64
The global fertility crisis: are fewer babies a good or a bad thing? Experts are divided
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
64 points (94.4% liked)
World News
32321 readers
869 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's bad for the 1% and good for everyone else including wildlife, nature and the planet.
as I see both fewer and more is bad. more is bad because of overpopulation, but fewer is also bad because of how the pension system works at most places
If those pension investments come crashing down, the government will just have to roll out a new pension scheme not tied to money. E.g. mandatory social duty where all young and able people work in rotas to take care of 1 to 2 elderly people per month.
that sounds interesting, but in this idea would those people have to pay for the expenses of the eldely? in my understanding the problem is not that the elderly wouldn't be able to take care for themselves generally, but that they wouldn't be able to pay for things they need or want.
When i'm 90, wheel me out to the orchard and I'll watch the chickens. If you give me a stick i'll wave it to scare the parrots off the apples.
Grandad, for the last time - those aren't parrots, they're people, and that's not a stick you're holding it's a rifle
When I'm 90 give me a ton of heroin and I will put myself in a dumpster before administering an intentional overdose.
If you raise a family they can take care of you when you get old.
No thanks.