Harvard Business Publishing

i completely disagree though such statements are very common particularly among politicians and particularly from countries where young generations work for retired people.. my arguments against would be not only overpopulation which maybe has recently reached its limits, contamination etc.. and the fact that all these genetic mutations you see around yourself in a crowded street dont seem to be necessary in here.. i would also point that till now its only europe and the US who were using so much energy and contaminating so much, that our harrasive species has already overtaken lebensraum of many other gorgeaus species.. theres also new fact in this new era of justice - emerging economies will start trully to contaminate and consume energy with us.. are there enough resources?? rationalization of demographic growth is a must with this according to me.. i remember how i got scared when Tata i guess announced new car for 1.000 euros for guys from the bottom of pyramide in India.. i thought they wanted to kill/poison all of us. Moreover its the poorest who bear so many children and this makes this world always look so unjust..

Dear Ana,

I am not placing a value judgment on the declining birth rates; in fact, I agree that creating a sustainable world is a very high priority for us all, and slowing birth rates will -- eventually -- be beneficial in this regard.

The pragmatic complication is that we also, in conjuction with the declining birth rates, have rapidly lengthening life expectancies. Thus, the slow down in births will take many years -- nearly a century -- to translate into a slow down in the overall size of the population. Meanwhile, for most of this century, more and more countries will face the challenge of supporting a still-growing overall population with a shrinking number of people in the traditionally-defined workforce.

Part of the solution, of course, will be for people to work longer. However, creating environments that support older workers will require many companies to rethink both their practices and their implicit assumptions about these workers.

That's my purpose in writing this particular post, and others like it: to remind leaders that we need to move away from looking only to the young -- that we must create work environments that tap people of all ages effectively. The growth in the number of young is slowing around the world, while demand for goods and services, given long life expectancies, will continue to grow for decades to come.

Sincerely,

Tammy

I don't think your post requires any calification, Tammy. While the perspective may seem a little cold, throughout history (including before oil prices, Wall St. meltdowns, and ugly nasty industrialized enviro-bullies ;-) humans have procreated in ways that support their immediate economic needs.

Of course, as we become more educated, our flirtations with extreme overpopulation will also guide our child-bearing decisions.

One of the few factual arguments made by Ana, that the poor have more children, directly supports your point of view!

Now, there is one flaw in your position, which seems to assume an infinite supply of arable land. Families that grow their workforce to capture more crops must have access to greater planting land. I have no idea whether this is the case or not, and it probably varies by country and region. But if the supply of agrarian labor exceeds the available land to put it to use on, I think we will see birth rates down in those regions as well.

EH

Tammy,

I really like your conclusion, beside every other consideration.
I think it's one of the prettiest sentences I've ever seen that summarize with a so powerful comparison a series of events.
It requires some knowledge of the task, sure, but it contains all the messages and implications in few words.
I wish I will ever be able to communicate so effectively.

Sincerely,

Stefano Galiasso

I think these statements are not new; nature has its own automatic balancing systems that we don't have much information about those systems.
Every phenomenon that is happening in this world has its own effect, for example traditional agriculture can motivate people to have more Childs but industrial era can reverse the trend
In an industrial country ,people have different engagements and troubles that prevent them to bear more Childs, they have to work many hours a day, hire some one other to keep their children, pay more to rent bigger living spaces, provide their children with different expensive entertainment, education and necessary items

With above rationale people in industrial economies need to be more economical than traditional economies.

in traditional economies expectations of people are much lower than industrials, simply I can say you that they are thinking much about their basic needs including a simple inexpensive rural home, easy clothes, some bread or rice, in many poor countries people have access to free elementary schools and in many other they don't have, so they have one remaining job, giving birth to Childs to secure labour need of industrial world

"Children have moved on the balance sheet of life."

The next generation has always been societies' greatest liability and asset. The family has traditionally been the most efficient way to allocate the costs and benefits.

The undesirable effects of a perpetually falling birth rate is largely a result of governmental interference via elaborate safety net policies such as Social Security that allow individuals to free ride off the children of others. It is going to take a lot more than a free refrigerator as economic incentives for some individuals to have and raise productive children when they can gain most of the benefits and pay none of the costs by free riding off others.

However, this is setting up for a 'generational war' where many of the young and old become single issue voters on these forms of taxation. For example, Holland has an interesting way of dealing with the undue burden of the older generation when they become liabilities and have no children to 'repay their debt' from being raised. By 1995 cases of euthanasia, sometimes involuntary, and assisted suicide in Holland had risen to almost 3 per cent of all deaths which has frightened some people to not go to hospitals.

Good article. So much calmer than some unfortunate, hysterical perspectives I've heard from anti-immigration advocates (Not that I can easily agree with those who I've met that say that borders should just be open).

Here's another wrinkle, though. If the predictions of peak oil theorists Sharon Astyk and Ricahrd Heinberg are correct, that the US should be a nation of 40-60 million farmers, what will then happen?
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/22584
or
A Nation of Farmers: Defeating the Food Crisis on American Soil (Paperback)
by Sharon Astyk & Aaron Newton