The idea of 'Too many people' is not going away because of an economic theory that is resistant to change. It's burned into memory with every crowded subway ride, every highway gridlock, every cash register lineup, every social housing or daycare waitlist, every delayed surgery.
The 'need to breed' myth is like being addicted to a drug. Always needing more. A smaller population may have advantages. There would be less housing sprawl, lower expenses for government, less environmental damage, reduced infrastructure, shrinking programs to support poverty, less consumption. More equity.
A low fertility rate is not "horrible" or "dire", it's a consequence of human excess. If there are no meat factory workers? Reduce consumption of meat, (already happening). Win-win. Tech is already displacing jobs for efficiency.
Do you think the aging population can be solved if we cut off Medicare and Social Security from anyone who doesn't have at least two kids? Either it will increase the fertility rate and the burden caused by old people remains sustainable or if they still don't have kids the old people can just rot in poverty and not be a burden on the tax system. Either way the tax payer wins.
Slowly, but surely, the idea that we don't have enough people is taking root. It's a sea change from Malthusian teachings that dominated the discourse in the latter half of the 20th Century. I think it may be a bit naive, however, to assume that this problem wont hit the US and hard. One area of research I would like explore is rising populism and authoritarianism within the US. I touched on this briefly in the context of depopulation in one essay:
"Finally, while we are only getting our very first glimpses of the political ramifications of depopulation, they too appear to be dire. On a more granular level, once the population of a city or town begins to age and fall, something of a “death spiral” begins. Tax revenue falls, local businesses leave, and unemployment ensues. It should be of no surprise that these very same localities, in the words of Brink Lindsey, can become “hotbeds of authoritarian populism.” One analysis by the Brookings Institution noted that about half of U.S. counties depopulated during the 2010s, and President Trump won a majority vote in a staggering 90 percent of them....Depopulation and rising unemployment in small localities could be key factors in the rise of authoritarian populist movements around the world.""
I cannot help but feel that the rise of authoritarian populism in the US is somehow intertwined with depopulation of small towns and subsequent detachment and "deaths of despair" that are killing so many Americans. Ironically, these social ills are leading people to support policies that would accelerate economic and social hardship.
The idea of 'Too many people' is not going away because of an economic theory that is resistant to change. It's burned into memory with every crowded subway ride, every highway gridlock, every cash register lineup, every social housing or daycare waitlist, every delayed surgery.
The 'need to breed' myth is like being addicted to a drug. Always needing more. A smaller population may have advantages. There would be less housing sprawl, lower expenses for government, less environmental damage, reduced infrastructure, shrinking programs to support poverty, less consumption. More equity.
A low fertility rate is not "horrible" or "dire", it's a consequence of human excess. If there are no meat factory workers? Reduce consumption of meat, (already happening). Win-win. Tech is already displacing jobs for efficiency.
Do you think the aging population can be solved if we cut off Medicare and Social Security from anyone who doesn't have at least two kids? Either it will increase the fertility rate and the burden caused by old people remains sustainable or if they still don't have kids the old people can just rot in poverty and not be a burden on the tax system. Either way the tax payer wins.
Slowly, but surely, the idea that we don't have enough people is taking root. It's a sea change from Malthusian teachings that dominated the discourse in the latter half of the 20th Century. I think it may be a bit naive, however, to assume that this problem wont hit the US and hard. One area of research I would like explore is rising populism and authoritarianism within the US. I touched on this briefly in the context of depopulation in one essay:
"Finally, while we are only getting our very first glimpses of the political ramifications of depopulation, they too appear to be dire. On a more granular level, once the population of a city or town begins to age and fall, something of a “death spiral” begins. Tax revenue falls, local businesses leave, and unemployment ensues. It should be of no surprise that these very same localities, in the words of Brink Lindsey, can become “hotbeds of authoritarian populism.” One analysis by the Brookings Institution noted that about half of U.S. counties depopulated during the 2010s, and President Trump won a majority vote in a staggering 90 percent of them....Depopulation and rising unemployment in small localities could be key factors in the rise of authoritarian populist movements around the world.""
I cannot help but feel that the rise of authoritarian populism in the US is somehow intertwined with depopulation of small towns and subsequent detachment and "deaths of despair" that are killing so many Americans. Ironically, these social ills are leading people to support policies that would accelerate economic and social hardship.