There is no indication that birth rates are going to stabilize, let alone recover, anywhere. Only Israel and Georgia (?) look like even half-way exceptions.
Unless they drastically and rapidly change, the 21st century will be the century of unbelievable aging and depopulation.
Based on these latest fertility numbers, we can expect the drop in new people in 100 years to be the following: USA (-47%), France (-46%), Russia (-65%), Germany (-68%), Italy (-78%), Japan (-81%), China (-88%), Thailand (-89%).
Turkey, UK, Mexico, etc. all similar.
People haven't really integrated what this means for our civilization, industrial society, and the progress of history because it's too big to wrap your head around.
I think what it means is that our civilization is about to collapse. Meaning sometime before 2200.
It is in every practical sense numerically *impossible* for immigration to fix this. You can't "make up the difference" with immigration when the difference is 50%+ of an entire generation. Especially not if you're China or the EU and your shortfall is in 100s of millions.
People still haven't updated on how rapidly fertility rates in the developing world are falling either. In 2022 already, Brazil was at 1.6, Mexico 1.8, India 2.0, Turkey 1.9, etc.
Numbers above say *Chile* is now at *0.88.* Thailand is at 0.95! What is happening!
The Danish population of Denmark hasn't changed a whit since 1980—44 years ago, or, you know, half a century.
The entire population growth in Denmark since 1980 has been immigrants. I bet this holds for many other countries too. Which means...
...the entire functioning of the quasi-redistributive quasi-capitalist system we have in Europe and North America has been subsidized by immigration for half a century already, while the previous population has stagnated and aged.
The system has been non-functional for decades.
There is no way to sustain the stack of institutions behind our version of modern industrial society when the next generations are collapsing by 50%+. It is as numerically impossible as throwing more immigrants at the problem. The math doesn't add up.
There is a strong psychological need to believe in utopian or apocalyptic visions of the near future, like AI doom/acc or imminent WW3 or ecological catastrophe, because the alternative is staring our incomprehensibly pathetic civilizational population collapse in the face.
I don't expect the dead players and bureaucrats to leap at opportunities for reform, but I think it's a catastrophic distraction for live players and independent thinkers, especially in tech, to forget that the straightforward solution is societal reform.
The solution isn't to hope we can build an AI who will solve all our problems for us or subsidize our incoherent, sociobiologically insolvent system with our wacky technology, the solution is coming up with a new, functional plan for organizing industrial societies.
People used to think that surely the low fertility rates of Asia would stabilize at, like, 1.1 at absolute minimum.
Nope. South Korea (population of 50 million) is now at 0.68. Others following. As @SamoBurja says, no reason not to expect 0.0 TFR societies in the near future.
If we fumble a much-needed reform of industrial society by 2100 or so, I think we miss our opportunity to establish permanent settlements in the Solar System and thus our chance at the stars down the line. It closes the book on that for us. Maybe in another 1000 years.
Everyone proposing to save the day with robots, AI, artificial wombs, longevity, or whatever other speculative wacky tech solution is proposing to do a great favor to the bad and broken system that brought us here.
The system needs reform, not more subsidy. Ideas, not tech.
The global economy and industrial/post-industrial standard of living, and all its attendant social norms, relies on a tremendous scale of population to be viable.
I don't think it's viable anymore when South Korea has 5 million people instead of 50 million.
I'm working on what I think will be a solution to industrial civilization's fertility problem. It's not a quick or easy problem. I published the first piece here in @palladiummag:
Also worth reading (and subscribing to!) @bismarckanlys Brief, which investigated India's rapidly falling fertility rates and near-future population stagnation here: brief.bismarckanalysis.com/p/fewer-than-o…
There is a personal upside to civilization-scale population collapse. If you are one of the few people to prioritize high fertility, your children and grandchildren will inherit a world:
Unfounded hope that fertility is a self-correcting problem, yet as @Empty_America is fond of pointing out, falling populations congregate in low-fertility cities even harder. They don't spread out to areas with cheap homes and fruitfully multiply!
If cheap homes attracted young people who automatically used them to be fecund according to some Malthusian logic, it would have happened already in places like rural America or Italy. The opposite is happening.
