American Trend: Fewer Children, More Animals/Pets

The data is known, but few talk about the reality: a world where 97% of its population lives in countries with a declining birth rate; where white, college-educated female Americans have a fertility rate of 1.6 children; and America's total fertility rate is 1.93 -- all less than the replacement rate of 2.1 children per female.

For background, read Fiscal Cliff: Government Says 'Be UNfruitful and Do NOT Multiply' and also read U.S. Teenage Birth Rate Lowest on Record as well as Childless Women: White and More Educated

This doesn't help: Kids are Hazardous to Marriage, Say Liberal Studies

Low birth rates cause European nationalities to fear that they will cease to exist, especially Russia and even Germany.

UPDATE 10/28/14: Limiting Births Fails to Save Earth: Government Report



-- From "Animal Planet: Pets Outnumber Children 4 to 1 in America" by Daniel Halper, The Weekly Standard 2/1/13

In a new book on demographics set to be published next week, Jonathan V. Last writes that pets now outnumber children 4 to 1 in America. The book is titled What to Expect When No One’s Expecting.

“In 1994 Americans spent $1.7 billion on pets; by 2008 that number had risen to $4.3 billion. By 2010, even in the face of a massive recession, it had climbed over $4.8 billion. The evidence suggests that pets are increasingly treated like actual family members: In 1998, the average dog-owning American household spent $383 on medical care for their dogs; by 2006, that figure had risen to $672” [writes Jonathan Last].

“Wealthy dog owners have successfully lobbied for changes in estate law allowing pets to legally receive inheritances and trust funds. A bill put forward in Congress recently called for a $3,500 tax break for pet-care expenses—which is more than families get for a child.”

“[E]ducated, middle-class people have all but stopped having babies,” he writes. “Pets have become fuzzy, low-maintenance replacements for children.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "America's Baby Bust" by Jonathan V. Last, posted at The Wall Street Journal 2/1/13

For two generations we've been lectured about the dangers of overpopulation. But the conventional wisdom on this issue is wrong, twice. First, global population growth is slowing to a halt and will begin to shrink within 60 years. Second, as the work of economists Esther Boserups and Julian Simon demonstrated, growing populations lead to increased innovation and conservation. . . .

Low-fertility societies don't innovate because their incentives for consumption tilt overwhelmingly toward health care. They don't invest aggressively because, with the average age skewing higher, capital shifts to preserving and extending life and then begins drawing down. . . .

If our fertility rate were higher—say 2.5, or even 2.2—many of our problems would be a lot more manageable. But our fertility rate isn't going up any time soon. In fact, it's probably heading lower. Much lower.

There's a constellation of reasons for this decline: Middle-class wages began a long period of stagnation. College became a universal experience for most Americans, which not only pushed people into marrying later but made having children more expensive. Women began attending college in equal (and then greater) numbers than men. More important, women began branching out into careers beyond teaching and nursing. And the combination of the birth-control pill and the rise of cohabitation broke the iron triangle linking sex, marriage and childbearing.

By 1973, the U.S. was below the replacement rate, as was nearly every other Western country. [And not coincidentally, since 1973 a total of 55 million Americans were "terminated" in the womb.]

Immigration has helped make up for America's dropping birth rate.

To read the entire very detailed and lengthy article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Michael Barone: Fewer dollars and babies threaten social programs" by Michael Barone, Senior Political Analyst, The Washington Examiner 2/1/13

When Medicare was established in 1965 and when Social Security was vastly expanded in 1972, America was accustomed to the high birthrates of the posWorld War II baby boom. It was widely assumed that the baby boom generation would soon produce a baby boom of its own.

Oops. The birthrate fell from the peak of 122.7 in 1957 to 68.8 in 1973 and hovered around that level until 2007. The baby boom, it turns out, was an exception to a general rule that people tend to have fewer babies as their societies become more affluent and urbanized.

Birthrates fell sharply during the Depression of the 1930s. They have fallen significantly since the housing collapse, from 69.3 in 2007 to 63.2 in 2011. The steepest decline in births since 2007 has been among Hispanic immigrants, who were also hit hard by housing foreclosures.

Low economic growth or even decline can shape expectations and become a self-fulfilling prophecy. "An economic recovery has begun," Obama said in his inaugural speech last month. The implication: This is all you're going to get.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read 44% of 'Middle America' Births are Out of Wedlock

And then there's the liberals' nightmare: Christians Will Flourish Demographically, Academic Says 

Plus, get this: Billionaire Liberal Elites Want Fewer Non-elites Born