We are going to really need to ramp up immigration soon...

[torbee]

U.S. Population Growth, an Economic Driver, Grinds to a Halt​

Covid-19 pandemic compounds years of birth-rate decline, puts America’s demographic health at risk​

By
Janet Adamy
and
Anthony DeBarros
July 25, 2021 12:49 pm ET

America’s weak population growth, already held back by a decadelong fertility slump, is dropping closer to zero because of the Covid-19 pandemic.
In half of all states last year, more people died than were born, up from five states in 2019. Early estimates show the total U.S. population grew 0.35% for the year ended July 1, 2020, the lowest ever documented, and growth is expected to remain near flat this year.
Some demographers cite an outside chance the population could shrink for the first time on record. Population growth is an important influence on the size of the labor market and a country’s fiscal and economic strength.


One bad year doesn’t automatically spell trouble for future U.S. demographic health. What concerns demographers is that in the past, when a weak economy drove down births, it was often a temporary phenomenon that reversed once the economy bounced back.

Yet after births peaked in 2007, they never rebounded from the nearly two-year recession that followed, even though Americans enjoyed a subsequent decade of economic growth.
With the birthrate already drifting down, the nudge from the pandemic could result in what amounts to a scar on population growth, researchers say, which could be deeper than those left by historic periods of economic turmoil, such as the Great Depression and the stagnation and inflation of the 1970s, because it is underpinned by a shift toward lower fertility.

“The economy of the developed world for the last two centuries now has been built on demographic expansion,” said Richard Jackson, president of the Global Aging Institute, a nonprofit research and education group. “We no longer have this long-term economic and geopolitical advantage.”

U.S. Population Growth, an Economic Driver, Grinds to a Halt

Because the birthrate already was moving down, the push from the pandemic could result in what amounts to a scar on population growth, possibly deeper than those left by historic periods of economic turmoil such as the Great Depression.

www.wsj.com

 

[Titanhawk2]

U.S. Population Growth, an Economic Driver, Grinds to a Halt​

Covid-19 pandemic compounds years of birth-rate decline, puts America’s demographic health at risk​

By
Janet Adamy
and
Anthony DeBarros
July 25, 2021 12:49 pm ET

America’s weak population growth, already held back by a decadelong fertility slump, is dropping closer to zero because of the Covid-19 pandemic.
In half of all states last year, more people died than were born, up from five states in 2019. Early estimates show the total U.S. population grew 0.35% for the year ended July 1, 2020, the lowest ever documented, and growth is expected to remain near flat this year.
Some demographers cite an outside chance the population could shrink for the first time on record. Population growth is an important influence on the size of the labor market and a country’s fiscal and economic strength.


One bad year doesn’t automatically spell trouble for future U.S. demographic health. What concerns demographers is that in the past, when a weak economy drove down births, it was often a temporary phenomenon that reversed once the economy bounced back.

Yet after births peaked in 2007, they never rebounded from the nearly two-year recession that followed, even though Americans enjoyed a subsequent decade of economic growth.
With the birthrate already drifting down, the nudge from the pandemic could result in what amounts to a scar on population growth, researchers say, which could be deeper than those left by historic periods of economic turmoil, such as the Great Depression and the stagnation and inflation of the 1970s, because it is underpinned by a shift toward lower fertility.

“The economy of the developed world for the last two centuries now has been built on demographic expansion,” said Richard Jackson, president of the Global Aging Institute, a nonprofit research and education group. “We no longer have this long-term economic and geopolitical advantage.”

U.S. Population Growth, an Economic Driver, Grinds to a Halt

Because the birthrate already was moving down, the push from the pandemic could result in what amounts to a scar on population growth, possibly deeper than those left by historic periods of economic turmoil such as the Great Depression.

www.wsj.com

Yeah, in 2039 when we need a bunch of high school grads to enter the work force or colleges

 

[swagsurfer02]

I would start with making sure the unemployed citizens have jobs, veterans are taken care of then start allowing legal immigration at higher rates.

 

[hydro2.0]

The path to legal immigration seems only attainable to those whom have the means. Antidotal but my cousins husband has been going through the immigration process for the last three years. He was sponsored by the wife’s parents - who it sounds like have a legal obligation if things went south. Just seems like the process is too long and you needs to have monies

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Maybe people should just start having more children.

I've done my duty to grow the population.

And honestly "overpopulation" should not be mentioned on this board again.

 

[Rudolph]

Or we could start to really develop effective de-growth policies. This is the issue with consumerist capitalism — that it requires constant growth or it collapses. We should be working towards tweaking things such that constant growth isn't necessary.

