Disappearing demographic

    By EmmaZahn on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:55am |

    Expressed concerns over the future of Social Security by young people(1) and conservative concerns of being overwhelmed by immigrants, legal or otherwise(2) had me pondering what the future will be like for my grandchildren so I went looking for demographics.

    The disappearance of one particular demographic wormed its way into my head and distracted me from my original concern.  I became alarmed.  I searched but could not find anyone commenting on its grave implications.  Middle children, once a majority of the population, are disappearing.  The national fertility rate has been between 2 and 2.1 children for the past quarter century.(3)

    What will a world of just first-borns, babies and only-childs be like.  The horror.(4)

     

    ---------

    1.  Matt Bai's recent conversation here.

    2.  American Conservative Magazine

    3.  Hoover Institute - "Since the 1970s the rate has been under two children for the majority non-Hispanic white population. The national fertility total currently barely reaches its replacement level; fluctuated between 2.0 and 2.1 children per woman over the past quarter century; by 2000 non-Hispanic white women were averaging just 1.8 children. Among all groups it was only the Hispanic women—who are at a total fertility rate of 2.5 children—who are above the replacement level. Even among Hispanic women, it is primarily Mexican-American women, the largest single group, which maintained very high fertility rates. Cuban-American women were close to the non-Hispanic whites, and the Puerto Rican women were closer to the fertility patterns of non-Hispanic black women."

    4. Tongue firmly in cheek but yes, I am a middle-child and it does bother me a little that our perspective may disappear for at least the near future.

    Comments

    Hear, hear, for us middle kids. BTW, Frank Sulloway's "Born to Rebel" addresses birth order and controls for complicating factors that undid 19th-century versions of the concept. Short version, middle and later children are less authoritarian.

    So a prediction from the model is that we will become more conservative. Maybe already happening.


    by Tom Wright (not verified) on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:28pm

    Thanks for the book reference. I'll check it out.

    A more conservative world I could probably live with but not an authoritarian one.  Have you seen this pamphlet on authoritarians?  John Dean based much of his book, Conservatives without Conscience, on the work of the pamphlet's author, Bob Altemeyer.

    Professor Altemeyer has been studying authoritarians for several decades and even conducts experiments of world governance with them as well as non-authoritarians and mixed groups.  The authoritarians have a tendency to either blow the world up quickly or let it evolve into chaos and then blow it up.  Very interesting work.


    by Emma Zahn (not verified) on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:58pm

    I read the Dean book, but not the original work.


    by Tom Wright (not verified) on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:48pm

    This is an interesting dilemna. On one hand we've got to slow down population growth due to lack of resources. (And less financial overflow for many American families, caused by lower salaries and higher prices, translating to less money for discretionary spending, and wish lists items like large families.) On the other hand, we've got to find a better way of socializing children if we have new challenges to overcome. I like independence and people with initiative, but perhaps more sensitivity to others and more willingness of those in American Society to be more group, oriented, or at least more sensitive to the perspective and needs of the whole.

    I will be interested to see what people say about this here.


    by flyover_27 (not verified) on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:32pm

    Latest Comments