Thread by @stuartbasten

I'm thinking of writing something on replacement fertility rates, maybe for @ConversationUK, just to set a few things straight. Just some misunderstandings which should be ironed out.
(1)

Let's not talk about the batshit crazy world which many people inhabit, where migration is seen as an evil conspiracy. But rather just focus on the issue of replacement rate fertility as a 'thing'. (2)

Firstly, if you want your "civilisation" to grow (quote unquote), even with no immigration, you need to have a lot more than replacement rate. Also people move away which makes a difference. That's common sense. (3)

Secondly, we really now can be quite sure that the raw numbers of people are less important than what they do and how productive they are. With high levels of education, we can show that an 'optimum' level of fertility is probably somewhat lower than RR according to outcome. (4)

Thirdly, proponents of RRF accidentally assume that there is some magical number of a given population that should be replaced. When a population stabilises at a RR of around 2.07 (without any migration of course but forget about that for the time being) one presumes this is..(5)

... somehow the magic number. So the grand plan all along is that 53m English should live on this earth. No more. No less. That's just mad. It makes no sense. (6)

Actually, though, replacement rate fertility is really really important in one way. And it is because of this that we should be talking about it a lot more (and not because of these crazy ideas of crazy people who don't think straight) (7)

Although it's a little old, this from Steve Smallwood from @ONS serves to remind us that RRF is *not* 2.1 for much, maybe most of the world. (8)

The reason, for those who can be bothered to learn what it actually is, is because of higher levels of infant, child and adult mortality among women. Also because of skewed sex ratios at birth, brought about by a skewed view of the value of boys over girls (9)

This is what matters. (10)

That mortality is still too high in much of the world. And that women and girls still suffer so much discrimination. (11)

Comparing replacement rate fertility is a very neat and simple way of showing what an unequal world we live in, and how much more work there is to do. (12)

Anyway, I've still got a lot of work to do on this. But like many demographers I'm sick and shocked and disgusted about how this toxic, crazy narrative appears to have spilled over with such tragic consequences. I just felt I had to write something. (13)

I'd be grateful for feedback and would be glad if wet might consider a coordinated response to this. @DrDemography @RebeccaSear @CSchmert @NickP1963 @AndrewNoymer @JessicaCalarco @FalkinghamJane @campbell_kang @dannydorling @kbguzzo @familyunequal @conradhackett @les_ja