Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

  • Advertisements

Readers Write: The advantages of a decreasing Western birth rate

Letters to the Editor for the March 4 weekly print issue: A growing birthrate adds to the problems of global warming, hunger, disease, and warfare; Human population should be managed; Since technology is replacing people, why do we need more kids who will grow up to face fewer jobs?

By Lynda Sayre, David M. Fitch, Robert Weeden / March 4, 2013



Big Sur, Calif., Astoria, Ore., and Salt Spring Island, British Columbia

Pluses of a declining birthrate

I was very surprised and dismayed that in the Feb. 4 article "Behind a looming baby bust" there was no mention of the problem of overpopulation worldwide. The burgeoning birthrate adds to the problems of global warming, pollution, hunger, disease, and warfare. Perhaps in the United States it is desirable to have more babies from the standpoint of the economy, but if a broader global view is taken, a decreased birthrate seems like a good thing.

Skip to next paragraph

Lynda Sayre

Big Sur, Calif.

Reducing the population in Europe, North America, Japan, and Russia could help improve the imbalance between Earth's natural resources and population. The true measure of overpopulation is the ability of ecological processes to break down human waste such as CO2.

Human population should be managed, rather than societies having to react to the consequences of too many or too few people. That management of numbers need not be as desperate as the Chinese effort, but could be as simple as removing the US dependent tax deduction that rewards having more children than the planet can support. As populations shrink, the gross national product could actually shrink without negatively affecting the standard of living.

David M. Fitch

Astoria, Ore.

The article asserts that with a decreased US birthrate there won't be enough workers to maintain product output or to be able to support "unproductive" seniors, which make up a higher proportion of the population. But didn't John Yemma's UpFront column in this same issue ("Machines versus people") point out that fewer people are needed to maintain productivity each year as machines replace them? So why do we need more kids who will grow up facing fewer jobs?

Germany's economy is the envy of the necktie set, and that nation's birthrate is way below replacement. It's the same with Sweden, which consistently ranks among the best places in the world to live. A world where a person has only three functions – to work enough to consume enough and to raise enough babies so our numbers can increase – isn't a very satisfying one, at least to me.

Robert Weeden

Salt Spring Island, British Columbia

Permissions

  • Weekly review of global news and ideas
  • Balanced, insightful and trustworthy
  • Subscribe in print or digital

Special Offer

 

Doing Good

 

What happens when ordinary people decide to pay it forward? Extraordinary change...

Paul Giniès is the general manager of the International Institute for Water and Environmental Engineering (2iE) in Burkina Faso, which trains more than 2,000 engineers from more than 30 countries each year.

Paul Giniès turned a failing African university into a world-class problem-solver

Today 2iE is recognized as a 'center of excellence' producing top-notch home-grown African engineers ready to address the continent's problems.

 
 
Become a fan! Follow us! Google+ YouTube See our feeds!