America's Fertility Rate Falls To Record Low

Tyler Durden's picture

The US isn't yet grappling with the economic disaster that is a shrinking popuation - unlike Japan. Though it's starting to look like a not-too-distant possibility. US birthrates fell to yet another historic low in 2016 as a whirlwind of economic and cultural factors inspire more women to delay, or forgo, having children. According to provisional data for the fourth quarter provided by the CDC, the US birthrate has declined to 62 births per 1000 women – its lowest level on record, and down from 62.5 in 2015.

This is especially troubling because demographers worry that a dwindling birth rate will hurt economic growth and tax revenues needed to fund transfer payments to a growing elderly population, as more members of the baby boomer generation age into retire.

The CDC did not say why the birth rate is declining. But according to Axios, research and surveys have shown several reasons, including wider availability of birth control, personal economic instability from student loans or other debt, women focused on launching a career before starting a family, and a growing acceptance that not everyone wants to have children.

If the Trump administration achieves higher economic growth, it’s unlikely to do so fast enough to support the mandated 9% increase in entitlement spending for older Americans without more deficit spending. Trump says he intends to preserve Social Security and Medicare spending levels.

The highest birthrates are now seen among women aged 30-34. Previously, the highest rate had been for women aged 25-29, which fell to 101.9 in 2016.

Chart courtesy of Axios

Furthermore, as Statista notes, teenage pregnancy is in continual decline in the United States. As preliminary data released in a newreport by the National Centre for Health Statistics on Friday reveals, the birth rate of mothers in the 15-19 age group dropped to a record low of 20.3, amounting to 209,480 births in 2016. Compared to 2015, this is a decrease of almost 9% and even 62% when compared to 1996.

Conversely, birth rates of women aged 40-44 are on the rise: While it stood at 6.8 in 1996, the provisional birth rate for this age group is 11.4 births per 1,000 women in 2016, which accounts for an increase of 4% compared to the previous year.

Infographic: Teen Birth Rate at Its Lowest Level in Twenty Years | Statista

You will find more statistics at Statista

Here are a few other interesting data points from the CDC, courtesy of Axios:

  • The CDC estimates the fertility rate in 1960 was about 118 births per 1,000 women, or almost double what it is today.
  • Despite the record low birth rate, more than 3.94 million babies were born in 2016, which was about 37,000 fewer than 2015.
  • The highest birth rate is now among women aged 30-34 at 102.6 births per 1,000 women. Previously, the highest rate had been for women aged 25-29, which fell to 101.9 in 2016.
  • U.S. births by race origin of the mother: 52% white, 23% Hispanic, 14% black, 6% Asian, 1% Native American/native of Alaska, Hawaii or Pacific Islands.

* * *

Economists worry that if birthrates continue to decline, America’s economy will enter a period of stagnant growth like that experienced by Japan over the past two decades. As we reported last year, the problem of falling fertility in Japan, which at 1.4 births per woman, has one of the lowest fertility rate in the developed world, is so severe, that Japan's lawmakers have decided to take action.  Late last year, Japan’ cabinet approved a record $830 billion spending budget for fiscal 2017, which includes child-rearing support. However, the birth rate in the US remains positive, while Japan's population is shrinking.

 

However, at this rate, the local population may not need the free money in the not too distant future. The only hope, as in the case of many European nations, is that a surge in immigration will offset the natural decline of the domestic population, whose average age has never been higher...

Comment viewing options

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

Four words:

 

Im mig ra tion.

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

Economists worry that if birthrates continue to decline, America’s
economy will enter a period of stagnant growth like that experienced by
Japan over the past two decades.

Why must we have growth?

Only because the debt-based monetary system and its rentier class requires it.

Otherwise, growth is a negative, not a positive.

More polution.

More drain on our fixed endowment of natural resources.

More species extinction due to crowding out of habitat.

greenskeeper carl's picture

Simple, HH, without growth, the Ponzi schemes run by our government come crashing down, quickly. Thats why its so important.

 

Come on people, my wife and I had three, and are now surgically incapable of having more. Get to work....

besnook's picture

i agree. all these stormfronters on zh should focus on procreation rather than fear of colored people domination of the white race since white girls have the lowest birthrate of all people.

Stuck on Zero's picture

"Economists worry that if birthrates continue to decline, America’s economy will enter a period of stagnant growth like that experienced by Japan over the past two decades."

How stupid. It's the voluntary economic activity per person that counts. In a growing nation all the economic activity goes into building schools, infrastructure i.e. stuff for the new kids.

gold rubeberg's picture

Exactly. Living standards in the US were excellent when the population was 250 million, and there's no fundamental reason whatsoever why they couldn't be again. A higher population means more total GDP but not more economic performance per person.

