The Chart That Really Scares The Government...

Tyler Durden's picture

With a government intent on growing its entitlements, welfare state, and implicitly it's debt load... what could be more terrifying than the future debt-serfs refusing to be born into existence. As the birth rate in the US tumbles to yet another multi-decade low, one has to ask how confident the young adult of today is and how, again, the Japanization of America continues to indicate a dark future ahead...



(h/t @Not_Jim_Cramer)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
VD's picture

now break down the demographics and....

FOC 1183's picture

You find Reverse Darwinism.

bigdumbnugly's picture

dam...  and that's even after the invention of viagra.

nmewn's picture

Dammit, somethings wrong with our centrally planned progressive social welfare network and it needs your support immediately!!

All you young people get out there and start fuckin and don't use contraception!...we were wrong!

If you're too old to fuck, send a check for anything you can afford to the Treasury as fast as possible, the life you save may be your own!

BLOTTO's picture

Imo, i think its the opposite and that 'they' are succeeding with their agenda -for people not to have children.


If they wanted us to have kids, they wouldnt be pumping the homosexual/feminist agenda and would be promoting normal, healthy, good functioning families...all they are promoting is filth.

And then the attitude is, 'who wants to have kids in this debt ridden, perverted, non-employment, depressed, dangerous, society?


Dont worry, theirs plenty of us slaves to do the dirty work for the fact, apparently, 'too much.'

nmewn's picture

Sometimes a simple parody of the truth goes further into the minds of those one is trying to reach when there isn't much there to catch it ;-)

hedgeless_horseman's picture



That chart says we need to win another big war so the soldiers can come home and have sex with a member of the opposite sex.

economics9698's picture

Socialism is the biggest boner killer ever invented for the over 100 IQ crowd.

0b1knob's picture

Chart is confusing.   Rate (of what?) has declined from 30% to 12% (of what?).

boogerbently's picture

You would think this chart would prompt a huge anti abortion push by dems.

TruthInSunshine's picture

"A record 20% of American households, ONE IN FIVE, were on food stamps in 2013, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

The numbers also show there was a record number of individuals on food stamps in 2013 and that the cost of the program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), was at an all-time high."

When 1/2 of American Households are on Food Stamps, Krugman will declare that his camp is STARTING to succeed.

zhandax's picture

Maybe all these new SNAP enrollees haven't figured out yet that the way to really plump your gubmint check is to have lots of dependents.  Probably still think it is just short-term 'help' until things improve.  The two-edged sword of the Ministry of Truth.

Keyser's picture

now break down the demographics and....

we have already entered the Age of Idiocracy... 


GetZeeGold's picture





Why would anyone want to bring a new life into this world only to have them be a debt slave?


Screw you Boehner and pay for this crap yourselves.


kralizec's picture

Obama is our President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

Lost My Shorts's picture

Just a guess -- maybe what this chart really shows is % of population under age 15 or some other age X.  So it would be a derivative of the birth rate, not the actual birth rate.

grgy's picture

"Socialism is the biggest boner killer ever invented for the over 100 IQ crowd" - economic9698

That has to be the most enlightened comment I've read in a long time. Ten thumbs up!

Lost My Shorts's picture

Strikes me as typical message board baloney.  "Socialism" = "whatever I don't like."  The word has long since lost any real meaning.  And all problems are the result of "whatever I don't like."  Not so enlightened overall.

Consider really why people don't have children, in approximate order of importance:

1) No longer possible to give them a middle class standard of living, due to the scam of free trade which sent all the jobs to Chinese sweatshops.  That's definitely not socialism.

2) Post-feminist women no longer want the whole responsibility of raising children, interfering with their careers and personal fulfillment.

3) Post-gender war family law is so extremely biased against men, that men wouldn't be unreasonable to think that "fatherhood" = signing up for indentured servitude in return for the privilege of donating sperm.

Protest as you will, but to say gender war and socialism are the same thing just leaves words with no meaning.

4) Crime.  Who wants the stress of constant worry about a child who is not safe in a criminal society?  When we were young, children ran free, had fun, and no one worried.  Today people feel like they need to watch and protect their children every second.  And even then, the drug dealers might win in the end.

5) Tea Party and crony capital are waging war on the public schools, so you can no longer count on your child getting a good primary or secondary education.  And then there is the crony capitalist destruction of higher education.  So you can expect to end up broke with an uneducated child.  Proper fulfillment of your duties as a parent is impossible, so why get involved.  (Don't see a lot of socialism there.)

