Birds and Bees

Blog Post
The Reproduction Metric

A total fertility rate of around 2.1 live births per woman is considered to be the replacement level in developed countries: in other words, the average number of live births per woman required to sustain the population, provide workers to meet industrial, agricultural, and defense demands. In 2015, the total fertility rate in the EU-28 was 1.58 live births per woman (the same rate was recorded in 2014). The EU-28’s total fertility rate increased from a low of 1.46 in 2001 and 2002. The bounce back in parts of Europe may be explained by the popularity of the name “Mohammed” among newborns.
Is Europe unsustainable without the importation of millions of (often savage) Muslims? Many Euro-Leaders say that it isn’t and it explains a great deal.
As Europeans decide not to have children, their ‘guests’ will reproduce them into relative oblivion in the course of a couple of generations and given that democracies impart one vote for each person, all that I can say is ‘aloha snackbar’. Beards are about to become a whole lot more popular, and women’s fashions will be delineated by how big of a tent is required to drape them.
Social Pressure
In China, elective abortions of females in utero has led to a gender imbalance of roughly 75% males to 25% females. Having a male child is a type of retirement policy in China because your son is required to care for you in your dotage. If you have a female child, her duty is to her in-laws and you’re out of luck. How is the one-child policy working out for the Chinese? You do the math. 
China is slowly backing away from the one child policy for this reason. It reduces the population but creates an impossible imbalance that inevitably leads to social unrest.

24 thoughts on “Birds and Bees

  1. America could be following Euro Nations, given the size of the I, me, mine snowflake generations.

    On another note, will be interesting to see what, if anything, comes out of the coming N & S Korean talks.

    I am so behind on blogs, sorry.

  2. This demographic bomb is the problem of the next hundred years and I'm kinda glad I'm old enough to not be likely to see it. What does a country with 75% male population do for the next 50 years? Do they attack other nations for brides? What do millions of men literally looking for love do to find/attract a woman when they're literally facing 1 in 3 odds against them? Robots?

    A while back, I got puzzled over the concept of the WWII baby boom. Why should such a thing exist? Yeah, some guys are going to come home and start families, but that's a delayed birth, not something extra. And don't forget all the guys who didn't come home and never had children. Why should the birth rate after WW2 be bigger than before?

    So I dug into some statistics. It turns out the much-discussed baby boom was a lower birth rate than the birth rate from 1900 to WW1. What defined the "boom" seems to have been the introduction of the pill in the 60s and the collapsing birth rate after that, capped by the legalization of abortion in the 70s. After that, the birth rate never got back to what it was before contraception.

    There are reports that Muslim population birth rates are dropping as they live longer in Western countries, but I don't have real numbers.

  3. Demographic bomb indeed.

    The progressive movement de-emphisizes the value of a family, naturally because they seem to want to stomp on anything with general social value. Their emphasis is on transsexuality and homosexuality, neither of which lead to stable, sustainable populations. Abnormality are their new normal and biology dictates that it won't work. But since nothing that they advocate works, who can be surprised?

  4. The North Koreans are confident that they can convince South Korea to cast the US aside and forge a security relationship between themselves. I think that's unlikely to happen. North Korea also believes that now that they have the People's Rocket pointed in the general direction of the USA that America cowers in fear of them. There is a lot of delusion in North Korea.

  5. Thanks SiGraybeard for the research, being one of those baby boomers, I've wondered about that for a long time.

  6. Some claim large families were beneficial in farming families. Maybe. The higher the income the fewer births seems to be a trend.

  7. I will also argue the value of a mother who stays at home and works to do her part to raise a family while the children are young is the backbone of the nation. Women who do that are continually demonized and poked fun at by the more "illuminated" in our society. There are sacrifices when that happens, and I do not argue against equal pay for equal work – but the price of putting a career ahead of a family is an unsustainable population.

  8. It's interesting to note that Vladimir Putin championed a stay-at-home-mother program in places like Siberia for single women who are not inclined to marry. They take women earning a clerical pay range, do psych testing to determine suitability, (blind) inseminate them with sperm men who are smart and strong. Then they pay them substantially more than they would have earned as clerks to raise those children. It's a Russian investment in the future. I know a lady personally who took that choice and is raising three children in the Tyumen Region of Russia. Tyumen = Siberia.

    It's racist because the Russians only want white (Great Russian) parents for the children – but it works for them.

