Economy

[BigRedBuster]

 

[BigRedBuster]

F’ing stupid.  
 

 

[Archy1221]

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Archy1221]

 

[BigRedBuster]

This is a interesting.  
 

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

On 1/27/2023 at 7:25 PM, Archy1221 said:

 

Demographic shifts and the cuts necessary to actually balance the budget (along with tax increases) simply make it impossible. 

 

The United States will always run a deficit. Servicing that debt is a growing problem that won't be addressed. 

[RedDenver]

3 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Demographic shifts and the cuts necessary to actually balance the budget (along with tax increases) simply make it impossible. 

 

The United States will always run a deficit. Servicing that debt is a growing problem that won't be addressed. 

Not to mention that the "payment on the debt" make up a large part of the bond market, which is larger than the stock market both in total dollars and transactions per day. Treasury bonds are considered among the safest investments out there and are the risk basis for most other investments. Getting rid of the debt is equivalent to shrinking the size of the bond markets and removing a lot of the least risky investments available, so we should be careful of unintended consequences.

[Born N Bled Red]

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is a interesting.  
 

 

 

Well I'll be damned. Building a society that favors the rich and drives both parents to work.out of the home in order for a family to survive drives down birthrates... huh. Who'da thunk it?

[BigRedBuster]

26 minutes ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

Well I'll be damned. Building a society that favors the rich and drives both parents to work.out of the home in order for a family to survive drives down birthrates... huh. Who'da thunk it?

That’s world birth rates. It’s happening almost everywhere. 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

Well I'll be damned. Building a society that favors the rich and drives both parents to work.out of the home in order for a family to survive drives down birthrates... huh. Who'da thunk it?

Oh I don’t know.  My wife stays home and i have four kids 

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

That’s world birth rates. It’s happening almost everywhere. 

Low birth rates have a lot to do with career growth among women. When facing the choice of having a career or having children, women are increasingly choosing a career.

 

In first world cultures where women have careers but are also extremely patriarchal - such as Japan and South Korea - the birth rates have fallen off a cliff and the drop off is even more drastic.

 

Unfortunately this demographic collapse has no easy fixes. Most developed economies will suffer from population declines - although the United States is fortunate that growth comes from immigration. 

[BigRedBuster]

7 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Low birth rates have a lot to do with career growth among women. When facing the choice of having a career or having children, women are increasingly choosing a career.

 

In first world cultures where women have careers but are also extremely patriarchal - such as Japan and South Korea - the birth rates have fallen off a cliff and the drop off is even more drastic.

 

Unfortunately this demographic collapse has no easy fixes. Most developed economies will suffer from population declines - although the United States is fortunate that growth comes from immigration. 

I know that.  This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. We live in a society where women CAN have a career. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

21 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is a interesting.  
 

 

 

There were 2.5 billion people on Earth in 1950. There are 7.8 billion people on the Earth today.

 

I realize the twist comes in our interpretation of "rate" but it's a big semantics stretch for me to call this "population collapse" or fret that it's anything but extremely necessary for the survival of the species. 

[BigRedBuster]

33 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

There were 2.5 billion people on Earth in 1950. There are 7.8 billion people on the Earth today.

 

I realize the twist comes in our interpretation of "rate" but it's a big semantics stretch for me to call this "population collapse" or fret that it's anything but extremely necessary for the survival of the species. 

I thought that comment was a little melodramatic.  I would be interested to read the reasoning behind the comment.

 

I look at the issue more from a labor perspective.  Right now, we have a major issue in the US with a labor shortage.  Part of that is because our birth rate isn't keeping up with retirement/death rate and that's been the case for a few decades.  I found it interesting that the birth rate issue is an issue not just here in the US.