Here is a solid, quick intro read on degrowth: https://www.plutobooks.com/blog/the-four-principles-of-degrowth/

 

[TarponSpringsNole]

The path to legal immigration seems only attainable to those whom have the means. Antidotal but my cousins husband has been going through the immigration process for the last three years. He was sponsored by the wife’s parents - who it sounds like have a legal obligation if things went south. Just seems like the process is too long and you needs to have monies

Nice wob

 

[torbee]

Yeah, in 2039 when we need a bunch of high school grads to enter the work force or colleges

As usual, you are wrong:

Historically, nearly half of the country’s economic growth has been driven by the expansion of the working-age population, including immigrants, said Neil Howe, an economist, demographer and managing director at Hedgeye Risk Management, an investor-oriented research company. Recent federal-budget projections suggest the potential labor-force growth rate will hover just above zero for years to come, down from a range of 2.5% starting in the mid-1970s to 0.5% from 2008 through last year.

The shifts will make the U.S. more reliant on immigration to grow the workforce, economists say, although that faces its own pressures.

Sectors such as healthcare, engineering and information technology will struggle to replace senior management as millions of baby boomers retire.

Over time, a lower fertility rate will lead to a higher ratio of retired beneficiaries to taxpaying workers, which is expected to raise the cost of Social Security and Medicare.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Or we could start to really develop effective de-growth policies. This is the issue with consumerist capitalism — that it requires constant growth or it collapses. We should be working towards tweaking things such that constant growth isn't necessary.

Here is a solid, quick intro read on degrowth: https://www.plutobooks.com/blog/the-four-principles-of-degrowth/

Ok but when exactly do you suggest we start stabilizing the population and how? The de-growth can not continue forever.

At this point we would do well to break even over the long run.

 

[Rudolph]

Ok but when exactly do you suggest we start stabilizing the population and how? The de-growth can not continue forever.

At this point we would do well to break even over the long run.

Not sure you've taken the time to understand degrowth.

 

[LuteHawk]

The Ponzi Scheme known as Social Security needs more
workers who are paying taxes. This will enable the retired
workers to get their monthly checks. This is how bad the
system works. Hopefully, there are not too many retirees
whose only source of income is Social Security.

 

[hydro2.0]

Nice wob

Lol of course I misspelled “anecdotal” and phone “corrected” me.

I’m leaving it

 

[Moral]

The Ponzi Scheme known as Social Security needs more
workers who are paying taxes. This will enable the retired
workers to get their monthly checks. This is how bad the
system works. Hopefully, there are not too many retirees
whose only source of income is Social Security.

Remove the cap and the issue is solved.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Not sure you've taken the time to understand degrowth.

Sounds pretty theoretical. Anyone actually tried this stuff successfully on a large economy?

 

[h-hawk]

Should limit immigration to farm workers and the smart ones who can help advance our industries.

 

[Rudolph]

Sounds pretty theoretical. Anyone actually tried this stuff successfully on a large economy?

We're trying this other thing pretty unsuccessfully right now. But societies living in sufficiency have and do exist. We tend to think of them as primitive. I hesitate to even enter this into the discussion, because it will serve to block people from further consideration.

If we limit ourselves to considering what has been tried "successfully" on a large economy then we might as well just give up. I implore you to really think about where your mind is going with this type of question.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

We're trying this other thing pretty unsuccessfully right now. But societies living in sufficiency have and do exist. We tend to think of them as primitive. I hesitate to even enter this into the discussion, because it will serve to block people from further consideration.

If we limit ourselves to considering what has been tried "successfully" on a large economy then we might as well just give up. I implore you to really think about where your mind is going with this type of question.

I'm suggesting that we need at the very least to maintain a stable population.

 

[QChawks]

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

9.5 million files for unemployment. People need to work. Then we need to assess how many we immigrants allow each year. I too think the number likely needs to be increased, but it’s more complicated than just saying we need more. If there ever was a time to change the number, it’s in the next 3.5 years. I doubt it happens under Republican leadership.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

9.5 million filed for unemployment in June. People need to go to work. Then we need to assess how many we immigrants allow each year. I too think the number likely needs to be increased, but it’s more complicated than just saying we need more. If there ever was a time to change the number, it’s in the next 3.5 years. I doubt it happens under Republican leadership.

 

[Rudolph]

I'm suggesting that we need at the very least to maintain a stable population.

Based on what? A hunch? What I’m talking about is decoupling population from this idea of what is needed to sustain the economy (capitalism) as we know it.

Basically I am suggesting that there are alternatives. The questions we could also be asking: 1) should we sustain this type of economy? 2) is this type of economy, ultimately, even truly sustainable?