6) The crony-capitalist health industry pirate brigade makes healthcare for your child crushingly expensive or perhaps unavailable.  (Don't see a lot of socialism there.)

7) America is such a child-hostile culture, that as a parent you must endure constant dirty looks and hostile remarks.  Who wants that?  I know from deep personal experience.  I live expat in Asia, and my daughter is half'n'half.  Over here, everyone loves her and she gets tired of being pinched so much by strangers.  When we come back to America, white Americans only bitch that she is too loud.  Over here, children are everywere, and they are normal, noisy, happy, exuberant, and beloved.  They grow up with a glow and confidence that comes from knowing they are the most precious thing in their parents' lives.  In America, children are a nuisance, barely tolerated, and shuffle along with slouching shoulders under a cloud that comes from doubting that anyone wants them.  That's culture, not socialism.

Keyser's picture

Whoosh...... Right over your head...... 


Quinvarius's picture

Pretty much all your issues are about collectivism or its secondary effects.  Socialism is just the brand of collectivism that you think is not the cause of any of this. To you socialism is just the fantasy good stuff of collectivism.  And that is just fantasy.  It is as stupid as the republican/democrat fallacy.  All of this is caused by government sponsored collectivism, especially the healthcare. 

Lost My Shorts's picture

Sorry, disagree.  I think your brain has just shrunk down to a single circuit, and everything is collectivism.  How is fake free trade foisted on America by the elites an aspect of collectivism?  How is a cultural dislike of children an aspect of collectivism?  Perhaps you are nostalgic for a pre-modern lifestyle with no government safety net, when people lived on the land and had lots of children for support in old age (and most of the children died young).  Good luck running for office on that platform.  And probably it wouldn't even work now.  Most young white hipsters in rich countries would rather die than return to that lifestyle.  You think maybe abolishing that notorious collectivist program known as "Social Security" would cause young white Americans to rush out and have babies?  I am guessing not.

Irony is, in countries where healthcare truly is collective, it costs half as much per capita and people are neither bankrupted nor rendered insecure by healthcare issues.

Irony squared is that individualism is a much more powerful force in the decline of the birth rate.  People nowdays in rich countries want to live for themselves, their career goals, their status and aspirations, their hobbies, their bucket list, their personal fulfillment.  Both men and women.  Have children and your bucket list is history, so people don't do it.

Irony cubed is that birth rates in ex-communist countries tend to decline as they became crony capitalist.

p.s. Socialism is collective (or effectively government) ownership of economic capital.  Redistribution of wealth or public services might drive you crazy, but they are not socialism if words still have any meaning.

spankfish's picture

"Have children and your bucket list is history, so people don't do it"

Glad my children were a part of my so called bucket list.  I could not imagine life without my children.

snr-moment's picture

Irony is, in countries where healthcare truly is collective, it costs half as much per capita and people are neither bankrupted nor rendered insecure by healthcare issues.


Yeah.  My daughter just got back from visiting some of those countries.  Wanted to know why so many people were missing body parts.

snr-moment's picture

Oh please.

1. People canot give their kids a middle class living.  So people in poor countries don't have kids?  You yourself said fertility drops in ex-communist countries.

2. Women still want children.  Look at all the fertility clinics across the country treating 40 something year olds, who spent years getting degrees to get a job, and never using 10% of the material they were taught to do their jobs.  Starting out your life 100k in debt is a fabulous form of birth control.  Chrony capitalism didn't do that.  Chrony education did.

3. Can't disagree with third point, but most men, still, don't consider fatherhood indentured servitude.  No-one gets married expecting to get divorced.  The number one marital stress is money.  A tax day in mid-May doesn't help.

4. Crime?  People watch too much TV.  Lousy judges of risk.  People don't have kids now, cause they might get shot, but had dozens back when half died of pneumonia?

5. A tea party war on public schools?  Seriously?  The rate of school spending per pupil has been at least double the inflation rate for the last 30 years, and yet STILL the College Board had to "re-center" their scores in the late 90's.  We have to revise how we teach math every couple years (??????) and now we have common core to dumb it down even further.  Hell, our public schools just doubled the length of each class session and made classes every other day, so kids could do their homework in school.  Have an exceptional student?  Too damn bad for you.  Draw pictures!

6. It was socialism that caused the price of health care to skyrocket.  Kids cost next to nothing to take care of.  Want the cost of your kids health insurance to skyrocket?  Make sure they take out a catastrophic plan, like O'bozocare does.

