demographic winter

As it usually happens, whenever I start reading Chuck Colson's Breakpoint emails after some time away, I seem to choose good ones to read. Some things don't change I guess. This past week he had a three-part series on demographics that was so interesting I just now ordered the heretofore unknown documentary he was referring to. The producer makes the case that changing worldviews and the exaggeration of the "population bomb" threat in decades past has made underpopulation a huge threat to a lot of societies — not just the usual suspects like Japan and Europe, and not just in developed nations either. And from what Chuck had to say, he makes a pretty convincing case.

For one, if you compare birthrates of a nation to that nation's economic growth (or decline) 45-50 years later, the producer claims you'll find that they match each other very closely. There are a few reasons for this. For one, middle-aged people tend to be both the prime producers and prime contributors in an economy. They have the experience and the energy to be the most productive with their time, and they have to provide for their families. And in a consumer-driven society, they're the ones spending the most money. Young people, especially nowadays, don't yet have money to spend in large quanties — or they damage their own economic future and thus the country's by doing it anyway. They're too occupied with saving and paying off their college debts, in itself a crippling effect with increasing consequences to the economy, to worry about someone else's. Older folks tend to spend much less, being in the mode of conserving what they have and no longer spending lots of money to support a family.

Perhaps the main reason, though, is that throughout history, from early civilizations to the present and everywhere in the world, it's been the trend for the middle-aged in society to care for both the old and the young. History and common sense both show there's just no way around this. So it's imperative for a robust economy to have a significant portion of its population of prime working age so that their generation can care for others and still propel the economy. If that sizeable middle-aged population is missing from a society, then those who are relied upon to keep the economy moving are instead stretched too thin with caring for proportionally oversized elderly and/or younger populations to have much left for themselves or their own families. One can debate the pros and cons of how to care for others all day, but the economic facts of yesteryear show such a demographic imbalance to be an obstacle to the growth and overall health of a society.

Case in point: take Japan. According to Breakpoint, the Japanese did not experience a baby boom after WWII like the U.S. and other nations did. So in the 90's, their previously booming economy hit hard times and still hasn't recovered. And the demographic imbalance there is only getting worse, to the point that Japan is seen as the example of what can happen if the replacement rate for a generation dips too low. Colson also cites Latvia as a place where this is happening, and Russia and China have "demographic catastrophies" on the horizon unless drastic action is taken to reverse the trend. This far along the course, I'm not sure that's even possible.

Speaking of catastrophies, does anyone else think this applies greatly to the U.S. as well? We have a huge chunk of our population that has been the movers and shakers in our economy for so many years that is fast approaching retirement. This isn't a news flash, of course, but it's yet another reminder that we have a freight train of a problem coming our way and seem content to just stand back and watch the wreck that's about to happen. But I guess that's an unsurprising result in a culture that tells people to look out for their own best interests above and beyond those of their countrymen or their country itself.

Something that surprised me is the fact that the problem is not limited to western civilizations. Countries like Mexico, Thailand, and Burma are also mentioned in the rundown. And in the case of Mexico, this affects not just the Mexican economy, of course, but ours in the U.S. as well. Many justify or at least brush off the low birthrate among U.S. women with the reasoning that we'll just continue to grow our population and our economy by importing labor to do what the shrinking native-born workforce won't do or doesn't have the manpower to do. But what if that labor supply also shrinks? Mexico's economy could slow down more and more as its prime laborers continue to head north in larger percentages. Or ours could slow down if labor in Mexico becomes so hard to find that opportunities improve enough there to keep workers in the country or they don't leave because there's no one else to care for their families. Another possibility is that the Mexican economy will continue to become even more dependent on American dollars flowing back across the border as more workers are needed here and domestic industries decline there. That doesn't strike me as a good arrangement for either country.

There was a lot more in those Breakpoints that isn't addressed here, but I'll mention one more thing in closing. What's the most reliable antidote to this demographic imbalance problem and also an indicator of future economic success? You guessed it, the prevalence of religious faith among a population. Colson puts it well:

Ultimately, the documentary makes the reality of demographic winter, and its consequences, brutally clear. It also makes it clear that the demographic decline it documents is not the result of some plague or other biological agent — it is the predictable product of our worldviews and values. Any society that devalues marriage, that encourages people to place career above family, that embraces abortion, will see its fertility rates plummet.

But, as Spengler and others have pointed out, the root of the problem is "the decline of religious faith." Loss of faith in the world to come leaves us grasping for everything we can get in this one, even at the expense of future generations. Not surprisingly, the exception to these demographic changes is among religious believers, who take seriously the command to be fruitful and multiply — who believe in the family and see children as a gift from God. Their belief in the world to come makes them fruitful in this one. And, it makes it urgent to know and articulate our worldview to others while we can.

Good closing words, those.

-----
Here's a very good article from the Breakpoint references that's actually encouraging as far as our cultural future is concerned. At least go read the awesome opening quote.