The world is about to see a mind-blowing demographic situation that will be a first in human history: There are about to be more elderly people than young children. For some time now, demographers and economists have observed that the proportion of elderly adults around the world is rising, while the proportion of younger children is falling.
But within a few years, just before 2020, adults aged 65 and over will begin to outnumber children under the age of 5 among the global population, according to a chart shared by a Bank of America Merrill Lynch team led by Beijia Ma, citing an earlier report from the US Census Bureau. And these two age groups will continue to grow in opposite directions: The proportion of the global population aged 65 and up will continue to increase, while the proportion of the population aged 5 and under will continue decreasing.
In fact, according to the Census Bureau, by 2050 those ages 65 and up will make up an estimated 15.6% of the global population — more than double that of children ages 5 and under, who will make up an estimated 7.2%.
As the BAML team explained in greater detail:
"...and life expectancy increasing by 1Y every 5Y. We are arriving at 'peak youth' for the first time in human history with the number of persons aged 65+ expected to outnumber children under-5 by the end of this decade. Aging has also become a universal phenomenon, and by 2050E, 80% of older people will live in EMs. Life expectancies of 300-400Y or even an infinite extension of life expectancy may be within reach in our lifetimes."
"This unique demographic phenomenon of the 'crossing' is unprecedented," the Census Bureau's authors noted earlier.
[......]
This has profound implications for Govts, economies, and political systems.
Western economies and Social systems have always been based on a Growing population/with a large young worker pyramid base, not heavy top.
Keynesian economics probably doesn't work in shrinking scenarios either.
This has already happened in many places in the First World. One reason for slow growth and lower labor participation rates.
"We're about to see a Mind-blowing Demographic Shift Unprecedented in Human History"
Demographic shift more older adults than children - Business Insider
Elena Holodny - May 16, 2016
(Charts within)
This is the fruit of contraception and abortion.
It was inevitable even without contraception and abortion, because of finite terrestrial space and resources.
The only possible what this demographic shift could have been avoided in the long term is coming up with a fiscally and energy cheap way to get human mass out of the earth's gravity well.
Even then, in the 1000+ year time frame, you run into the same limits, unless you can cross trans-stellar distances.
If humans don't voluntarily limit their population growth, reality will limit it for them.
-
We are no where near that point.
If the entire world had the fertility rate of Middle Class White Americans, this would be true.
But MOST of the world's population has much higher fertility rates than we do.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2002rank.html
-
That's not my concern. I'm speaking of Anerica and the west.
This has profound implications for Govts, economies, and political systems.
Western economies and Social systems have always been based on a Growing population/with a large young worker pyramid base, not heavy top.
Keynesian economics probably doesn't work in shrinking scenarios either.
This already in progress in many places in the First World. One reason for slow growth and lower labor participation rates.
"We're about to see a Mind-blowing Demographic Shift Unprecedented in Human History"
Demographic shift more older adults than children - Business Insider
Elena Holodny - May 16, 2016
(Charts within)
And Obama and Crew will simply import the people and population problems of the worst Nations/Societies and Cults in the world and make them your problem.
He has already done so.
Now, since Obama has imported near 3 Million of the worst people on earth, sooner or later, you will need to fight them, or die at their hands.
And every year, the Obama Imports have allot more babies than your people do, so the longer you wait, the more likely you are to be simply exterminated.
Don't take my word for it.
THEY, the Obama Imports, openly boast that they plan to out-breed and eventually exterminate your people. Take their word for it.
-
That's not my concern. I'm speaking of Anerica and the west.
Which does not in any way contradict my original point.
This was the problem BEFORE Obama as well, and an even worse problem in Europe where the 'native' Birth rate is much lower than ours. In Japan, they're not importing anyone, just shrinking up their own derrieres.And Obama and Crew will simply import the people and population problems of the worst Nations/Societies and Cults in the world and make them your problem.
He has already done so.
Now, since Obama has imported near 3 Million of the worst people on earth, sooner or later, you will need to fight them, or die at their hands.
And every year, the Obama Imports have allot more babies than your people do, so the longer you wait, the more likely you are to be simply exterminated.
Don't take my word for it.
THEY, the Obama Imports, openly boast that they plan to out-breed and eventually exterminate your people. Take their word for it.
-
And better nutrition, better medical care (including vaccines and antibiotics), less violence, safer societies, safer workplaces, and affluence.This is the fruit of contraception and abortion.
