[risyGreeple]

Which is better, having a reduction in your standard of living and keeping your ethnicity alive or keeping your standard of living and giving your country and ethnicity away?

When you say "having a reduction in your standard of living", for most of people means to live in poverty... and then giving birth their babies in a world of poverty. Without food for feeding them, without a shelter for offering them. Can some people afford it? I agree. But it's not the case of a lot of other ones.

I repeat again I would like to have a baby. Firstly, because it would be the prettiest thing in my life. Secondly, "for my ethnicity". BUT I CANNOT!

[k1ePRlda]

There are many reasons: incompatibility work-familiar life, social engineering designed to destroy the family, widespread use of contraceptives, hedonistic society, times in which you do not need to have children so they can help you in work...and because this is very difficult to tackle the problem, it is a cultural, social and economic issue. Countries with different cultures, economies, religions and even different races have it.

[hablyShappY]

Poor nations often have more children than rich nations.

So I understand why people is dying of hunger and diseases in Ethiopia...

[myspacepro]

When you say "having a reduction in your standard of living", for most of people means to live in poverty... and then giving birth their babies in a world of poverty. Without food for feeding them, without a shelter for offering them. Can some people afford it? I agree. But it's not the case of a lot of other ones

People in India have been doing it forever. We can too, we just have to change our mentality and expectations of life.

[cookiemonster]

And we can also finally - in case there are any ignorant assholes here who believe whatever toothfairy says - debunk the idea that "Europe needs immigration for higher birthrates", since when we look at the table in WG's initial post, we see that the countries who have many immigrants nowadays had higher birthrates decades ago when the country was more homogenous and the immigration of non-europeans in some of those countries had barely started.

the problem is shrinking old population = big trouble for socialist economies...... you better start having lots of children or who's gonna pay for your retirement check?

[NETvoyne]

People in India have been doing it forever. We can too, we just have to change our mentality and expectations of life.

But I don't want my supposed child to live like the average Indian...

[Stacypettlerr]

So I understand why people is dying of hunger and diseases in Ethiopia...

Not just that… richer families in a first world nation also have less children than poor families in the same nation. So wealth generally seems to inhibit large family sizes. What are possible reasons/explanations for this?

[DavidShreder]

the problem is shrinking old population = big trouble for socialist economies...... you better start having lots of children or who's gonna pay for your retirement check?

Those who want immigrants in Europe are capitalists and not socialists.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?t=34558

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.

[Catieliecutty]

But I don't want my supposed child to live like the average Indian...

Well, you can't have your cake and eat it too. It has to be one way or the other. Eventually lose your people or change your lifestyle.

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:07 ----------

Those who want immigrants in Europe are capitalists and not socialists.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?t=34558

It is the socialistic promises of governments and failures of centrally planned economies in the West that require mass immigration. If people had no problem working until they died and didn't care if they lost their entitlements, immigration would not be required on a mass scale.

[PapsEdisa]

the problem is shrinking old population = big trouble for socialist economies...... you better start having lots of children or who's gonna pay for your retirement check?

less babies born = less elderly people, you see?

Higher birthrates (slightly) in Europe is necessarly for the countries to keep themselves alive or to keep the majority ethnic-population a majority.

That "we need more children to pay for our elderly"?..where the logic there? These children will also become old.

The "problem" is though that today's elderly live longer than they ever have done.

In in e.g my country the policy and general moral is to keep older and sick people alive forever, which ofcourse is a good thing IMO (I don't facny death Euthanasia except in extreme cases.

[saruxanset]

less babies born = less elderly people, you see?

Higher birthrates (slightly) in Europe is necessarly for the countries to keep themselves alive or to keep the majority ethnic-population a majority.

That "we need more children to pay for our elderly"?..where the logic there? These children will also become old.

The "problem" is though that today's elderly live longer than they ever have done.

In in e.g my country the policy and general moral is to keep older and sick people alive forever, which ofcourse is a good thing IMO (I don't facny death Euthanasia except in extreme cases.

yes but dont ignore that the elder need money to live and access to medical services, who's gonna pay for all that if there is 1 child per 10 elders? I dont think you need to let gazillion arabs in order to sustain your population but an economy needs a worker population who can consume, pay taxes, move the economy.... if every is old then who will work, who will pay taxes, who will stimulate the economy by consuming?

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:15 ----------

Those who want immigrants in Europe are capitalists and not socialists.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?t=34558

Actually both want immigrants

the ones who dont want immigrants is the right wingers...

socialists are known in europe for giving out benefits to just about anyone who passes by!!!!

[Chito]

Not just that… richer families in a first world nation also have less children than poor families in the same nation. So wealth generally seems to inhibit large family sizes. What are possible reasons/explanations for this?

Interestingly a few centuries ago was exactly the opposite. Rich families had higher reproductive success than the poor because their children were more likely to survive.