If there were any ill effects at all they'd come from government policies dependent on population growth, like piling up levels of debt that would take a billion people working around the clock to pay off ...

AVmaster's picture

Are you kidding?

Try dating a western woman these days. Straight up crazy SJW bitches that might accuse you of rape at any moment... And the government will be plenty happy to throw your ass in jail for anything she says...

This is why the statement: "The highest birthrates are now seen among women aged 30-34." is true because those women aren't as crazy as the twenty something SJW warrior bullshit of today...

And if you have a kid with them 20 somethings... It's gone... She's gonna leave ur ass and slap ya with child support...

Have a kid? Not worth it.

MGTOW

PT's picture

Re "The highest birthrates are now seen among women aged 30-34." is true because those women aren't as crazy as the twenty something SJW warrior bullshit of today" :

Just 'cos a woman gets older doesn't mean she gets saner.  Late 30s and their body clock starts ringing at them and they suddenly become desperate to have babies before it is too late.  So yes, they suddenly realize now the men hold all the cards and they'd better get their shit together real quick if they want any babies at all, but I don't trust the sanity to return.  The insanity just takes a different direction.

clymer's picture

BPA, GMO's, Chemtrails, vax, fluoride,

engineered eugenics so the only population growth comes from immigrants

easier to control

TBT or not TBT's picture

Planned Parenthood has outdone all of those by orders of magnitude.  Progressive taxation and feminism are huge too.   Chemtrail?   Good lord.   

hedda.lettuce's picture

well... if all that bullshit is true, which it isn't, one can safely and reliably expect that many men never get their shit together, regardless of age. They just get hairier, fatter, lazier, and dumber, ass cheeks hanging out everywhere. And then they lose their teeth.

PT's picture

hedda:  Deep down I always recognize that there may be some part of my personality that predisposes crazy women to be attracted to me and I being too stupid to figure out I am creating my own misery - I don't realize they are crazy until it is too late and I have no idea how to modify my behaviour to attract the sane ones.

SweetDougisaTwat's picture

You didn't mention the allegation of abuse and its concomitant restraining order.

pliny the longer's picture

this.  plus, have u seen the eligible 'candidates' recently?  no self respecting man would even want to coplate with them.  the even 'sort of quasi kinda cute i guess' ones are such insufferable bitches its just not worth it.  

i have sons, i tell them to ram their heads into a wall for 4 straight hours, its about the same experience

Teja's picture

Hm. Did the thought that the other side might view the current overweight pickup driving conspiracy obsessed male population similarly ever occur to you?

Problem is, lesbian couples CAN get children, but the number of children per such couple must be > 4 to keep population numbers constant.

pliny the longer's picture

that thought did occur, i just chose to ignore it.  seriously, though, i don't know what the answer is.  i guess each generation has to figure it out for themselves.  i worry about my sons, the wrong woman can absolutely ruin their lives.  not saying same can't be true for dudes, but i see it far, far more frequently with PITA women.  just my lens.  

exi1ed0ne's picture

It has nothing to do with SJW snowflakeism.  This is seen everywhere in all advanced economies because it takes longer to get to the point where you are established enough to where having kids makes sense, as well as widespread access to birth control. 

Take a look at any group of people that aren't 1st gen immigrants, refugees, or illegals.  ALL of them are suffering from declining birth rates because the economy sucks balls and it takes a lot longer to get your life into a position to realistically have kids.

Yog Soggoth's picture

God ain't making any more land, so why in the heck would we want more people?

BrownCoat's picture

Economists indeed. The economy is for people. "Goods and services" are for human living standards. If living standards suck, then "economists" are measuring the wrong thing. I don't care about numbers, I about my living standard and whether or not my neighborhood is a wasteland.

playit's picture

I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do... www.jobproplan.com

BrownCoat's picture

When do populations decline? Under socialism! The USSR had a declining population. Western Europe, Japan and the USSA have declining populations. There are other causes of population decline, but socialism spectacularly causes decline. Socialism kills living standards.  

The "solution" of immigration only makes the situation worse. Immigrants can prop up the numbers at a huge societal expense. Too much immigration and the indigenous culture dissipates. Importing stupid people prevents a high tech society from working properly. Immigration may mask the problem only to hasten the continuing economic and social decline.

Mile High Perv's picture

Chairman Mao would disagree with you.