7. Can't argue with your culture point.  But don't you find it odd that it's in the cities, which reliably voted liberal/socialist where this attitude is most prevalent?  Out in flyover country people still have kids (despite being poor, uneducated hicks).


Almost all your points ignore reality.  When the government makes it impossible for 2 working parents to afford a house and food, you can be damn sure they aren't thinking family.  Your "progressive" tax system, public employee unions, and SOCIALISM did this.  Look at ALL of the "socialist" world.


Lost My Shorts's picture

One of us is out of touch with reality, it's true.  Not sure which.  Maybe it's the one with the single-circuit brain which which just flashes "SOCIALISM" to whatever input.

Change happens at the margin.  You can't explain or refute explanations of declining birth rate by citing the characteristics of people who still have children.  (N.B. the birth rate is probably not really declining any more.  It's just staying low; the chart at the top probably has the quality of a moving average, catching down to a low birth rate established years ago.)

1) People who themselves once had or aspired to a middle class standard of living are very reluctant to have children whom they expect to live in poverty.  Captian Obvious speaking here.  Have your own reality if you want.  Some poor people have lots of kids, and some don't; that's a complex digression.

2) Women on average want fewer children than they had two generations ago.  Maybe they wanted fewer back then too, but now they have a choice.  Strange that you would argue that point based on anecdotes about fertility clinics.

3) Who said marriage?  Who thinks nowdays that marriage has anything to do with children.  Well, maybe me and you, but if you look at the numbers, most parents don't make a strong connection nowdays.  Children and child support, on the other hand ...

4) When I was six, I walked a mile to first grade every day alone.  Now no one would do that.  (It might even be considered criminal in itself.)  Whether it's real crime, or irrational fear of crime, people feel the need to invest a lot more effort in protecting their children, which is a disincentive to having them in the first place.  It doesn't compare to death by pneumonia in the old days, over which you have no control.  You do have control over whether your children ever go anywhere without you, or you go with them, or they just stay home and play video games their whole lives.

5) Per student spending has been in decline since 2009, which is when the Coffee Party appeared.  Or something.  Per student spending is not even a meaningful measure anyway.  So much of that goes to federally mandated special education, so that one autistic child consumes more cash than 15 ordinary kids.  Common core might seem like "socialism" to you, but it's really crony capitalism, driven by the textbook makers, test makers, and other crony capitalist parasites that drain revenue from the schools.  Common core is designed to shift the locus of "campain contributions" from crony capitalist suppliers from the state level to the federal level, and Washington politicians from both teams are very happy with it.  The difference between Rs and Dems is one shovels money to crony capitalists only, and the other shovels money to cronycaps and the teachers' unions equally.  Meanwhile, class sizes keep growing, and the resources spent productively on regular kids keep shrinking.  I have been looking for a house for a year, and it tends to go like this:  affordable house, yeah! -> slum or Tea Party stronghold -> schools bad, crap -> change search criteria.

6) High health costs in the US are caused by greedy doctors, private equity vampires who own half the facilities, for-profit hospital chains with seven-figure administrators and nine-figure CEOs, greedy price-fixing pharmacos, and profit-skimming insurance companies.  Every one of the above has legions of lobbyists dropping $5K checks left and right in DC to maintain their price fixing and unethical business practices.  It's the purest example of crony capitalism in America.  The Fox-meme that it's all from socialism is just silly, though I know your one and only brain circuit would never agree with me.  Have a sick child and it costs you $100+ to see a doctor, and another $100 for any medication (that would cost $25 and $5 anywhere else even paying cash in full).  It hurts.

7)  Where I spend most of my time when in America is small town, semi-rural, nearly all white, full of retirees and military, and all they want is to cut taxes and don't see any children around.  I am glad you live in a more supportive place.

snr-moment's picture

Change happens at the margin.  You can't explain or refute explanations of declining birth rate by citing the characteristics of people who still have children.  (N.B. the birth rate is probably not really declining any more.  It's just staying low; the chart at the top probably has the quality of a moving average, catching down to a low birth rate established years ago.)

Umm, yes, you can.  It's called science.  Like why bacteria grown well in some soil but not soil with lots of fungus.  Also, regardless, of the chart above, the actual fertility rates (children per woman, over her entire life) is dropping.  We are now catching up with Europe.  Want correlation, look at Fertility Rates, National Debt Ratio, Average Tax Burden,  Wages post taxes and fees.

