Western fertility rates in decline

[nymnpseudo]

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Energy, food, raw materials (wood, stone, metal, etc), and variable which require more those things like weather is what was referencing. 

You've lost me.  However .. western fertility rates in decline is the topic anyway.

I think we all know our general population is hugely stressed in our present day.

"Stress can interfere with conception. ... That's because stress can affect the functioning of the hypothalamus – the gland in the brain that regulates your appetite and emotions, as well as the hormones that tell your ovaries to release eggs. If you're stressed out, you may ovulate later in your cycle or not at all."

"Stress degrades sperm quality, study shows. ... It may trigger the release of steroid hormones called glucocorticoids, which in turn could blunt levels of testosterone and sperm production. Another possibility is oxidative stress, which has been shown to affect semen quality and fertility."

As well, of course, stress will reduce the desire for having children, a conscious decision will be made NOT to have children because of financial stress, for instance.

And:  Air pollution affects fertility in men and women.  https://www.popsci.com/air-pollution-fertility-pregnancy  ..  as well, undoubtedly, on survival rates of fetuses.

 

[StringJunky]

Can't the apparent reduction in fertility rate actually just be because the odds of offspring survival are so much better in affluent communities that having lots of offspring to offset infant/juvenile mortality is unnecessary?

[nymnpseudo]

51 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Can't the apparent reduction in fertility rate actually just be because the odds of offspring survival are so much better in affluent communities that having lots of offspring to offset infant/juvenile mortality is unnecessary?

 We are talking of 'the west' where infant survival has been very high in the past century, and only until the last couple of decades has fertility and birthrates decreased to a point where economists are worried.  Families of 5 to 13 relatively healthy children were common in western culture as late as 50 year ago, with some of those families intact today (except for parents of course.)  Western culture families of one or two are the norm today, beginning a generation ago.  Larger families from non-western culture are the reason immigration has been heavily promoted in the west. 

Interestingly .. U.S. infant mortality is very high compared to many other western nations.  https://www.google.com/search?q=infant+mortality+rates+in+u.s.&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA807CA807&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=PRq4lALhOJq-9M%3A%2C98any87m3QFC6M%2C_&usg=AI4_-kTRdggLq-iFV_onxtiFgOym7vwk2w&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiU1O-owL7gAhUijoMKHbkkDxoQ9QEwAHoECAUQBg#imgrc=HNVkXxsWKlBIzM:

Edited February 15, 2019 by nymnpseudo
missed a punctuation mark

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Can't the apparent reduction in fertility rate actually just be because the odds of offspring survival are so much better in affluent communities that having lots of offspring to offset infant/juvenile mortality is unnecessary?

I think people are simply waiting longer to have kids and are having less kids once they choose to have them. In my opinion it is a good thing. However capitalism and to an extent various forms of socialized program requires an increase to function optimally. This thread is more about the economic implication than it is about the reason for the shift. 

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

I think people are simply waiting longer to have kids and are having less kids once they choose to have them. In my opinion it is a good thing. However capitalism and to an extent various forms of socialized program requires an increase to function optimally. This thread is more about the economic implication than it is about the reason for the shift. 

Right, OK.

[Ten oz]

17 hours ago, nymnpseudo said:

You've lost me.  However .. western fertility rates in decline is the topic anyway.

The topic is the economic impact of the decline. 

You are correct that more people are consolidating into major Metro areas. The result of that is partly responsible for the declining economic conditions in the mid west here in the States. The loss of manufacturing is most often blamed but the lack of growth is just as big a problem. For example the population of North Dakota was 690k in 1930. Today it is only 760k. Only about a 10% increase in 100 years. California went from 5 million in 1930 to 39 million today.near an 800% increase. As a result California is economically the strongest State in the union. 

Capitalism demands growth. It is increasing demand that drive up home values for example. One if the Reasons the average cost of a home California bis double the national average is it's growth. Also more brains are more powerful than less brains. It is harder for companies to find enough skilled people in declining locations. So as the while country begins to decline there will be economic challenges associated.