>

Maybe the problem isn't declining birthrates, but a global economic system that only functions in growth mode? We can't keep growing forever and we are already over using the Earth's resources.
/u/Salt_Attorney (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >

Except you’re wrong 
The less money people have , the more kids they crank out .
Look at the inner  cities and rural Appalachia, 
Poor people have a lot of kids 
Unmarried single poor women have lots of kids . 
Middle class married folks have one or two , sometimes three . >

> The less money people have , the more kids they crank out .
Yes and the more money people have, the less kids they have. Statistically. But what you are missing is that here we are talking about money people work for and earn. The less money people earn with their work, the more kids they have, and the more money people earn with their work, the less kids they have. But now imagine a person does not earn any money through work. They simply have free time, and get paid by the governemnt a certain salary for no particular reason. You would see that the more money you give them, the more likely they are to have children. >


You would see that the more money you give them, the more likely they are to have children.

Do you have literally any evidence for that claim? >

Oh yeah .
It’s called welfare queens 
Welfare brood mares etc etc 
All you have to do is crank out a kid and not be married , and the govt hands over a pile of cash every month 
Free housing , section 8
Free healthcare 
Free food 
Free utilities 
Free internet 
Free Obama phones 
Free everything .
Unless she  is married , then you don’t hardly get anything . >

"Oh yeah definitely, source: my ass"
Is not evidence of a claim. >

Well, 
First, I don't think that declining birthrates are a problem on a planet with 8B humans.
But even so, benefits aren't enough to motivate people to have children. If you look at Japan for example, you have one of the most pressured, stressed and depressed society on earth. Who would want to raise kids in a country where kids have to work more than 12h a day just to avoid failing your studies and being considered a looser for life ? 
In their case, even if money wasn't a problem to raise kids, as long as their culture is that stressful and depressing, I don't think that birth-rates will significantly grow.
Add to this eco-anxiety growing worldwide, resources shortages being closer everyday, and I don't think you paint a beautiful future that motivate people to raise kids for. >


First, I don't think that declining birthrates are a problem on a planet with 8B humans.

It is when your greying population doesn't have enough young people to care for them and pay their pensions. >

Well, maybe you (generic you) shouldn't have designed the economy to be a pyramid scheme. >

Is that by design? I can't think of a society in human history which didn't have wealth inequality. >

Of course it is! Wealth inequality is exacerbated by the wealthy to get more wealthy, and that is certainly by the design of the wealthy.
But that's not quite the same thing as a pyramid scheme economy. Endless growth is not inherently necessary to support a population.
Both are features of capitalism.