Jump to content

Americans aren't making enough babies to replace ourselves


Recommended Posts

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/americans-aren-t-making-enough-babies-replace-ourselves-n956931

 

Quote

For the population to reproduce itself at current numbers, the “total fertility rate” needs to be 2,100 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age over their lifetime, researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in their report, released early Thursday. But the latest data show a current rate of just 1,765.5 per 1,000, or 16 percent below the number needed to keep the population stable without additions through immigration.

 

The total fertility rate has been declining steadily for seven years, but the numbers for 2017 represent the biggest drop in recent history. The rate for 2016 was 1,820.5; for 2015, 1,843.5; and for 2014, 1,862.5.

 

Quote

Experts say the decline isn’t due to a single cause, but rather a combination of several factors, including changing economics, delays in childbirth by women pursuing jobs and education, the greater availability of contraception, and a decline in teen pregnancies.

 

This all seems really good (except for changing economics, which reads to me as not having money).

 

EDIT: Put the updated quote in the top box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

Am I missing something here?

 

You missed the part where it says the current rate is 1,765.5 per 1,000. 2 children for every 1 woman keeps the population flat. Less than that and you end up with a declining population. For instance, Japan has been below 1.5 children per woman for a while now and it's freaking people in the country out. 1.77 children per woman is pretty bad unless you start supplementing that aging population with immigrants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the article has been corrected, and the paragraph now reads: 

 

Quote

For the population to reproduce itself at current numbers, the “total fertility rate” needs to be 2,100 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age over their lifetime, researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in their report, released early Thursday. But the latest data show a current rate of just 1,765.5 per 1,000, or 16 percent below the number needed to keep the population stable without additions through immigration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

Yeah I get that, but wouldn't that be 2+ children per woman per lifetime, not per year? I should really, really go to bed. I feel like I'm gonna read this later and have a good chuckle.

 

No, the article is written dumb and they fixed it. It was 2.1 children per woman over that woman's lifetime. It's now 1.77 children per woman over hat woman's lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dodger said:

I ask this not to be snarky but because I'm just not that great maff. What would the birth rate be if we weren't aborting around 800,000 babies a year? Is it statistically insignificant or would it make an actual difference?  

 

As in that abortion would be legal or abortions would totally cease?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

As in that abortion would be legal or abortions would totally cease?

As in that if we weren't aborting approximately 800k babies a year in the U.S., so those 800k babies get born, would it have a statistically significant impact on the annual birth rate? So yes assuming abortion "totally ceased"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

As in that if we weren't aborting approximately 800k babies a year in the U.S., so those 800k babies get born, would it have a statistically significant impact on the annual birth rate? So yes assuming abortion "totally ceased"

 

There are 11.8 abortions per 1000 woman in the US, so that 1.77 per woman would become 1.78 per woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dodger said:

I ask this not to be snarky but because I'm just not that great maff. What would the birth rate be if we weren't aborting around 800,000 babies a year? Is it statistically insignificant or would it make an actual difference?  

There were about 3.9 million births in 2017 and about 638K abortions in 2015 (the last reported data by the CDC), so it's not statistically insignificant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SFLUFAN said:

There were about 3.9 million births in 2017 and about 638K abortions in 2015 (the last reported data by the CDC), so it's not statistically insignificant.

So what would the birth rate be if we had say 4.5 million births instead of 3.9 million a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...