START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
1,351,922 people care about Politics

Are Childfree People Destroying America?

Are Childfree People Destroying America?

The U.S. economy is growing too slowly for the taste of many commentators, and some have decided that childfree people are the reason. Claims abound that the childfree are dragging population numbers down and that their growing ranks will devastate the economy, because more people are the key to economic growth.

The issue is way more complicated than that. This post lays out some of the arguments of what I’ll call the “pronatalists,” who are in favor of Americans having more children, and the counter-arguments of their opponents.

Will the American Population Continue Shrinking?

Pronatalists: Birth Rates are Plummeting

The American fertility rate, which measures the average number of births per woman, has fallen to 1.9. That is below the replacement rate of 2.1, which is the number needed to maintain the current size of the population.

Our birthrate, or number of births per one thousand women, is correspondingly heading downward. In 1990 it was 71, while today it is 63.2.

Many expect these trends to continue, “with the census estimate for 2050 down almost 10 percent from the mark predicted in 2008.”

Counter-Argument: The Population Will Grow

These numbers and projections could very well be wrong. “These kinds of forecasts have turned out to be wrong generation after generation,” according to a senior economist quoted in the BBC News Magazine.

The BBC article goes on to list a number of reasons that the numbers may be off, including that women may be holding off on having babies until the economy improves. Low birthrates today don’t mean low birthrates tomorrow — “the women who are not having children this year will probably have them a few years from now.”

“The main reason for the fall in both fertility and immigration is the economy… This means that when the economy recovers, so should fertility,” The Economist claims.

Professor Andrew Cherlin of Johns Hopkins agrees: “I think our fertility rate will rebound as the economy gets better.”

As more people choose not to have children, Professor Cherlin may be proven wrong. Perhaps people are not putting off reproduction until they are financially stable — perhaps they are deciding to forego breeding altogether, regardless of the economy’s antics. Are the pronatalists right about the reason for the slowing in our population growth?

In any case, fertility is not the only way to increase our numbers: we also have immigration. The Economist makes the fairly obvious observation that allowing more immigration would increase our population. The U.S. “is in an enviable position” in that regard. It “is still a top destination for those looking to have a better life.”

With the option of allowing more immigration available, there is no reason to demand that childfree people give up their lives to have children they don’t want. Instead, we can welcome people who do want to move here.

On the other hand, maybe we don’t need more people. It is difficult to understand how low population growth could be bad given that we have more workers than we have jobs. There is still plenty of room for economic growth with the population we have, and fewer bodies might even improve the situation. With fewer children born today, “there may be fewer Americans 16 years from now joining the droves of the jobless,” according to Claire Gordon at Aol Jobs.

Americans Can’t Count on Never-Ending Economic Growth

Then again, maybe the debate over population is irrelevant. Maybe we need to stop obsessing over economic growth and reimagine the characteristics of a healthy economy.

Pronatalists: The Only Strong Economy is A Growing Economy

Right now, the economy’s growth is among the primary metrics used to measure the country’s financial health. Growth in the economy “depends upon…an expanding population… Taken to extremes, very low birth rates cause declining economic growth,” writes Sydney Williams at Breitbart. Therefore, the argument goes, people who choose not to have children are more or less directly responsible for weakening the economy.

Counter-Argument: The Economy, and Our Population, Can’t Grow Forever

As a USA Today letter writer pointed out, we cannot indefinitely follow “an economic model of unlimited growth. Nothing can grow forever, and anything built on this model will self-destruct.”

Setting aside the disastrous environmental implications of an even larger American population, it would be apparent to a school child that the population can’t keep growing indefinitely. The U.S. has finite land, and the world has finite resources. Inevitably population growth must stop. So how will we stop the economy from imploding when that happens?

Economists, please start figuring that out right now.

For me, the take-away from this debate is that people who choose not to have children are not the villains hurting the American economy: there are other ways to increase the number of people in our country, and it may not even be necessary to have more people. So please stop accusing the childfree of not caring about our country or about other people’s economic stability.

