First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply Is a utopian society the "great filter"? EXTENDED DISCUSSION
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/5/15

BlueOni wrote:

The declining birthrates in industrialized countries are brought about by many interacting factors, such as delayed childbirth due to greater educational access and labor force participation on the part of women, increased access to and use of contraceptive and abortion services, cultural differences concerning how many children is considered "the normal amount to have", recent economic performance, access to and affordability of leave and childcare services, and so on. To some extent giving people greater control of their reproductive futures and alternatives to reproducing does indeed feed into broader population decline.

The thing that's important to take into consideration, however, is that as automation continues to expand the need for large labor pool decreases. In a utopian society essentially every job is automated, so provided a sufficiently genetically diverse population is sustained it wouldn't matter how large or small it was anymore.


The labor market is an interesting point. It's also funny that eh decline of birth rates in industrialized nations are supposedly due to choice, (and somehow we oddly choose less children), where as in undeveloped countries its considered a necessity by culture and survival via ensuring a large enough labor support network, and low chances of survival past birth....

Regardless of the rationale the odd fact remains that we lose the impetus to have children, and, given a choice, we decide not to.
(just musing. not trying to counter your post)
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 1/5/15

serifsansserif wrote:

The labor market is an interesting point. It's also funny that eh decline of birth rates in industrialized nations are supposedly due to choice, (and somehow we oddly choose less children), where as in undeveloped countries its considered a necessity by culture and survival via ensuring a large enough labor support network, and low chances of survival past birth....

Regardless of the rationale the odd fact remains that we lose the impetus to have children, and, given a choice, we decide not to.
(just musing. not trying to counter your post)


You know, I can't blame you for assuming that. It's an assumption that makes sense given the increases in reproductive control and economic opportunities/resources coupled with the decreasing birth rates. However, Pew did a little digging on just that subject and determined that people in North America and Europe at least weren't actually expressing an intention to have fewer children. Rather, those other factors I mentioned seem to be having a stronger impact. Have a look, see what you think:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/11/birth-rates-lag-in-europe-and-the-u-s-but-the-desire-for-kids-does-not/
Posted 1/5/15 , edited 1/5/15
From what I know, colonialism hindered most chances for advancement for many.

In most case our reality is far worse from ideal. So if imperfection is to exist, perfection will be constantly changing as you said.

Try pareto principle.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/5/15

BlueOni wrote:


serifsansserif wrote:

The labor market is an interesting point. It's also funny that eh decline of birth rates in industrialized nations are supposedly due to choice, (and somehow we oddly choose less children), where as in undeveloped countries its considered a necessity by culture and survival via ensuring a large enough labor support network, and low chances of survival past birth....

Regardless of the rationale the odd fact remains that we lose the impetus to have children, and, given a choice, we decide not to.
(just musing. not trying to counter your post)


You know, I can't blame you for assuming that. It's an assumption that makes sense given the increases in reproductive control and economic opportunities/resources coupled with the decreasing birth rates. However, Pew did a little digging on just that subject and determined that people in North America and Europe at least weren't actually expressing an intention to have fewer children. Rather, those other factors I mentioned seem to be having a stronger impact. Have a look, see what you think:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/11/birth-rates-lag-in-europe-and-the-u-s-but-the-desire-for-kids-does-not/


definitely interesting. compared to lesser developed nations as well? desire seems, for the most part to be replacement rate. the disparity between want and actually have isn't THAT high, but then again, we're taking the difference between having one and two children for the most part..... The article states that they are indeed having children later due to career, BUT also older couples are happier having their ideal number as well.

blah. anyway, i would rather retract the statement based on just fuzzy data rather than not.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.