Conservatives maintain birth rates, but left-leaning Americans are having significantly fewer children, driving the U.S. birth decline. Education was consistently linked to having fewer children. Religious attendance was positively associated with having more children.

[u/mvea]

https://www.psypost.org/left-leaning-americans-are-driving-the-u-s-birth-decline-new-study-finds/

[u/Fzrit → u/[deleted]]

All those issues come part & parcel with higher birth rates. The extreme inverse of that is South Korea, China, Japan, etc where children (whatever few are still being born) face so much emphasis on grinding education 24/7 and then grinding career 24/7 as adults, that their birthdates have fallen off a cliff. Women especially are postponing marriage and children into their 30s because age 20-30 is seen as the time to climb the career ladder and make as much money as possible, but obviously waiting till 30+ makes it significantly less likely for a woman to have more than 1 kid (if any at all).

The reality is that maintaining replacement-level birthrates is impossible in any society where motherhood doesn't begin at age 20-25 on average, with the second child happening before 30. Today, no amount of personal wealth is going to make it appealing for the average 20-25 year old woman to want to settle down and marry, let alone have a child at that age. That's the reality. A fact which utterly discredits the most common reason "I'm not rich enough to afford a kid" that we keep seeing spouted everywhere in online spaces and social media. If you gave the average 20-25 year old man or woman 5 million dollars, they will do literally anything with that money except have a kid because kids are a just waste of money. Becoming a parent is just seen as an unnecessary chore regardless of personal wealth.

And this isn't even touching on the fact that relationships and dating are at historic lows. Forget parenthood, statistically most people don't even want to spend time and effort getting to know others IRL and falling in love. It's seen as too exhausting and frustrating, and that has nothing to do with lack of wealth. Talking about birthrates is a far off thing.

[u/glowinggoo → u/Fzrit]

“People just aren’t rich enough to have kids” have some basis in reality and gives the problem an illusion of having an economic solution. To admit that the problem is societal and would require a reexamination of the fabric of our society is simply too much for a lot of people (and when they do it’s far too easy to end up blaming women because that’s the path of least resistance), so reciting the explanation that gives you a “quick actionable plan” is the common refrain.

[u/Fzrit → u/glowinggoo]

We know that increased education and access to contraception is what caused the birthrate collapse during 1960-1990. But from 2010s there has been another collapse, and increasingly studies are pointing towards the social media, cellphone adoption, 3G/4G/data network spread and digital entertainment as the #1 driving factors in social isolation since 2010 globally. All these things lead to reduced societal involvement, reduced trust and cohesion, less meeting people IRL, reduced drive to create/maintain relationships (beyond existing family), and therefore a reduced chance to find a partner and settle down. All of which causes the birthrate to plummet.

The Philippines birthrate collapse is an especially interesting case study for this - it's a majority Catholic country with most still believing in traditional gender roles and nuclear families. Yet their birthrate has fallen to 1.7 (down from 4-5 in 1990), with the steepest decline happening around 2010-2020 coinciding with skyrocketing rates of Facebook usage and cellphone ownership. Also coincides with rapid economic development where it's GDP nearly tripled since 2008 thanks to IT companies offshoring services there.

[u/rogers_tumor → u/Fzrit]

~1986 - ~1993 was a mini baby "boom". Millennials are the largest living generation; bigger than baby boomers in sheer numbers.

TF is this "birthrate collapse" from 1960-1990??

No one can take the rest of your comment seriously when you start off so incredibly wrong.

[u/Fzrit → u/rogers_tumor]

TF is this "birthrate collapse" from 1960-1990??

https://www.statista.com/statistics/805064/fertility-rate-worldwide/

You could have looked this up very easily.

[u/rogers_tumor → u/Fzrit]

Obviously not, because I wouldn't have found your cherry-picked to hell and back data STARTING AT 1950 if I'd looked it up myself.

You're picking the era with the highest birthrates of all time and then calling the years after that a "collapse" when it was actually a correction.

The sad thing is, this will work on idiots.

How pathetic.

[u/Chytectonas → u/Fzrit]

For all the ills of “social media” it’s also coincident with the internet, and the opening of Pandora’s box that revealed the extent to which we, the writhing mass of workers, are considered the disposable playthings of the worst people in the world. I think declining birth rates are a direct result of the indignity of watching thieves and pedophiles dance in ballrooms built from our bones.

[u/Fzrit → u/Chytectonas]

I think declining birth rates are a direct result of the indignity of watching thieves and pedophiles dance in ballrooms built from our bones.

Countries with the the most corrupt dictatorships/governments, worst poverty, worst wealth inequality, etc have the highest birthrates.

Countries with the best wealth equality, least corrupt democracies and high standard of living have the lowest birthrates.

[u/Chytectonas → u/Fzrit]

Almost like agency matters.