If the declining birth rate doesn't fit the economic model, and the state is unable to reverse the declining birth rate, and the declining birth rate is the aggregate of millions of micro decisions that Starmer correctly identifies is not his place to tell people what to do, then the only solution left within the power of the state is to change the economic model.
Young mothers have been demonised and blamed for all the ills of society for a long time now. Is any real wonder many don't want to subject themselves to that? I certainly didn't. There are far too many people anyway. A diminishing population will benefit other species that call this planet home in this era of diminishing resources and declining habitats. The current economic model of growth growth growth is not sustainable.
Can someone explain to me how fears about diminishing birthrates stack up against the size of the world population now and it's continuing growth and the finite resources on the planet. This is a genuine question and not trying to be smart or clever. I thought resource depletion was a serious issue and all governments seek is growth including now in population. I do not u derstsbd how this can be sustainable.
There are more than enough humans plaguing the planet! Enough of this declining population crisis nonsense. So people might suffer economically and socially, tough. If we don't cut our own number drastically nature will do it for us with far less compassion. Why anyone would want to bring life into this hellish system beats me anyway. reproduction is child abuse in its most extreme form.
An unregulated housing market is a major cause of our birth rate decline. Paying people to have more children is likely to make this worse. We need to build more affordable homes and change laws so that big builders can’t wriggle out of providing them. In addition, landlord profits should be taxed at a premium rate to make owning multiple homes financially less attractive. Finally, overseas investors should be prevented from buying up new homes, and those already bought given the choice or resale or rent out.
The problem with "affordable" (ie below market price) housing is that the generosity of taxpayers is a far weaker force than the greed of developers, especially when the lion's share of the taxes are paid by people who already own homes.
Concern about falling birth rates is misplaced and damaging. There are already far too many humans for the planet to sustainably support, so we should be delighted when population growth falls.
The idea that as the world's population ages we must have more young people to support the elderly is crazily short-sighted - every generation will have to be bigger, which is clearly unsustainable (and our politicians must know this, so their promotion of it is disingenuous at best). We have already decimated the natural world - there will be nothing left if we continue as we are.
It is time to acknowledge that capitalism and consumerism - at least in their current unmoderated forms - are not only exploitative of both humans and the planet's resources but are ultimately unsustainable.
Rather then project forward the current flawed financial and political power structures to which we are all subject, and talking about tweaking them while turning a blind eye to the fact of their unsustainability, humanity needs to be thinking about how to reorganise society to that there can be a humane and sustainable future for all - including the other species with which we share the planet and on which we depend.
Women want different things these days so unless you make it worthwhile for parents from an economic basis your not going to shift the dial. If older women still go on to raise a family in the long run the birth rate should recover surely.
If the declining birth rate doesn't fit the economic model, and the state is unable to reverse the declining birth rate, and the declining birth rate is the aggregate of millions of micro decisions that Starmer correctly identifies is not his place to tell people what to do, then the only solution left within the power of the state is to change the economic model.
Young mothers have been demonised and blamed for all the ills of society for a long time now. Is any real wonder many don't want to subject themselves to that? I certainly didn't. There are far too many people anyway. A diminishing population will benefit other species that call this planet home in this era of diminishing resources and declining habitats. The current economic model of growth growth growth is not sustainable.
Can someone explain to me how fears about diminishing birthrates stack up against the size of the world population now and it's continuing growth and the finite resources on the planet. This is a genuine question and not trying to be smart or clever. I thought resource depletion was a serious issue and all governments seek is growth including now in population. I do not u derstsbd how this can be sustainable.
There are more than enough humans plaguing the planet! Enough of this declining population crisis nonsense. So people might suffer economically and socially, tough. If we don't cut our own number drastically nature will do it for us with far less compassion. Why anyone would want to bring life into this hellish system beats me anyway. reproduction is child abuse in its most extreme form.
An unregulated housing market is a major cause of our birth rate decline. Paying people to have more children is likely to make this worse. We need to build more affordable homes and change laws so that big builders can’t wriggle out of providing them. In addition, landlord profits should be taxed at a premium rate to make owning multiple homes financially less attractive. Finally, overseas investors should be prevented from buying up new homes, and those already bought given the choice or resale or rent out.
The problem with "affordable" (ie below market price) housing is that the generosity of taxpayers is a far weaker force than the greed of developers, especially when the lion's share of the taxes are paid by people who already own homes.
Concern about falling birth rates is misplaced and damaging. There are already far too many humans for the planet to sustainably support, so we should be delighted when population growth falls.
The idea that as the world's population ages we must have more young people to support the elderly is crazily short-sighted - every generation will have to be bigger, which is clearly unsustainable (and our politicians must know this, so their promotion of it is disingenuous at best). We have already decimated the natural world - there will be nothing left if we continue as we are.
It is time to acknowledge that capitalism and consumerism - at least in their current unmoderated forms - are not only exploitative of both humans and the planet's resources but are ultimately unsustainable.
Rather then project forward the current flawed financial and political power structures to which we are all subject, and talking about tweaking them while turning a blind eye to the fact of their unsustainability, humanity needs to be thinking about how to reorganise society to that there can be a humane and sustainable future for all - including the other species with which we share the planet and on which we depend.
Women want different things these days so unless you make it worthwhile for parents from an economic basis your not going to shift the dial. If older women still go on to raise a family in the long run the birth rate should recover surely.