Mothers and fathers die. For the population to remain constant, the two of them need to produce about 2.1 children on average in order to replace themselves. (The extra 0.1 is necessary to offset the deaths of children who never reach reproductive age.) This figure is called the “fertility rate.”
Recent data shows that the fertility rate in the United States is nowhere near that 2.1 figure. It has instead dropped to an all-time low of about 1.6. American woman on average give birth to only 1.6 children.
This raises a question: How fast will our population decline due to our low fertility rate of 1.6 compared to the replacement rate of 2.1?
The answer is, pretty fast. At our current fertility rate of 1.6, the U.S. population will decline by 50% in 77 years.
Granted, that calculation doesn’t account for immigration into the country. But are we willing to accept an enormous number of immigrants – something like 200,000,000 – over the course of three-quarters of a century?
That would constitute the biggest immigration wave in the history of the world. It would be much bigger, on both an absolute basis and percentage basis, than the massive waves of the Irish to America in the 1800s, Italians in the 1900s, and even Latinos in the 2000s. Immigration on that scale is inconsistent with the current political sentiment and, arguably, inconsistent with maintaining our American culture.
If it makes you feel better, know that the fertility rate in most of Europe is even lower. In Italy, it’s about 1.2. At that fertility rate, the population of Italy will decline by about 75% while the population of America declines by “only” 50% over those 77 years.
Extend that out further. At a fertility rate of 1.2 over 800 years, the population of Italy will decline to approximately 20 people. At least there won’t be any complaints about a housing shortage.
(BTW, consider the fact that this ridiculously low fertility rate in Italy is in a country that is nearly universally Catholic, and that the Catholic Church prohibits abortion and contraception. Along with art and food, the rhythm method has apparently been perfected in Italy.)
Back to America. The bottom line is America is apt to shrink. I see some good and some bad in that.
First the good. As a matter of personal aesthetics, I think we have enough people here already. The roads seem sufficiently crowded. Even hiking in the remote mountains of Colorado, it’s rare that I wish there were more people on the trail.
It’s true that our cities are hollowed out, but that’s due to crime, corruption and mismanagement, not a lack of people.
Now the bad. Our economy, like most modern economies, hinges on growth. Imagine an economy where the gross domestic product is flat forever. Imagine an economy where the stock market doesn’t go up and everyone’s 401K stagnates.
Worst of all, imagine an economy where the number of young workers paying Social Security taxes drops dramatically due to low birth rates while the number of retirees collecting benefits rises dramatically due to longer life spans.
This touches on a basic issue. Our Social Security system is a big pyramid scheme. Old people like me tell ourselves that we’re simply collecting the money we paid in over a lifetime of work, but, in point of fact, the average retiree collects far more than he paid in. That’s possible only because the number of payors continues to grow faster than the number of payees.
At our current fertility rate, expect a collapse sometime in the next few decades. We’ll lack the workers to fill the bottom of the pyramid.
Finally, there are some aspects of our de-population explosion that are philosophical, metaphysical and even religious.
God told the Abrahamic religions to “be fruitful and multiply.” We obeyed. Did we ever.
This advice to “be fruitful and multiply” was given twice. The first time was at Creation when the human population was two people. The second time was after the Flood when the population was eight people.
We haven’t heard that advice for a long time. During that long time, we’ve multiplied and fruitified to a population of eight billion people. If the advice is still applicable, then when will it expire? When we’re eight trillion? Eight quadrillion? Do we just keep multiplying and fruitifying until there’s no place to stand?
In the philosophical realm, there’s this. We seem to be the only form of life in the universe that is capable of asking questions like “How many of us are enough?” And, from the evidence found so far, we inhabit the only home of all life. As a philosophical, moral and ethical matter, what is our obligation to propagate? To what extent? How many? Where?
These questions are not easy, but it’s worth talking about them. We might be the only creatures anywhere at any time to have that talk.
Note to readers: In case you’re wondering, I fathered at least two children, and one of them gave birth to my grandchild a few months ago. Two of the three pay Social Security taxes.
the Aspen beat 
Glenn,
I haven’t gone through the math, but I think Optimus type robots will be a big part of the equation. In the next decade there is likely to be 100 million robots. These robots will be way more productive than humans driving up our GDP significantly…I don’t know if we should count them in the per capita GDP. They don’t get Social Security, no health care or much of what humans require…so far less to operate with a lot more output.