And better nutrition, better medical care (including vaccines and antibiotics), less violence, safer societies, safer workplaces, and affluence.
Oh, and this is not necessarily a bad thing.
This was the problem BEFORE Obama as well, and an even worse problem in Europe where the 'native' Birth rate is much lower than ours. In Jpoan, there not importing anyone, just shrinking up their own derrieres.
The First World and the people who made it are dying, and [not] really being replaced.
Thus the world economies and Negative interest ratesin those countries.
But putting 1st world countries populations in a slightly negative population growth rate is a wise policy, as our current population, without millions of Obama Imported Muslims and Mexicans, is a bit too large for America's long term sustainment.
America Limiting its 1st world, native born population, and then investing in making the most of ALL people of that population, whether they are born of the Upper Class, or born in poverty, regardless of "RACE", is just common sense.
But this strategy only works if you control your borders!
If you chose to NOT control your borders, then the only way to survive, is to have more babies than the other cultures/cults who are currently promising to exterminate you!
So, Which is it going to be:
Modest Population Shrinkage, combined with border control and a society that doesn't grant education/jobs based on skin color, but on merit...
or
Open borders, every Tribe Breed as fast as possible, and when resources collapse, we'll have a nice like war...
or
Just surrendering without a whimper, continuing to not have kids, enforce the borders, and in fact, spend 100s of Billions of Dollars Importing those who openly state they plan to kill U.S.?
-
Sort of.Western economies and Social systems have always been based on a Growing population/with a large young worker pyramid base, not heavy top.
Keynes wasn't dealing with a society with a shrinking tax base. However, its basic principles don't change much as a result of that factor. E.g. if there is a sharp economic downturn, you will still want to set up a stimulus program to put people to work, in order to keep money circulating throughout the economy.Keynesian economics probably doesn't work in shrinking scenarios either.
Sure, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. In particular, if the society isn't growing as fast as in the past, you don't actually need high growth rates.This already in progress in many places in the First World. One reason for slow growth and lower labor participation rates.
The only way an economy with low birth rates can stay even close to strong and growing is if they allow people in their country in large numbers. Otherwise, the population will grow old, the economy will shrink, and advancement of society will slow to a crawl.
just in time for the robots to take over. funny how things work themselves out.
I'm for an immigration shut down, UNLESS we use it like the draft, for people who are going to pay our Social costs, not drain themBut putting 1st world countries populations in a slightly negative population growth rate is a wise policy, as our current population, without millions of Obama Imported Muslims and Mexicans, is a bit too large for America's long term sustainment.
Yes.kurmugeon said:America Limiting its 1st world, native born population, and then investing in making the most of ALL people of that population, whether they are born of the Upper Class, or born in poverty, regardless of "RACE", is just common sense.
But this strategy only works if you control your borders!If you chose to NOT control your borders, then the only way to survive, is to have more babies than the other cultures/cults who are currently promising to exterminate you!
Actually, it started with the 1965 immigration Act, and continued though Reagan's Amnesty, and Both Bush Presidents.kurmugeon said:So, Which is it going to be:
Modest Population Shrinkage, combined with border control and a society that doesn't grant education/jobs based on skin color, but on merit...
or
Open borders, every Tribe Breed as fast as possible, and when resources collapse, we'll have a nice like war...
or
Just surrendering without a whimper, continuing to not have kids, enforce the borders, and in fact, spend 100s of Billions of Dollars Importing those who openly state they plan to kill U.S.?
The path Obama and crew have had U.S. on for the last eight years is basically suicide.
(Well, Suicide on our part, for letting him continue. On the part of Obama, it is Treason, Sabotage, and eventually Murder)
THEY, the Obama Imports, openly boast that they plan to out-breed and eventually exterminate your people. Take their word for it.
-
No ,immigrants!
And better nutrition, better medical care (including vaccines and antibiotics), less violence, safer societies, safer workplaces, and affluence.
Oh, and this is not necessarily a bad thing.
...
Actually It started with the 1965 immigration Act, and continued though Reagan's Amnesty, and Both Bush Presidents.
Stop blaming this just on Obama, it's OCD partisan.
Alas, because Of these previous President's acts, there are now so many Amnestied Illegals they are now the Swing Vote on New illegals, and it's probably No Candidate can get elected who isn't pro-Illegal Amnesty (aka 'Path to Citizenship'). Thus, even Obama's election.
The Goose has been cooked by Both parties.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?