[QbCp7LaZ]

This is a VERY INTERESTING DOCUMENTARY, every single person should watch it.... the world is in for a SERIOUS ONE.... the huge bulk of the world's population is middle aged now, in 25 years a lot of the world's population will start collapsing especially in europe, creating a huge burden on young workers and tax payers.....

it's been proven that shrinking countries = collapsing economies.

[attackDoold]

Interestingly a few centuries ago was exactly the opposite. Rich families had higher reproductive success than the poor because their children were more likely to survive.

Do you know which factors caused this to change?

To me it seems 'Morale' is important in society & culture. A depressed people may not reproduce as much as a 'happy' nation. And so there is a morale element to population growth or decay. Maybe Europeans are depressed…? They did suffer very much in Century XX, WWII and the Cold War.

Perhaps you Native Europeans are still too depressed to reproduce?

[bahrain41]

No need. what you need to is to have a full stop on immigration and have voluntary repartition for 1st and 2nd generation immigrants, and give out 50,000 to each family. plus automatic deportation of non-native criminals.

[JeremyBalll]

Do you know which factors caused this to change?

To me it seems 'Morale' is important in society & culture. A depressed people may not reproduce as much as a 'happy' nation. And so there is a morale element to population growth or decay. Maybe Europeans are depressed…? They did suffer very much in Century XX, WWII and the Cold War.

Perhaps you Native Europeans are still too depressed to reproduce?

you want me to tell you what's causing this?

rampant feminism in the western world, notice how many western women cant cook, lack motherly skills, dont want children but a career, many have turned into total man haters and gold diggers are actually considered "cool"

the US for example in the 50's had a very healthy birth rate (today's baby boomers) and is due to the fact that 50's america was a type of place where momma stay home raising children and being a mommy to her 3 or 4 children while daddy provided.

once society moves away from that model, which has actually kept the population going for thousands of years, once the so called modern western ideals set in a society it's when birth rates become catastrophic because suddenly having a car, a great job and a big house is more important than creating a family..... modern western values are not compatible with traditional family roles, and unfrotunately for the west, it;s those traditional roles the ones that usually keep societies healthy with plentiful values and going demographically speaking.

europe is dying out..... and when you look around, european women ages 18 to 25 are too busy studying to find a good job and compete with men in the job market.... and women 25 to 40 are too busy having careers to even bother with a family.

[kuklame]

That "we need more children to pay for our elderly"?..where the logic there? These children will also become old.

I posted this months ago, but I'll quote it here since it applies:

You have to have growth, unless you can increase productivity to replace growth, which requires innovation and is not always possible or may take time to achieve. Otherwise, you get an economic imbalance and a recession, and people don't like those.

ΔGDP = ΔPopulation + ΔProductivity

So, if you are a debtor nation with a declining population and your economic sustainability is tied to your GDP, as most Western nations are, you either have to increase your productivity or increase your population.

It doesn't seem possible to increase productivity enough to offset the decline of demographics in the West without some new innovation that revolutionizes the way we produce wealth, so the only solution is...immigration.

Japan will one day experience what it is like to have a declining population and stagnant levels of production. It won't be pretty either. John Mauldin likes to refer to them as "a bug in search of a windshield".

[LongaDonga]

you want me to tell you what's causing this?

rampant feminism in the western world, notice how many western women cant cook, lack motherly skills, dont want children but a career, many have turned into total man haters and gold diggers are actually considered "cool"

the US for example in the 50's had a very healthy birth rate (today's baby boomers) and is due to the fact that 50's america was a type of place where momma stay home raising children and being a mommy to her 3 or 4 children while daddy provided.

once society moves away from that model, which has actually kept the population going for thousands of years, once the so called modern western ideals set in a society it's when birth rates become catastrophic because suddenly having a car, a great job and a big house is more important than creating a family..... modern western values are not compatible with traditional family roles, and unfrotunately for the west, it;s those traditional roles the ones that usually keep societies healthy with plentiful values and going demographically speaking.

Are you a female? You have no clue of what you're saying.

[unsamiSlini]

Are you a female? You have no clue of what you're saying.

yes i am a female but i am not a feminist man hating psycho....

I value that I am married and I left my career to dedicate myself to the greatest job in the world.... baking cup cakes for my children and being a loving mommy.

I also had a good job, a nice car, even planned on buying a nice house, but for what? to be alone???? no I met my husband, married him and left my professional life to dedicate myself to my family.

and yes I had plenty of women criticizing me and putting me down because of my decision..... funny enough the ones who are shocked about my decision of leaving my career to dedicate myself to a family and have children, are european women..... i even had one belgian lady tell me once... (you just brought the feminist movement back by a couple of decades when you decided to become a maid for your hubby like if you were living in the 50's)

[jadabaad]

nvm, please delete.