My grandfather had 144 cousins, my dad 40, me 21, my three kids 4, none of my kids have kids. My wife’s three kids have 5. Turn the lights out and close the door. Tom
With the exception of the bigoted and uninformed anti-Catholic sidetrack, interesting article, Mr Beaton. Be a bigot all you like. But at least be an educated one. The Catholic Church has not emphasized the rhythm method alone since the 1980s. Catholics use Natural Family which focuses on ovulation and other indicators of fertility.
John, thank you for that correction. I have a couple of thoughts about this and about your comment.
First, I have a lot of respect for the Catholic Church. I’ve even thought from time to time about converting, particularly on my several walks of all 500 miles of the Camino de Santiago and many other multi-hundred mile pilgrimages (you can find my writings on the subject by typing “Camino” into the search box above). My brother did convert before he died.
I firmly believe that despite it’s earthly limitations and occasional human flaws, the Catholic Church has been an enormous power for goodness — probably the greatest power for goodness in history.
Despite my ponderings on the subject, I’ve always concluded at the end of the day that I want a relationship with my Maker without intermediaries. But I respect those who see it differently, and I certainly respect their Church.
Here’s my most important point in this long reply: If what was intended as my light-hearted poke caused you offense, I sincerely apologize.
Now, onto the specifics. As for Natural Family Planning, AI says (though I realize AI is certainly not definitive):
“Natural Family Planning (NFP) refers to methods couples use to avoid or achieve pregnancy by tracking a woman’s natural fertility signals and abstaining from intercourse (or using barrier methods) on days identified as fertile. NFP differs from hormonal or barrier contraception because it relies on observation and behavior rather than drugs or devices.
Main methods
How it’s used (basic)
Effectiveness
Pros and cons
Getting started
Use cycle-tracking apps cautiously—prefer instruction plus validated apps/tools.
Receive instruction from a certified NFP instructor or reputable program (e.g., Couple to Couple League, SymptoThermal Method instructors, local healthcare providers).”
Soooo, that’s the statement of AI (which, I repeat, is not necessarily definitive).
As for the Church’s approved birth control methods, you apparently concede that they relied exclusively on the rhythm method for the first two millennia of their existence, with a change occurring only in the last generation.
With that change, they now endorse NFP. But that sounds a lot like the rhythm method. The main difference I can discern is that NFP attempts to track ovulation in ways more sophisticated than a simple calendar, i.e. they measure body temperature and other variables. But it still focuses on the body’s ovulation rhythm.
As for Italian Catholics and their observance of doctrine on this matter, maybe they’ve really perfected the NFP, but I think it’s more likely that they simply ignore the Church’s doctrine on this point.
In that regard, AI states:
“Multiple surveys and studies show that most Italian Catholics do not follow the Church’s prohibition on artificial contraception; only a minority use exclusively natural-family methods or abstain for religious reasons. Estimates from studies and national surveys typically put the share who rely solely on NFP/abstinence for religious reasons in the low double digits — roughly 5–15% of Catholic couples — while the majority report using modern contraceptives (pill, condoms, IUDs, sterilization, etc.).”
In short, only about one in ten Italian Catholics observe the Church’s constraints on contraception.
Sure, I was poking fun at Italian Catholics with a little sarcasm for their “uncanny” perfection of NFP. If you now want to poke fun at us Protestants for our Holy Rollers or our Revival Meetings, have at it. I’ll take it in good humor.
Again, thanks for your correction and comment. Glenn
So you think that 77 years from now is “soon” and “pretty fast”? That is ridiculous! The fertility rate might change drastically in the next 77 years so what are you even talking about?
Humans have been around for a few million years. And so, yes, I think 77 years is “soon” on the scale of human existence.
You’re right that the fertility rate “might change drastically in the next 77 years.” But based on the trend over the last 77 years, that change over the next 77 years will make it even worse — it will drop even further.
A fertility rate that has steadily dropped by half over the last three generations, is currently well below the replacement level, and is still trending downward, is, in my mind, something to talk about. It’s noteworthy that out of thousands of readers of this piece, you are the only one to express the opinion that this is not.
If indeed you believe this is not worth talking about, you’re of course free not to participate in the discussion. If you do choose to participate, please try to be civil.
Pingback: Who'll Be Sitting Across from J.D. This Weekend in Pakistan? First Lady's Surprise Statement. Cop Gets Three to Six Years for Crime of Doing His Job. What Will Fertility Crisis Mean for YOU? - Independent Women's Network