DESPITE OUR FOUNDING EDITOR’S BEST EFFORTS …
We all know about the unsustainable ratio of “takers to makers” – which is to say the growing number of people who are dependent on government versus the shrinking number of people who are paying for government.
We’ve written that whole “center cannot hold” column dozens of times. Most recently HERE.
Overlooked in the “takers to makers” conversation? A plunging fertility rate, which we’ve also addressed previously (HERE and HERE). Basically it goes like this: If America ain’t “birthin’ no babies,” then its shrinking workforce is going to become a much bigger problem. And all that government debt? Those tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities? Yeah … it’s gonna be a lot harder to pay off that Everest-sized mountain of bad news (assuming you still subscribe to the fiction that it can be paid off).
So …
According to a new report from the National Center for Health Statistics, for the first time ever the United States’ non-marital birth rate is in decline.
That rate peaked at 52 live births per 1,000 unmarried women in 2008. Last year, it was down to 45 live births.
“Like declines in overall fertility that have occurred since 2007, it’s quite likely that this recent decline in the non-marital birth rate also occurred as a result of the economic recession of 2007-2009,” observe Gretchen Livingston and Anna Brown of the Pew Center.
Wait … the recession of 2007-09?
Last time we checked it was still going.
“Fewer babies means a contracted consumer economy moving forward – and yes, less taxpayer revenue to deal with the massive pile of debt that’s being accumulated by our current crop of ‘leaders’ in Washington, D.C.,” we wrote back in January. ‘Bottom line? America’s plunging fertility rate is yet another indicator of the unsustainable nature of our country’s current trajectory.”
Yup …
RAPID REACTION
@fitsnews Not … Enough … JOBS
— Jed Daughtry (@JedDaughtry) August 14, 2014
23 comments
Not enough taxes.
Too much spending.
“Not enough taxes” “Too much spending” I would argue you are both right and the solution to our problems is more of one and less of another.
“So, more spending, less taxes? Great! We’re on it!”
-Congress
Fewer births would normally translate into more open space for those already here and less drain on natural and other resources such as clean air, water, soil, etc. Our economy is FUBAR, no matter how many productive people make babies. It will either crash completely and/or become a totally moot point due to war, disease, or other calamity. Since we are being flooded by illegal invaders from below our southern border, it is unlikely that we will realize the dividend we would normally get from reducing our birth rate thanks to our suckass politicians who have sold us down the river.
Abortion.50 million taxpayers aborted since 1973.
No, in all likelihood, the majority of them would have been dependents on the system. Children who grow up without the love, guidance, and support, that any child should have will likely wind up having behavioral issues and wind up as wards of the state, whether in a jail or prison setting, psychiatric unit, or both. Between stays in these facilities throughout their lives, it can be expected that many will victimize the taxpaying citizens through crimes which will run the gamut from thefts, to assaults, to even murders. Additionally, they will be a drain on natural resources which involve open spaces, clean air, clean water, and soil.
I can only imagine how much worse off society would likely be now if we had fifty million (+ or -) additional drains on society and our resources.
So true. We witness the results of teen mothers and unwed mothers (those who slipped by the abortionists). Infanticide would be a much more effective way to deal with this situation. We identify just those children most likely to have behavioral problems and will likely be a drain on society. Only those are eliminated by infanticide. We could call it retroactive abortion. This way the children who will contribute to society will be spared.
The Germans were ahead of us in this regard in the thirties and forties
I have tears in my eyes.Thank you sir for your support of the sanctity of life.
CIC is just stating facts, I don’t get that he is advocating abortion as a method of population control or human husbandry. Facts are that a good many of the women having abortions are poor or feel they have no real option. They know their own personal circumstances better than anyone else and looking at a landscape they feel is devoid of viable options they go for the quick and permanent solution to their perceived problem. There may be times, but I doubt very many, when the abortion is for gender selection or to avoid complications from possible birth defects.
“CIC is just stating facts.”
