The inverse relationship between production and fertility is probably underrated. Kids make families consume more, but they definitely inhibit production for 13+ years. How much historic GDP increase has been due to declining % of children?
-
-
Oh, and regarding your first tweet, keep in mind that US TFR got down to about 2 in the 70s and has stayed there since, so I think the percentage of population under 18 has been similar since the 80s
-
True, although it took until the 90s for the 70s kids to leave home, etc., but it hasn't changed much since then.
-
I think that real productivity growth has been low for decades, and swallowed up by a growing dependent underclass and bloated govt.
-
Right, I basically agree although I'd say that even over the last 20 years a number of things have improved/gotten more efficient, but the gains have mostly gone to a small percentage of people
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, I think low fertility causes increased wealth, not vice-versa. China, for example, had a boom following its fertility decline.
-
Globally, I think most of the real economic growth of the past few decades was due to declining fertility. Production vs. reproduction.
-
Right, this is what I'm getting at. Not that there haven't also been other production improvements of course (mostly tech, and there have also been some increasing drags on production...)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.