this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
221 points (97.8% liked)

World News

47515 readers
2319 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Namrata Nangia and her husband have been toying with the idea of having another child since their five-year-old daughter was born.

But it always comes back to one question: 'Can we afford it?'

She lives in Mumbai and works in pharmaceuticals, her husband works at a tyre company. But the costs of having one child are already overwhelming - school fees, the school bus, swimming lessons, even going to the GP is expensive.

It was different when Namrata was growing up. "We just used to go to school, nothing extracurricular, but now you have to send your kid to swimming, you have to send them to drawing, you have to see what else they can do."

According to a new report by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN agency for reproductive rights, Namrata's situation is becoming a global norm.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Population increase is only important to employers.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's important to everyone, including you. As the population ages, and fewer young people move into the economy, the tax base shrinks. Who is going to pay for government?

Also, employers will have to compete for the remaining workers, raising wages. That's good to a point, and then everything becomes too expensive, now you're in a depression. It's an economic death spiral.

Taxing the rich only works to a point. Their wealth is mostly in the global stock markets, which will eventually crash. As well, the value of those publicly traded companies will nosedive as fewer and fewer workers are available to produce the goods and services.

We're facing the global equivalent of the fall of Rome. Nation states will splinter into smaller and smaller, self-dependent groups and the riches we enjoy today will be memories of a better time. If you want a contemporary version of that, look at China restricting rare earths. That's impacting about every other country on Earth. Now imagine international trade utterly collapsing.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Sure but you can't have an endless increase in population. Whatever the problems of declining or stabilizing the population are, they need to be tackled, not ignored, yes. You can't fix them by saying just keep the pyramid scheme going.

The real problem is more like how many workers for each retired person. So there are other ways to fix that. Personally I'm down with working more years so that people don't have to have kids if they don't want to. I can't imagine forcing people to have children.

And you know what? Employers having to face a tight labor market doesn't sound like it's worse than employees having to find scarce jobs.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Never proposed that growth should continue, indeed it cannot. But depopulation is going to steamroll us in the next century and I see no way around it.

[–] Killer57@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Humanity desperately needs to move away from capitalism, if it wants any chance of survival. Either that or we install a Universal base income system.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Neither of those proposals answer the issues I brought up. But they're very good for lemmy upvotes!

[–] kazaika@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

No its important for wellfare video

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I look at long term trends where the global population peaks in a few decades then heads down all too quickly, and find it important to act to stabilize that at a level a bit below here we are now

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It will collapse because we don't regulate intake. Look at population collapse for rabbits as an example. We're overconsuming and need to regulate now.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The problem is we’re over-consuming now, over-populating now, but will feel the effects of lower birth rates in 50+ years. There’s extremely delayed feedback on population trends, but that doesn’t make it untrue.

Even conservatives sometime start from a point of truth. The problem is their solution is to turn back rights for women, opportunities for women. Technically correct, if you have no morals or empathy.

For the rest of us concerned about this possibility, society needs to change a lot to remove obstacles from people who do choose to have children. And this would take a couple generations to take effect so we need to start now, to stabilize the dropping population in 50-100 years