He must be stating them because he believe they were relevant to determining public policy. Specifically, policy towards abortion.
“They know their own personal circumstances”
——————-
It is not only a personal decision. There is another person involved. My post does not challenge your position at all.
My position is that the only difference between an infant and an unborn child is stage of development and dependence on the birth mother. Our laws and culture does not consider stage of development in the crime of murder. Murder is murder no matter the age of victim.
That leave only the issue of dependence on the mother. The mother and child have conflicting rights. The right to life being the most fundamental, the child’s right to life prevails unless the mother’s life is in danger or the child medical condition is so serious that it could not enjoy life.
The position of the “pro-choice” is that the only distinction the unborn has with an infant (dependence on the birth mother) extinguishes all of his or her rights.
EXACTLY!
What party were they affiliated with before their death ?
You sure you aren’t Catholic, with the brood you are creating?
This is why we need a sensible immigration policy. I’m absolutely against illegal immigration but absolutely, as the foundign fathers werem FOR immigration.
Hmmmm …. US Census numbers …. Look at these people in government – their never ending out of control spending habits and dishes out raises and bonuses. Look at all the over-paid do nothing in Government – look at their benefits you pay for – Look at a US Senator’s or Congressman’s ridiculously high salary, and for what? Lip service?. Its all coming to a head. Collapse is inevitable. So face reality.
Bye Bye l, America. You have been sucked and sucked till almost there is nothing left to suck. You are imploding from within. And your days are numbered.
Empires come and go…history shows a success rate of “zero” for all of them in the long run….so flag waving is the equivalent of cheering for what one day will be the losing team.
Better to focus on the important things; family, existential questions, etc. You can plan around the day the sociopaths run the show into the ground, as repeated by history over and over again.(assuming it happens in your generation, it took 80 years more or less for communist Russia to fall apart).
It’s pure folly to place any faith in politicians, place it in yourself instead and be happy/healthy.
If you’re one of those people with the desire to control everything/everyone and will lie to get elected to do it, fuck you, but I’m living my life as far away as your shenanigans as possible.
A declining fertility rate need not reflect an “unsustainable trajectory.”
Immigrants (legal and illegal) contribute to the tax base of both states and the nation. Income taxes, Soc. Sec. taxes, etc are deducted from immigrants just as they are native born. In fact, their may be a net positive from illegals in that they will never collect or gain returns on their contributions. They consume products and they pay taxes.
Our immigration policy needs repair and change for sure, but long-term economic ramifications are not all negative from a pure economic standpoint.
An American bred infant born today won’t contribute in taxes, etc. in a meaningful way for another 20-25 years. A 16 year old immigrant worker will contribute to our tax base immediately and for a long time.
What is the net, net? I can’t answer, but it is sure not a zero sum equation.
Several European nations have encouraged immigration specifically for the reasons outlined above. They have not limited it to specific skills or trades either.
I know, I know, it doesn’t fit the current immigration narrative, but it does fit the narrative that has been repeated over and over in this country and its long history of immigration whether legal or illegal.
There’s no danger in running out of people any time soon.
Especially if you keep poking GT’s wife with that thing as much as you do.
:-D
So much for Hope and Change…
So FITS, there’s fewer unwed mothers giving birth, and you think that’s a bad thing?
This country and this planet are way over-populated. You may catch on to this as sections of the country become uninhabitable due to lack of fresh water. It may happen in your lifetime. Your children will be around to see it.
Just look at the South West – which Native Americans have periodically fled for hundreds of years ago due to long term drought – and the sucking dry of the Ogallala Aquifer in the Plains. Since the mid 90s here in SC, we have seen recurrent droughts, some lasting as long as 5 years, come out for a year and go back in.
If you haven’t watched it, Ken Burns’ film ‘The Dust Bowl’ about the events of the 30s and now is worth the time.
uhm. ever heard of immigration? what the fuck? this was like a conversation on FOX news where coins have only one side.