If you enjoyed these insights or wish to support further research on solving the problems raised herein, I warmly invite you to become a paid subscriber to @bismarckanlys Brief.
One underexplored aspect of the population collapse crisis is how many developing countries simply have fraudulent population numbers for various reasons.
Nigeria's population may be overstated by as much as double.
Every week, Bismarck Brief sends paid subscribers a new in-depth investigation of the strategy of a key institution, industry, or influential individual, from China to Silicon Valley.
Finding solutions to civilization-scale threats like the imminent demographic collapse is part of our daily work at @bismarckanlys. Make sure to follow our founder and president @SamoBurja and my colleagues @benlandautaylor and @RianCFFWhitton to stay up to date on our work!
Indeed. We could call the current demographic collapse trajectory "the Thanos Plan." Many think it will turn out very well, strangely enough. But maybe we shouldn't Thanos ourselves.
I cannot think of a single advantage to living in Western Europe over Eastern Europe or a single amenity available in Western Europe that isn't available in Eastern Europe at the same or lower price as of 2024. Not one.
In 2024 the Balkans are nicer than Western Europe.
Communism is ancient history now whether you like it or not. Eastern Europe has rapidly caught up to a stagnant and bureaucratized Western Europe and many parts are on the cusp of surpassing it. But nobody has integrated this into their worldview yet.
This was not true in the 1990s. In the 90s, you could say Eastern Europe was poorer, had less amenities, worse infrastructure, and was more unsafe.
But now it is safer and there isn't a noticeable difference in the amenities or infrastructure, and increasingly pay too.
Counterpoint: Gen Z is accurately naming the salary needed to be fashionably well-off in 2024 after inflation of both money and expectations, while earlier generations are just naming the same number they remember from their youth, which is now outdated.
Corollary: what this chart actually shows it that Millennials' economic expectations of self and others took a major blow.
If I'm reading this correctly, the cost of renting in NYC has gone up about 7x since 1980, and NYC remains the fashionable city to aspire to be financially successful in, so it is impossible that the salary to be financially successful hasn't also increased 7x in the last 44y.
Video calls force you to stare at a person's face, close up and without interruption, which is actually just not at all how conversations in person occur. Audio/phone calls are much closer to natural conversation in person, where you speak and listen while mostly looking away.
When was the last time you had an hour-long conversation with someone in person where you both stood one foot apart and talked while staring into each other's faces and maintaining eye contact the whole time? Literally never happens.
I can show you in one simple chart why industry wants to flee Europe for America: from 2019 to 2023, electricity prices in Europe skyrocketed, more than doubling in Britain and even Poland, up 50% in Germany and Italy.
Meanwhile, cheap U.S. electricity has gotten even cheaper.
Not a single European country has electricity cheaper than the U.S. now (6.48 pence per kWh), but the closest are Norway (6.64), Finland (6.81), and Sweden (7.65).
These three countries get almost all of their electricity from hydropower and nuclear power.
There are only so many possible sources of abundant energy for a wealthy, highly industrialized continent of 500 million people.
If piping in Russian and Iranian gas is now out of the question, then the only option is a nuclear buildout the likes of which has never been seen.
People call this ideology communism, but it's really far worse than communism. Communism believed in the virtue of technology and industry and sought to raise living standards and tech progress. Communism put satellites in orbit and probes on Venus. This is something new.
I am aware of all the failures and atrocities of communism. But the pitch for communism was still never "we are going to roll back technological society and return to living in caves" or whatever.
I don't support communism by any means but it seems relevant that calling this communism actually undersells how bad it is.
Actually, if I remember correctly, Japan easily succeeded—Mitsubishi builds half the Boeing planes already—they just failed to build it to the arbitrary specifications that U.S. airlines, regulators, unions, etc. demanded, so their airplane couldn't find enough buyers.
They built eight planes and they flew. But commercial aircraft manufacturing is not exactly a free market where the best man wins.
To be honest I basically think the decisions on who gets to make the parts, who gets to take credit for the final product, and who gets to finally profit off the whole industrial manufacturing chain, are all just made arbitrarily in Washington, D.C.