 

[Rudolph]

Another good, quick read on degrowth: https://theconversation.com/life-in-a-degrowth-economy-and-why-you-might-actually-enjoy-it-32224

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

Remove the cap and the issue is solved.

Commmon Morel, you better than this. Who wants to pay more money into a retirement plan than they will ever get out? If so, let's be honest and just raise their regular tax rate to subsidize those who have paid less in than will be drawing out...

 

[bladel]

The Ponzi Scheme known as Social Security needs more
workers who are paying taxes. This will enable the retired
workers to get their monthly checks. This is how bad the
system works. Hopefully, there are not too many retirees
whose only source of income is Social Security.

It's not just Social Security or government programs, just about every element of market-based economies are predicated on growth of the market, either in purchasing power (stagnate for a while now) or increased population. I think I read that current growth trends are below the UN's "low growth" model.

If the US and China both follow Europe and Japan over the population cliff, what's next? Deflation? Throw out the economics textbooks.

On the plus side, the climate situation should benefit from lower population.

 

[BioHawk]

Maybe people should just start having more children.

I've done my duty to grow the population.

And honestly "overpopulation" should not be mentioned on this board again.

It's tough to have kids when you are burried in student loan debt, can't afford a mortgage for a new home, and have to take a significant pay cut to take care of your family. Many millenials and Gen Zers are just kind of skipping the whole kids thing.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

It's tough to have kids when you are burried in student loan debt, can't afford a mortgage for a new home, and have to take a significant pay cut to take care of your family. Many millenials and Gen Zers are just kind of skipping the whole kids thing.

Do you really think I'm exempt from that??

 

[BioHawk]

Do you really think I'm exempt from that??

Why would you think that's what I was implying? And for the record, I don't have a friggin clue what your personal situation is.

 

[Huey Grey]

It's tough to have kids when you are burried in student loan debt, can't afford a mortgage for a new home, and have to take a significant pay cut to take care of your family. Many millenials and Gen Zers are just kind of skipping the whole kids thing.

Covid probably won't help. I'm guessing birth rates have dropped since the start of the pandemic. Honestly I am encouraged by all of this. It'll wreak havoc economically but we need way less humans.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Why would you think that's what I was implying? And for the record, I don't have a friggin clue what your personal situation is.

I'm saying I'm living that life right now and children should be more of a priority. For both people and for our government.

I'm living in a 900 square foot home that has 5 people in it. My wife stays at home with the kids mostly now due to COVID but previously because child care was too expensive. On top of that 2 of our children are autistic and require several therapy appointments a week (which we are mostly doing online). I'm supporting 5 people on just my wages alone. Plus a student loan debt when they start billing me for that again (It paused due to COVID)

The car I drive to work was manufactured in 1998.

If it was just the two of us we would be in a nicer and bigger home with much nicer cars and more stuff. But children were our priority. They should be for others.

 

[seminole97]

Or we could start to really develop effective de-growth policies. This is the issue with consumerist capitalism — that it requires constant growth or it collapses. We should be working towards tweaking things such that constant growth isn't necessary.

Here is a solid, quick intro read on degrowth: https://www.plutobooks.com/blog/the-four-principles-of-degrowth/

The root of economic growth is savings, which allow for more capital investment, which allows for more productivity. Higher productivity is what makes us wealthier. There is no reason to anticipate an end to productivity increases, unless you think there is really nothing new to be learned in the universe.

Adding people to increase production also adds the people you now have to produce more for, so that's not the best way to achieve economic growth. It doesn't even guarantee growth.

 

[BioHawk]

I'm saying I'm living that life right now and children should be more of a priority. For both people and for our government.

I'm living in a 900 square foot home that has 5 people in it. My wife stays at home with the kids mostly now due to COVID but previously because child care was too expensive. On top of that 2 of our children are autistic and require several therapy appointments a week (which we are mostly doing online). I'm supporting 5 people on just my wages alone. Plus a student loan debt when they start billing me for that again (It paused due to COVID)

The car I drive to work was manufactured in 1998.

If it was just the two of us we would be in a nicer and bigger home with much nicer cars and more stuff. But children were our priority. They should be for others.

You should be proud of the sacrifices you have made to make this work. However, from articles I have read or watched on the topic, there are significant numbers of people who don't want to do what you are doing. It might be helpful if there were preventable stressors, like paid family leave and other things to help people out, but I suspect that if those things existed many of those same people would find other reasons to not have kids.

 

[dirtypool]

I'm saying I'm living that life right now and children should be more of a priority. For both people and for our government.

I'm living in a 900 square foot home that has 5 people in it. My wife stays at home with the kids mostly now due to COVID but previously because child care was too expensive. On top of that 2 of our children are autistic and require several therapy appointments a week (which we are mostly doing online). I'm supporting 5 people on just my wages alone. Plus a student loan debt when they start billing me for that again (It paused due to COVID)

The car I drive to work was manufactured in 1998.