P.S. I left out the population’s effect on Social Security and Medicare because that is a thicket too dense to enter in this article. Suffice it to say that those systems need some reimagining too.

 

Related Stories:

Do Childfree Couples Have it All?

The Ethics of Childbearing

Why Are We Still Judging Women Without Children?

 

Read more: , , , ,

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

221 comments

+ add your own
1:16PM PDT on Aug 31, 2013

According to book, 'Mining the Sky', NEO's mass exceeds earth for new homes. As the sun dies, if we are still around, we must leave earth for outer planet's moons.

1:05PM PDT on Aug 31, 2013

I've made some Mathematical models - spreadsheets, i. e. number tables showing the
end of humanity... the population disappearance tables. They show population climbs, sometimes for centuries, then WHAM! Humans go 'poof', gone, relatively 'instantly', compared to many decades or centuries.

Economic term: ceteris parabus.

The multiple misanthropic comments here, taken to an extreme, say massive depopulation is good:

Bosnia, Rwanda,
HIV,
Cambodia with Pol Pot.
WW II
Stalin's Ukraine
Spanish Flu
WW I
Armenia
Plague of Middle Ages.

All caused massive depopulation. True, wages after the plague and standard of living increases according to historians.

8:53AM PDT on Aug 23, 2013

For more than 250 years Malthus is wrong!

8:31AM PDT on Aug 23, 2013

Industrialization causes gals say, "I ain't having kids. They cost too much." - being responsible. Then may say, "... after I'm..." (college, have a good job, etc. i. e. WAIT) The problem is fertility drops and medical risks increase for both mom and baby - disabled and non productive (risk).

Media reported: 50% births... OOPS! 45% MEDICAID.
If births 'responsible,' then?

IDIOCRACY movie is pathetic prophetic. But then, the flaw is gals (not go to college) may B smart birth smart babies.

I'm shocked by the cynicism and downright Malthusian misanthropic comments.
The Malthusian views here see trash, sewerage, exhaling carbon dioxide, criminals, violence, mouthes to feed.
I'm optimistic and see creativity, beauty, minds and love.

China future will be a lot of old people dying slowly and painfully with no medical caretakers.

8:20AM PDT on Aug 23, 2013

My take is this: increasing industrialization d3P/dt3 0 and even if dP/dt>>0 then it goes

8:15AM PDT on Aug 23, 2013

THE POINT: Population Collapse and Extinction By Choice - childless.
I made an economic mathematical model, showing 4 Billion population collapse in 75 years to zero (2213 - 2288).

7:39AM PDT on Aug 23, 2013

I find this a balanced article intimating for and against arguments. It didn't say much. My take is this: increasing industrialization d3P/dt3 0 and even if dP/dt>>0 then it goes

7:50AM PDT on May 16, 2013

TO KATHY P.:
I absolutely agree with you. Also, there are not enough businesses on this planet that can hire as many people as we now have, much less the millions being born. What are people thinking, if they are thinking at all !!! Wanting more than one child is nice, but not nice for the children's future.

Remember some of the SF movies? We had to find another world to live on because Earth became so horrendously populated. And dirty. And living in poverty. And many are sick. And crime infested. And deteriorated.
Need I continue?

1:09PM PDT on May 15, 2013

the world has plenty of kids. Lets focus on feeding and taking care of the ones who are already here?

5:22PM PST on Mar 7, 2013

Absolutely ridiculous...

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

Nice words-"zero tolerance"! But when has that ever really been true, and even more so in war and when…

Asking the UN for help is like inviting a fox to guard chickens; it is just the international PR firm…

meet our writers

Beth Buczynski Beth is a freelance writer and editor living in the Rocky Mountain West. So far, Beth has lived in... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Animal Welfare

Causes Canada

Causes UK

Children

Civil Rights

Education

Endangered Wildlife

Environment & Wildlife

Global Development

Global Warming

Health Policy

Human Rights

LGBT rights

Politics

Real Food

Trailblazers For Good

Women's Rights




Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.