- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
- Messages
- 8,769
- Reaction score
- 9,888
Lack of population growth isn't really an issue in capitalism. It's especially an issue in socialism, because it creates a bigger burden on the young to pay for the old. The greater the burden, the worse the quality of life for a young person, which will in turn cause them to leave that country for another where they can be less burdened. But that just puts an even greater burden on the young people staying there. It's a spiraling effect all the way down.The reasons aren't unknown, the basic trade off has been well discussed for a while. When the risk of children dying young is high, people have more kids. When the risk is low, people devote more resources to fewer children.
As countries become wealthier with better healthcare systems, the risk of early childhood deaths decline so people have fewer kids and instead devote more of their income to making sure that 1 kid is all he/she can be. This is why we see the decline in birth rates in regions with high relative wealth and that the world birth rate has been declining for years. Now only the poorest countries have high birth rates and even they are slowing down as the economic and health gains in the rest of the world finally make it down to them.
The capitalism problem is that so much economic policy is driven by growth and you can't have perpetual economic growth with a shrinking or stagnant population. So capitalism needs more people so that more things are bought and sold and tax revenue can increase. But biology doesn't need more people. And thus the conflict/concern about birth rates.
In capitalism, sure you don't get economic growth. But since people are less reliant on other's to pay for them, there's less of a burden on young people, so they continue to create a healthy economy with companies, jobs, investments, etc.