What Happens When Demographics Change Forever?

Are we on the brink of population collapse? Some economists and tech billionaires (like Elon Musk) think so. As noted in a recent NY Times article about Peak Population, birth rates are declining, and some argue an aging population could strain social services and hurt the economy. (On the other hand, some say, slower population growth could be more sustainable for our environment.) Whichever argument you sympathize with, here's a key thing to understand about this trend: Demographers predicted it. In fact, they've been expecting for years. Their advice? Don’t freak out. Here’s what changing demographics might mean for our planet and the future.

Please note: In this episode, we're using the word "woman" as shorthand for “people who ovulate.” But it’s important to note that some women don’t ovulate, have XX chromosomes, or a uterus — whether they’re queer, intersex, and, or, have a condition that affects their reproductive traits.

*****

*****

Curious about the future? With the help of a diverse cast of innovators, researchers, and dreamers, FAR OUT explores the future of humanity on this big, messy planet called Earth -- and maybe beyond!

Hosted by futurist Sinéad Bovell, Far Out invites viewers to get informed about what’s to come. The series is produced for PBS by PBS North Carolina, the team behind the award-winning PBS series Overview.

#animal #communication #FarOutPBS

And keep up with Far Out and PBS Terra on:

[conlon]

I think a lot more people would have children if they didn't have to worry about whether they could afford it. I'm not saying this would change the trend, but I think the best way to support people to feel able to have more children is better child benefits and community support. Better community support could both support people having more children and support an aging population.

[eric]

I will always be deeply suspicious of those who say " more babies we need more workers!"

Those people will pay your babies low wages until they can replace them with robots!

[nebulan]

5:25 <- THIS this THIS! Forcing people who don't want kids while denying support to those who do is baffling.

[R-MD]

This video doesn't even cover some of the biggest issues with the decline in childbirth. Lack of homes. Lack of high paying jobs. The death of the middle class. The exploitation of the growing lower and working classes. The fact that people can't be sure if their children will starve to death in the streets because of climate problems. The consolidation of wealth into the hands of the few while the many suffer.
All this stuff is being brought on by governments and corporations, then we get talking points fearing the collapse of the economy based on this stuff but it still keeps happening. Nobody is fixing the root of the problem. The rich are ruining our world with their greed, the governments with their corruption.
Our planet is dying, our societies collapsing into war and poverty. No shit people don't want big families.

[TheNotSoMysteriousG]

Honestly, for ecological reasons, I can’t see population growth as a good thing. Better for our societies and economies adapt and the population shrink.

[beth]

Viewing increased consumption as a constant necessaity is the real problem. We simply cannot have infinite growth with finite resources. Reaching a steady equilibrium based on "enough" should be our goal.
~And billionaires don't fit into that picture.~

[johnnytownsend]

Humans did just fine when there were only a billion of us. We don't need 9 or 10 billion. Even 5 billion people is way more than we "need" to sustain civilization. Most of these "advances" in agriculture have been devastating to the environment and to species diversity. If we can adapt to going from 3 billion to 8 billion in my lifetime, we can certainly adapt to going back to 6 billion.

[thepilotale]

Best way of preparing is rethinking our current economic models that count on continuous growth in consumption and focuses on other metrics to measure quality of life and prosperity

[evelynsaungikar]

The population explosion was also unprecedented. Many people alive today were alive when the population was half what it is now.

[hansolowe]

High-intensity fertiliser indeed..

The nitrogen is now screwing ecosystems everywhere it is used on this massive scale.

That's not a solution either. It's a problem that we created that allowed us to grow rapidly.

[G-Rex]

As a 28 year old, I have no interest whatsoever in bringing any children into this horrible, corrupt, and broken world

[adventuringchemist]

My wife and I chose to wait until our 30s for children. It let us establish our careers and become financially secure. Also, by only having 2 kids, we can better focus on each one.

[theanadevine]

Brilliant, engaging, calm in the face of flustered billionaires and policymakers who see a person with a uterus as a customer-printing machine, and so instructive. Thank you, Sinéad Bovell and team!

[MuchPurple]

IMO there are far too many people in the world NOW. This decline in population is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. The world will have to adjust, and it will in time. And if there are fewer consumers of goods, which is the real issue with magnates obviously, they will have to adjust too. I chose to be child free years ago, and am glad I did. ✌

[davidwappler]

The birth rate decline is actually good news for people and the Earth. We're overpopulated now, trampling the Earth and decreasing biodiversity. A further increasing population would mean even higher housing costs (and the rent is already too damn high!), and a downward pressure on wages, particularly for lower wage workers. A lower birth rate is a collective solution to these problems.

[caseyleichter]

Reducing the human population is absolutely a good thing - for one thing, it could mean less human sprawl into hitherto undeveloped/wild land areas. '
If we could focus on any one thing, I'd strongly urge advocating a revolution in attitudes toward consumption. We need a shift in global philosophy away from uncontrolled consumption, casual consumption ("click once to order from Temu!"), and an end to planned obsolescence that requires frequently replacing everything from shoes to major appliances.

Reducing the excessive and needless buying of ephemeral, non-recyclable, non-sustainable goods will have a ripple effect throughout the world: stop supporting polluting industries, stop giving money to the private equity interests that are behind them, stop putting money in multi-billionaire pockets. I'm not sure how to make that shift happen: young people, though far more aware of and concerned about climate change, show no signs of limiting their consumption of the very consumer goods that exacerbate it.

[mcampbe]

Birth rates are low and staying low. Japan is dying along with South Korea. It is not just about consuming, how do we supply all of these seniors with support in their old age with fewer people in the workforce?

[zanerasmussen]

We should probably stop using consumption as a driver of the economy anyway.

[meghanelizondo]

I'd like to dispute the closing tag about living in a "shrinking world". The smaller the human population the larger the world. Humans aren't the only thing on this planet. Also, by changing the way we farm, we've only accelerated environmental collapse (extra chemicals, soil malnourishment, loss of nutrition in the food, and collapse of surrounding environments).

[eric]

FEWER CHILDREN who are raised by EDUCATED and EMPLOYED mothers and fathers mean a better life for those children.
What parent on earth does not want that?