I would actually posit that the intentional destruction of the "family" structure is the real cause of the drop in populations in all the locations that you've mentioned (other than the USSR which is a different animal altogether)

Having a stable father-mother-children structure seems to be becoming the exception rather than the norm.

PT's picture

Oooooh, the magic "Socialism" just happens to benefit a bunch of Corporates while totally screwing the workers.  Becoz Socialism doesn't work ...

The badge on the hood might say "Socialism" but when you look under the bonnet you see pure Fascism.

And yes I am totally comfortable with the idea that "Pure Socialism" is fundamentally unworkable, but I am likewise convinced that "Pure Capitalism" suffers the same problem.  Pure Capitalism, Pure Socialism, Benevolent Kings, Unicorns and Fairies.  They all live together.

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.  But under Communism, it is the reverse!!!

Capitalism is a great idea.  But if you're working your guts out and still starving, it might be time to escape the false "Capitalism - Communism / Socialism" paradigm and look in a totally different direction.  Go back to First Principles.  Question ALL of the underlying assumptions.  Every other branch of Science does this, why not the Economists?

Production, Resources, Energy, Labour, Information, Technology, Distribution.  And what do you really want?

stacking12321's picture

You seem to conveniently ignore one glaring difference:

With capitalism, economic exchange is voluntary, so if you don't feel like being exploited, just walk away.

With socialism, the barrel of a gun is pointed at you, so you'd better cooperate, comrade.

PT's picture

At this point, yes, with Capitalism you are free ... but you have no land, no resources, and huge competition.  You do as your customer requires of you or you starve to death.  Yes, a few figure a clever way to "escape", but that happens under any system.

Blue Balls's picture

Socalism the boner killer all over the world.

cbxer55's picture

I know Southern California (socal) is bad, but I lived there for 26 years. Never killed my boner. Lots of pretty, scantily clad ladies at the beach ya know! ;-)

Sonny Brakes's picture

How many children did you father in those 26 years?

Blue Balls's picture

Who needs children when you have porn hub.

Beowulf55's picture

"Lots of pretty, scantily clad ladies at the beach ya know! ;-)"

And most dumber than a sack of hammers. And...will bred a generation dumber than them.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Welcome to Costco.  I love you.  

GUS100CORRINA's picture

America's Fertility Rate Falls To Record Low

My response: When a culture of a nation continues to attack GOD's definition of family, fertility rate will suffer.

But the more important issue concerns abortion.

America has MURDERED 55+ million of its preborn via abortion since the 1970s. So people bitching about fertility rate need to note that America murdered 55+ million of its future citizens. GOD's big quarrel with America concerns the sacrifice of its children. Historically, Israel was doing the same CRAP 1000’s of years ago during its worship of pagan god BAAL. Sadly, GOD ended up judging the Jewish people for their transgressions. It did not end well to say the least.

The real question: What is GOD going to do with America? We will most probably find out shortly. GOD being merciful has given America a brief final chance to change and repent from its SIN of massive murder of the preborn. GOD has chosen a person to lead the change and his name is President DONALD J. TRUMP. All recent events and data suggest that President TRUMP is America's Nineveh moment! We need to make sure we don’t squander this opportunity and end the murder of the preborn.

HEALTHCARE BILL IS A REAL BIG DEAL. SUPPORT FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD MUST END OR IT WILL BE LIGHTS OUT FOR AMERICA!!

By the way, if you are a PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL and DON'T LIKE WHAT I WROTE, I HAVE ONE WORD FOR YOU. TOUGH!

PT's picture

Some people are not interested in having children if they think those children will only end up starving to death.  Funny, that.

Some take it a step further and want to ensure their children are high enough on the social ladder to attract a mate that will allow their grand children to do all right and not starve to death either.

Who woulda thunk it?

You mean when both men and women are scrambling to grab any spare scrap of work they can, in order to feed themselves and keep up appearances to attract a mate ( half-decent clothes, hair-style, pretend to be unstressed even though 90% of their earnings go into taxes and either the rent or the mortgage ), they might not be inclined to commit the next 20 years to providing for children as well?  Why, it's almost like after all them years at school they actually did learn how to add up!

A native living in the bush may not have the material things of the modern world, but everyone knows where they can find food, be it picking off of plants or hunting down animals.  Modern man is totally clueless.  All he knows is relying on someone else to appreciate his work, give him money which he then uses to buy food.  And he can not gain food without keeping up appearances.  No-one wants to hire the uncombed, unshaved homeless dude who only owns one set of clothes and never has a shower.  Chew on that.

U4 eee aaa's picture

Amen brother. What goes around comes around.

As I have said before.

Baby boomers have institutionalized abortion and now euthanasia will be institutionalized against them because there are no children left to pay their pensions and health care. They ate their seed corn!

TBT or not TBT's picture

OTOH most of those 55million unborn would have voted Democrat.   Game Over.   

Omen IV's picture

Beyond Stupid!

so you are creating human beings for a life of “welfare” – with IQ's less than 100 - robots are cheaper with no social costs -   lets call it what it

SEX - The FUN  - is free will – no third party is demanding the FUN be pursued.

The FUN is the: risk, responsibility, benefit for those engaged in the FUN – no third party was “asked” for permission.

If the FUN can result in Recreation – and / or – Procreation based on empirical data for millions of years – it is the conscious risk of those engaged – no one else!

Therefore the FUN is the responsibility of those enabling the FUN.

if there are finite resources in the world, why is there "unlimited" FUN without consequences ?

if the FUN was not licensed? If you are acknowledging the “Procreation” has no value at the margin (less than 100 IQ) or else someone would bid for it as a worker – then why produce – or – reproduce? I put forth the proposition, the ultimate critical path is not global warming via fossil fuels but too many humans and the danger they create.

Methane in garbage dumps all over the world produce multiples the pollution of fossil fuels and are completely dependent on the derivative….people. No people no garbage!

Instead of carbon taxes or minimum income – the time has come to pay for:

Vasectomies / Tubal Ligations – $10,000 each – 1 million per day for 10 years / 365 days a year or 3 Billion plus to reduce the worlds population by 3.5 Billion from the present 7.5 Billion.

forget raising the cost of living via energy taxes or minimum income – get to the source of the problem ………………….FUN

 

Public Education Funding makes no sense and countless other entitlements - it is the responsibility of those engaged in the FUN - no one else

 

SeaMonkeys's picture

Great point. We are approaching a world where labor is becoming obsolete. Adding value is not something that the population as a whole can participate in. At this point, why are we chasing growth when instead we should be solving society's problems before they get out of control. We can 3D print a house for 10K in 24 hours. A car for a few hundred. I hope to see a day when food production can be improved enough to make it feasable to grow your own food anywhere. Call it multi-trophic verticle farming for both urban and rural dwellers.

Perhaps one day we can lessen the need for money itself. Kind of return to the west of centuries past and homestead. As of now of course, you can't survive without dollars, which means that the population is forced into wage labor. 

 

Mile High Perv's picture

TPTB don't want these problems solved. In fact, quite the opposite - the more the problems, the richer they get.

RichardParker's picture

+1000

Allegedly, it would only cost 30 billion a year to solve world hunger. 

https://www.google.com/#q=how+much+would+it+cost+to+solve+world+hunger

That would be less than half a month of quantitative easing.

stacking12321's picture

Not quite.

World hunger is not a problem to be solved.

It's a symptom, that many of those who have children, are not responsible enough to have and raise them.

The more money you give to poor people with children, the more children they have.

It's an exponential growth situation.

TBT or not TBT's picture

The Fed has done just fine with 2D printing.  

malek's picture

"Why must we have growth?"

Because otherwise we have statism?

waspwench's picture

Growth is unsustainable.   Yet we are constantly told that we need growth.   Obviously, endless growth  will not work.   We would breed outselves into extinction.   What is needed is sustainability, equilibrium, stasis, balance.   Almost no-one is addressing this.

Our government has made it difficult for educated, middle-class people to set up households and to have families.   They have made it easy for poor people, illegals and economic migrants of the moslem persuasion - these people are subsidised and having large families is actually profitable for them.   

It would seem that the plan is to reduce or largely eliminate the better educated and higher IQ elements of our society and replace them with low IQ, obedient, easily controlled serfs.   Once the appropriate ratio is achieved then a massive population reduction can be engineered and the NWO will be established.

All seeems to be going according to plan.   Even if people accept that this is indeed the long term aim, I cannot imagine that there would be enough of us willing to have large families to combat the situation, so.....

neilhorn's picture

An Idiocracy come true? I thought that movie was supposed to be entertaining comedy. It apparently was a prophecy. Get Brawndo!

PT's picture

C'mon, everyone knows that Idiocracy was a documentary.

But don't worry, plenty of 'tards lead kick-ass lives ...

hedda.lettuce's picture

Mike Judge is the ONLY man who should be reproducing.

I hope to run into him soon...

WileyCoyote's picture

You sound like a student of Dr. Bartlett. The most misunderstood thing is the exponential function! Growth generally solves nothing and causes even more problems.