If it was just the two of us we would be in a nicer and bigger home with much nicer cars and more stuff. But children were our priority. They should be for others.

Id love to know your salary range to think so highly of yourself to be telling people to keep squirting out kids.

if you are doing it on a retail clerk, fast food worker or any waiter salary i may take you a little more serious on this comment

Otherwise you just come off as sounding priviledged

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Id love to know your salary range to think so highly of yourself to be telling people to keep squirting out kids.

if you are doing it on a retail clerk, fast food worker or any waiter salary i may take you a little more serious on this comment

Otherwise you just come off as sounding priviledged

My salary range is not that low but it isn't exactly high either. Slightly higher than the median personal income in the US but significantly smaller than the median household income.

And I'm not asking people to keep squirting out kids either. I'm saying most people who earn a decent wage should be having 2 or 3 children at least to replace themselves and maybe if they can make up for early deaths and all the people who don't have children.

 

[dirtypool]

My salary range is not that low but it isn't exactly high either. Slightly higher than the median personal income in the US but significantly smaller than the median household income.

And I'm not asking people to keep squirting out kids either. I'm saying most people who earn a decent wage should be having 2 or 3 children at least to replace themselves and maybe if they can make up for early deaths and all the people who don't have children.

Whats a decent wage to you?

 

[RonaldMexico]

The path to legal immigration seems only attainable to those whom have the means. Antidotal but my cousins husband has been going through the immigration process for the last three years. He was sponsored by the wife’s parents - who it sounds like have a legal obligation if things went south. Just seems like the process is too long and you needs to have monies

WOB?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Whats a decent wage to you?

Depends on where you live but if you can afford to have children you should do so. Even if it means living at a much lower means than you would like.

 

[seminole97]

It's not just Social Security or government programs, just about every element of market-based economies are predicated on growth of the market, either in purchasing power (stagnate for a while now) or increased population. I think I read that current growth trends are below the UN's "low growth" model.

The potential growth of wealth, which is a subjective appreciation of value, is unlimited.

Take the basic elements that make up your computer. Imagine breaking your computer down into various elemental piles of it's components (copper, aluminum, etc) and seeing those in just little piles of pure grit.
I doubt you'd find the copper dust, aluminum and other materials very valuable at all. Probably would give someone five dollars for all of it.
But if you apply decades (and really centuries) of man's accrued knowledge to those elements they can be constructed together in a way that people find much, much more valuable. You might even pay $1000 for those same elements, properly put together by the right minds.
That's the fount of wealth. Ask someone 200 years ago to predict what could be made in the year 2021 with those same piles of grit. What would he tell you? Anything useful? Would the limits of his creativity proscribe the limits of humanity evermore?
I don't believe so.

P.S. Imagine trying to describe software to someone from 200 years ago, and how valuable the skill of coding is, and what 'resources' are consumed in creating more of it.

If the US and China both follow Europe and Japan over the population cliff, what's next? Deflation? Throw out the economics textbooks.

On the plus side, the climate situation should benefit from lower population.

Deflation is a monetary phenomena, not a population based one.
Supply and demand will still be in effect even as the population shrinks.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

You should be proud of the sacrifices you have made to make this work. However, from articles I have read or watched on the topic, there are significant numbers of people who don't want to do what you are doing. It might be helpful if there were preventable stressors, like paid family leave and other things to help people out, but I suspect that if those things existed many of those same people would find other reasons to not have kids.

That is the problem. Don't get me wrong there should be those things to help people have kids.

But the main problem is that children are no longer a cultural priority.

And when we don't make the next generation a cultural priority we destroy ourselves.

 

[BioHawk]

That is the problem. Don't get me wrong there should be those things to help people have kids.

But the main problem is that children are no longer a cultural priority.

And when we don't make the next generation a cultural priority we destroy ourselves.

That's not just America. It's a trait of all industrialized countries with increased women's rights. As it turns out, many of them would like to have jobs and careers too and not be stuck home raising the family. It's not just the US that's looking at demographic issues in the future. One positive is the world population is expected to start shrinking around 2050 as a result. But there will be issues with it.

 

[Rudolph]

The root of economic growth is savings, which allow for more capital investment, which allows for more productivity. Higher productivity is what makes us wealthier. There is no reason to anticipate an end to productivity increases, unless you think there is really nothing new to be learned in the universe.

Adding people to increase production also adds the people you now have to produce more for, so that's not the best way to achieve economic growth. It doesn't even guarantee growth.

Lol.