Published: Wednesday, Feb. 6 2013 12:00 a.m. MST
I wish the Deseret News would at least cite the blatant political bias of the
authors it provides links to. Jonathan Last is with the Weekly Standard, an
admittedly conservative organization. It's clear that the DesNews is on a
real traditional family kick as of late and is grabbing whatever material it can
to support this, without providing a counterbalance. You know, like journalists
are supposed to do. Would Last's conservative stance matter if
he made a reasonable argument? No. But he doesn't. The linked WSJ article
is extremely weak, providing little compelling evidence for his assertion that
lowered fertility rates are the root of "most of our problems". Last
then provides a litany of truly bizarre and speculative solutions to the crazy
cost of childrearing, including discouraging college and improving the highways.
There are several wildly speculative false correlations in his article. He even
cites Julian Simon, a real fringe activist economist who among other things
believed that resource scarcity on earth isn't a problem because eventually
we will be able to find resources on other planets. Not exactly balanced
Tough economic times have historically done this. Duh.
This silliness has to stop, the idea that the earth has an INFINITE carrying
capacity is beyond ridiculous. The world's optimal population
may be 2 billion, or it may be 10 billion, but at some point population will
have to stop increasing. The idea that population can grow forever is the
ultimate Ponzi scheme, which may explain Utah's affinity for large
families, and Ponzi schemes!
The DN is as subtle as a sledge hammer.
From the article:"By 1973, the U.S. was below the replacement
rate, as was nearly every other Western country. Since then, the phenomenon of
fertility collapse has spread around the globe: 97% of the world's
population now lives in countries where the fertility rate is falling.Which leaves us with outsourcing our fertility. We've received a massive
influx of immigrants from south of the border since the late 1970s. Immigration
has kept America from careening over the demographic cliff. Today, there are
roughly 38 million people in the U.S. who were born elsewhere. (Two-thirds of
them are here legally.) To put that in perspective, consider that just four
million babies are born annually in the U.S.If you strip these
immigrants—and their relatively high fertility rates—from our
population profile, America suddenly looks an awful lot like continental Europe,
which has a fertility rate of 1.5., if not quite as demographically terminal as
Liberal Larry,There are other forces at work that will take care of
this. In the meantime leave the population increase up to those of us who can
reaise superior children. Our kids will help you receive your social security
and other government benefits.
It’s really hard to see how having more kids will solve the unemployment
problems, the immigration problems, the size of government problems, the
medical care problems, the morality problems, the grownup kids living in my
basement problems, the dirty air problems, etc. etc. etc.Having more
kids would of course be beneficial to religions, churches, charities and most
other business operations that feed off the labor of others. When a
rancher wants more cattle, he usually provides more food.
OTOH, a lower birth rate also reduces the number of dependents in society, thus
less need for schools and lower crime rates. These are savings that somewhat
offset the social costs of an aging population. (Still, I'm all in favor of
All the growth in consumerism we 'need' is already here, in the form
of the ballooning middle class in china and india. There's no way the
capacity of our planet to sustain infinite growth is going to go unpunished, and
we owe it to ourselves and our posterity not to make such stupid decisions.
The name of the social security system in many countries is "kids".
People produce and make jobs are an asset not liability to planet made for them.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments