WILLisms.com: Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 301 -- Declining & Concentrating Birthrates.

« Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 300 -- Cutting The Deficit In Half. | WILLisms.com | Pundit Roundtable »

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 301 -- Declining & Concentrating Birthrates.

Fewer Women Producing More Children-

A smaller proportion of individuals are producing a larger proportion of our population. This trend holds in much of the advanced world:

In the United States... the percentage of women born in the late 1930s who remained childless was near 10 percent. By comparison, nearly 20 percent of women born in the late 1950s are reaching the end of their reproductive lives without having had children. The greatly expanded childless segment of contemporary society, whose members are drawn disproportionately from the feminist and countercultural movements of the 1960s and 70s, will leave no genetic legacy....
The 17.4 percent of baby boomer women who had only one child account for a mere 7.8 percent of children born in the next generation. By contrast, nearly a quarter of the children of baby boomers descend from the mere 11 percent of baby boomer women who had four or more children. These circumstances are leading to the emergence of a new society whose members will disproportionately be descended from parents who rejected the social tendencies that once made childlessness and small families the norm....

Among states that voted for President George W. Bush in 2004, fertility rates are 12 percent higher than in states that voted for Sen. John Kerry.

And in France:

Among French women born in the early 1960s, less than a third have three or more children. But this distinct minority of French women (most of them presumably practicing Catholics and Muslims) produced more than 50 percent of all children born to their generation, in large measure because so many of their contemporaries had one child or none at all.

Source:
Foreign Policy: "The Return of Patriarchy."

A highly recommended read. The thesis of the article is essentially that the world's liberal/progressive societies will eventually cycle back into conservative/traditional societies, by virtue of liberals having fewer babies and conservatives having more.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Bush On Track To Cut Deficit In Half, & Then Some.

Posted by Will Franklin · 19 March 2006 07:12 AM

Comments

Most of my Liberal friends don't have kids, and the few that do may have at most one. I have three.

There are good reasons for this. Many of the elitists view children as a burden and are too busy living their lives filled with Gay Cowboy movies and art house flicks. My Liberal friends have more time to read great Literary works, while I am watching Thomas the Tank Engine and Robots. They have all this excess time to devote to protesting the war or to good Liberal causes. Instead, I have t-ball games.

It is a contrast in selfishness and the selflessness that is required to be a parent. Red State activities like going to church or ball games or camping, hiking, fishing, etc., tend to be family activities. Urban living is filled with places and lifestyle choices that are not conducive to children, and therefore children are a burden. Suburban living provides lifestyle choices that make child raising easier, but the Liberal Elitist world is not a good place to have children or to take children. Kids just aren't that much fun and mess up a good Gay Cowboy movie.

Posted by: Justin B at March 19, 2006 01:51 PM