1) That's what I said.   House and Food.  2 parents working.  What's killing the middle class?  might have something to do with taxes and regulations.

2)My anecdotes fill up pages in every phone book.  Of course they want fewer now, since most survive (so far), but an Italian 1.3?  What they "want" is a product mostly of "WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD"  See Number 1.

3) You need to relearn to correlation between poverty and marriage.  Child support doesn't wake up at night to change diapers or provide extended family to help with daycare. (By the way, sending all the Elderly to Florida and Arizona instead of living at home, helping out, became a phenomenon about....when?)  And socialists don't like marriage anyway.  Witness Julia.  The family structure is too competitive for the government.

4) It's the poorest areas of the country with the least parental involvement and highest crime rates, that are still having kids.  Like I said, Americans suck at judging risk.  And it's a city/media/yellow journalism phenomenon

5) pure Bullshit.

  PS. That "hotbed" of tea partiness known as Chicago is closing schools, 129, mostly because of UNDERUTILIZATION. People who can't afford the ridiculous taxes, or lack of jobs due to businesses being driven away MOVE.  Or don't have kids. Karma's a bitch, huh?

By the way, that other hotbed of Tea Party activism, Detroit is supposed to have a really good school system.

6) No. It's caused by an entitlement mentality nurtured by the "socialists" that healthcare is a right, and everyone should live to be 100.  That everyone is entitled to an artificial heart, a quituple bypass, or 30 years of hemodialysis.  That these things are,, and will always remain, extremely expensive (since the world is only sterile on the human level) should require no explanation.

7) Well, yes, retirees and military tend to have fewer children, as a rule.  And I do.  And I love it.


And yes, you are very much out of touch.

PFO's picture

Hey Dawgs,

'Lost my Shorts' hits the nail on the head!

My Ex left me for a 'navyman' from a family of 3 generations sucking off the gubbermints teat and I never saw my son or daughter again.

Went down to the courthouse numerous times looking for 'justice' but all I found was 'just-us' dead-beat child-abusing uncle-dads standing around wondering how we  became chattel of the:

satanic-kaballic-talmudic-feminist-pedophile-savage capitalist-consumer credit culture of death

But, may I suggest instead of getting mad, we ALL just get even:

Finally, I spent 6 weeks in the Philippines last Winter and haven't seen a more happy-kid-oriented culture since I grew-up in the 1960s.

Looking at the demographics of the country it is a perfect bell-curve, with over 1/2 the population [52 Million] under 30!

That dawgs, is pure venture capital.

It's also pure military muscle! So, China should think twice before they go picking a fight with the PI, they don't have 1/2 the military-age men.



PS Don't believe Phillipinos are up to a fight with the Chicoms? Ask the Japs, they lost thousands of their best troops AFTER MacArthur left in 1942. The Pinos owned the country at night, the Japs only the cities by day.

My host and his father [Local police chief] killed five Japanese soldiers one morning in 1943 because they were raping girls in their village. The son put their eyes out with his BB gun and Dad finished them off with his 45; adding new meaning to the term "hand-to-hand" combat.

That night a Harvard educated Japanese officer came to their door to apologize for the behavior of the slain-soldiers and warn them to flee from the enraged Japanese Commanding Major.

G-R-U-N-T's picture

Socialism is the biggest boner killer ever invented for the over 100 IQ crowd.

LOL, Classic!

Nexus789's picture

Try citing the impact of corporate welfare which is more relevant rather than simply parroting 'socialisam'.  The US is not and never will be a socialist country. 

mayhem_korner's picture



The chart says little about sex.  It says a lot about birth rates.  The gap is what I refer to as the Norma McCorvey effect.  Grew in the 60s and memorialized in '73.  Anyone who doesn't think it's significant is blind.

Erudite Redneck's picture

55 million babies killed.  God will judge this nation.  God said he would not be mocked.

PT's picture

As I get older, I tend to agree with you, though I still prefer abortion to letting an unwanted child live.  Life is hard enough as it is, why force an unwanted child to endure it?  Do 'em a favour and wipe 'em out so they don't have to endure the horrors of this world.

On the other hand, these days I think of abortion as a result of a lack of faith in God, at the least.  If someone aborts due to financial worries, then I can easily accept that as worshipping money to the exclusion of God - yes, that is a big sin.

I still say that the problem should be attacked from a different angle - bring up the kids right and they shouldn't want to abort.  By the time they want to abort, it is too late.  Just my 2 cents. 