  9. There are also other aspects to the topic that continual growth. Productivity with new solutions makes both service and manufacturing better and more competitive with less people. Block chain will likely make a tremendous impact on how we do transactions and reduce the need for people in service industry. Farmers are are fewer that ever before in the US but produce more than ever. I guess Japan will do fine. Redistribution of wealth and new opportunities for the new generations combines with increased productivity will help japan to do fine. Genetics will change the way medical services takes place with CRISP and GMO 2.0 But all this must be driven by some demand like less people. If you think like they do in Niger where they have 7 children there is less or no incentive to automate and increase productivity. I am optimistic on behalf of the US as long as the immigration is stopped or minimized. If there is a demand for people just create incentives for the people you need after you know there is a concrete demand. Just creating incentives for people to come without a demand will just end in increased taxes, less competitiveness, de-stabilization and pressure on natural resources. The regressive left and socialists just want to gain votes by immigration and their key incentive is the value they promote they are willing to share. There are ways to cooperate with other countries to recruit manpower for limited periods of time. I do not suggest the slave contracts the Arabs offer e.g. working people from Nepal where they keep the passport when in the country and the kick them out when the job is done. Even the salaries tend to be low. The UK they have recruited Gurkha's for 200 years and when finished with the service they had to go home in the past. Now they have the chance to settle down in the UK and that causes many challenges. But the work ethic and culture they bring is not that problematic since they are not practicing Islam. If the US starts to keep more money inside the US and invest in schools teaching natural sciences and train people to come up with smart solutions for the future it will help the country. It is positive that Pakistan now experience they stop in the US money flow into the country. That help them to become more creative and productive. Dambisa Moyo has said many times that best way to help Africa is to say within 5 years there will be no more development money. That will make their politicians aware of changing the focus to what matters instead of flying 1st class to Washington for receiving checks. There is no lack of people in this world but the socialists must not be allowed to make the US become just like Africa by stimulating mass immigration. The same people tend also to be climate alarmist and it is definitely not a sustainable climate strategy to move people with low carbon emission to a country where the demand for energy is a lot higer. Just do the math. Somalia is like 0,05 annual metric ton per capita and the a US citizen is 16.5 metric ton per capita. I rather suggest the US apply carbon emission to support increased productivity than less. Happy New Year!

  10. Muslims of any sort are unwelcome in Russia. When they are discovered, they are asked to leave.

  11. Happy New Year, John. I miss Oslo – but the summer, not the winter.

    The US seems to be doing fine where the birth ratio is concerned, illegal immigration notwithstanding. Places such as Japan and Europe have more problems.

    It's true that individual productivity might reduce the need to replace one's self, but as a society we need enough depth to be able to withstand a plague, a war, and to still function. I'm thinking of things in this context in a systemic way, over many decades. Yes, farms produce more and the US always produces far more food than we can consume. Now that we are also exporting oil, the future is promising in that regard as well.

  12. >There is a lot of delusion in North Korea.
    There's a lot of delusion in the US for that matter. Trump is Putin's agent. White cops are all itching to shoot themselves some by-definition-innocent-and-unarmed black men (because who doesn't want to be vilified by the press, and lose their job, and likely their assets defending even a "good" shoot). Illegals do NOT commit disproportionate amounts of crime. There is NO voter fraud in blue hives. And so forth. I'm not sure that's less deluded than Fat Un worship.

    > [Russian] stay-at-home-mother program
    Huh. I had no idea. Not sure what I think of it yet, but what/how the provision for a father-figure/male role model for the boys resulting from this program?

    In this vein, a while back Singapore had a program to encourage presumably high-IQ/high-accomplishment (or at least low time-preference, i.e. able to suffer now for benefit in future) women to have more children. So the S'porean approach was to incentivize women with PhD's to have kids. My take was that they wouldn't necessarily get more smart, hard-working offspring, but they were guaranteed more socially-awkward people in need of corrective eyewear, who were also unable to catch a ball. This trenchant observation did not go over very well in my office. Heh.

    >What does a country with 75% male population do for the next 50 years? Do they attack other nations for brides?
    Aren't they already importing brides from SE Asia (Thailand, Philippines, etc)? Bear in mind that Han Chinese have about the same high opinion of SE Asians as, say Swiss-Germans have of southern Italians or Greeks….

    >The UK they have recruited Gurkha's for 200 years and when finished with the service they had to go home in the past. Now they have the chance to settle down in the UK and that causes many challenges.
    IIRC the UK-settlement issue was also tied to a pay/pension differential. The retired Gurkhas got less money, but it went way further back home in Nepal. Then some well-meaning people (including an actress whose father was an officer commanding Gurkhas, if I remember) pushed for pay parity, which resulted in fewer Gurkhas being recruited overall since the budget did not increase. This actually hurt the Gurkhas rather than helping them. All this is from vague memory – be glad to be corrected if it's off.

  13. Re China, they are in the negative, and may never recover. That 2.1 ratio is based on a 52:48 ratio. When you skew it as far as the Chinese have, they are effectively under a 1.0 rate.

  14. The demographic suicide of the West and China, is a thing to behold, with the European solution of importing Muslim savages being particularly insane.

    I'll wager my fighting monkey it'll end in tears, and gunfire.

  15. Beijing is painfully aware. As Mike writes above, there has been a serious government effort to import foreign brides but not being of Han bloodlines makes them undesirable for arranged marriages between proper Han Chinese families. It is unlikely to alleviate the situation to any meaningful degree.

  16. Correct, and they don't want the Mongolian brides either… Hence the downward population spiral will continue.

  17. The Nork Conundrum is that the US wants China to solve the problem of Fat-un, the best result of which would be the death of Fat-un. The result of that likely being reunification which creates a manufacturing juggernaut that crimps China's influence. Nuking Norkland has radioactive fallout in China, also undesirable. Take over by conventional warfare is a form of reunification with a ROK dominance and with minimal destruction in the South, not a good option economically for China.
    China wants a Nork control of the peninsula with no Fat-un or destruction of all infrastructure leaving them more say so in manufacturing world wide for a considerable time span. Trump putting pressure on the Chinese is unlikely to cause them to eliminate Fat-un unless China feels they can install a new puppet and blame the South and/or the USA for the terrible loss of chubby.
    The likelihood of Fat-un willingly ceding control, low.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top