan.
It’s been like that for a while. A lot of US population increase is from immigration. That’s why the current administration wants to encourage more children
With AI taking over so many jobs in the near future, this is good.
could you do something similar for the US vs. central and south american countries?
We only have 330 MILLION people in this country and its slowing down its a crisis! Not because these things have any material effect on the people living their lives, but because we’ve built a system that requires constant growth to fund a ponzi scheme for retirement and benefits instead of a more sustainable system.
So, obviously, the problem is with the people not having enough kids. The ponzi scheme was working well can’t see what the issue would be there. An idiot might suggest that things like health care, child care, and other support for parents would encourage having kids but that sounds like socialism. Perhaps we can outlaw birth control, nix sex-ed, and encourage people to get married at 18. That’ll make for a prosperous country.
BTW, if Thanos showed up we’d only have 165 MILLION people. You know, like 1958, post WW2, post baby boom and the mythical „good America“ that some people think we should RETVRN to. That movie made no sense to me.
If current models of fertility decline are projected onto Sub-saharan African nations, the global human population could peak as early as the 2050s and then begin an irreversible decline.
That will be an interesting world.
This is not an issue, it’s an improvement. Humanity is destroying natural habitats and killing off animals at an alarming rate. If people actually cared about global warming they would not be trying to maintain this overgrown population.
So basically Africa is pushing the net birthrate up in modern times
At some point the world will have to come to grips with the fact that “cost” or “education” aren’t the reasons people aren’t having kids and do some soul searching as to what the real reason is. There’s simply no well understood reason that rural tribes in India with no education and almost no expectation of women’s rights are having less kids at the exact same point in human history as white upper middle class millennial women in the US. It goes beyond social forces
I would very much like to have kids but it’s expensive. Just giving birth is expensive as an act but it would put us in a whole different lifestyle financially. When my parents had THREE kids including one severely disabled one they remained upper middle class. Having ONE would be a huge blow for us. I just can’t see it changing
Is *now* below replacement level? That would imply it just happened but this graph shows it happened around 2009-2010 and that it was below replacement level from 1970 to 2000ish
Declining population isn’t a big concern to me but those country policies aren’t much at all for a family. Idk how much $500 is worth to the Chinese but $500 in American society is nothing compared to taking care of a kid for 18 years and then college for 4-8 more years depending on additional schooling or not.
I know there must be research saying if these small monetary incentives don’t work then adding more money won’t influence families to procreate more, but honestly, if kids were fully funded (extreme position) to the point families could cover costs AND hire night nannies, chefs, etc. then you’d have people having babies left and right. Imagine living as a 0.1%er. Not 1%er, literally above a 0.1% lifestyle just for having 2+ kids.
Money is definitely a factor but are we gonna talk about finding a good partner?
Well! Sounds like it’s time to think about restructuring how we handle Labor markets, pensions, healthcare and long term economic planning as a society.