Omegaman2211's picture

So you prefer murder to letting an unwanted human being live? Got it.

PT's picture

You prefer 80 years of pain as opposed to two minutes of pain?

MilwaukeeMark's picture

Who made YOU or ANYONE the judge of that. That's EXACTLY the kind of hubris that got US(A) here in the first place.

Keyser's picture

Had those 55 million babies been born, the unemployment rate would be in the neighborhood of 60% and the system would have already crashed. Perhaps our forefathers were onto something when they explored Eugenics, however abhorent that may sound. 

STP's picture

Demographics AND Eugenics will eventually play a role.  I'll never forget a qoute by Rep. Patsy Mink, on "the Reproductive Rights of Low Income women on AFDC."!

Here in the Section 8 capitol of SoCal, Palmdale, California, you can go to any Walmart and see hordes of third world peasant Illegals, with three, four and sometimes, five kids each.  And none of them look very bright to me.  They all have that vacant stare and look well-suited for the Service Economy jobs.

Fact:  You're not going to find many apples in an onion field, that's for sure!

While I am a conservative, I'd rather spend $800 on an abortion now, than a half million dollars on their progeny.  Better yet, stop the EITC and quit making me pay for other people's kids!

PT's picture

God is judging our nations.  He is taking our wealth and giving it to someone else.

Testudo321's picture

You mean the god loving Chinese?

Where abortion is not only legal, but the state can force you to abort if they think you have too many chilren? And too many usually means more than one?

PT's picture

No, I mean the God, although I was actually hesitant even to make such a comment because some people might use it to say, "See!  Jamie and Lloyd really are doing God's work!"  Sure, they might be doing "God's work".  But there are a bunch of psychopaths in wards for the criminally insane all over the world that are using the same argument to justify their own deeds.  And who's to say a homicidal maniac isn't doing God's work if their next victim just happens to be named "Jamie" or "Lloyd"?

From what I understand of modern history, a bunch of rich US people deliberately set up the conditions to shift all the US prosperity to China, India and Mexico.  They could have chosen to have Chinese factories serving Chinese people and US factories serving US people but no, they preferred to put the production in the cheap countries and the sales in the expensive countries.  For every "well-off" US worker (who then loses his job), there is a Chin/Mex/Indian low paid worker who can't afford to buy the stuff he makes ... yet.  I don't blame the foreigners from embracing the US offer - they got top production facilities and technology, and a couple of them got rich, although they would have done their countrymen a favour if they had have kept the sales local (but why would they do that if they can make more money by selling to the first world?)  Overall, western prosperity is in the process of being given to other countries and for the religiously inclined, I see no problem in thinking of it as a divine decision, although atheists are free to examine it on a more human level.  When the atheists get bored with analyzing the process on a non-divine level, they may like to make their analysis a little bit more interesting.  It ain't the first time God has "taken from those who abandoned him and handed success to their enemies."  We are greedy and we are stupid, but what directs the greed and the stupidity?

Regarding the whole China and their one-child policy thing, for all these years they've been doing us a favour.  Each person on this planet currently has an area approx. 200 metres x 200 metres with which to attend to their needs.  Some of that area is uninhabitable and some of it should be made available to wild animals.  Of course we can free up more area by putting people in the sky instead of on the ground, as long as they like to pay for elevator maintenance.  The point being, at what point do you think the world will be over-populated:  1 person per 40 000 m2?  1 person per 200 m2?  One person per square metre?  When we're waiting for someone to go for a piss so we can purify the urine and drink it?


RafterManFMJ's picture


Increase the importation of Mexicans and Somalis. That was easy.

Villageidiot777's picture

US should increase Mexicans import since Europe has covered Somali imports quite well. Get 'em while you can.

DaveyJones's picture

unfortunately, dying empires have an increasingly hard time doing that

PT's picture

Ummm, does this mean our taxes decrease as we save billions of dollars in all them schools we no longer have to build / maintain?
Does this mean our education standards increase due to an oversupply of teachers allowing us to choose only the very best?

Yeah, I thought it was all one way ... 

Semi-employed White Guy's picture

Now that we've gone from Absolutely no homos in the miltary to .... Don't ask, don't tell under Slick Willie to ... Be a flamer, and please DO tell under the Obamunist, the returning soldiers might not be re-kindling their relationships with a member of the opposite sex.

piceridu's picture

And some ask why they want to have immigration reform...exponential growth without birthing pains.