Do you think the West will ever have anything akin to the late Roman laws which tried to fix the declining Roman population?
>>18291710Probably not, governments will collapse before they could implement such laws.
Plenty of Western countries in Europe are already giving benefits and gibs to parents. They still don't have children because it is not really about affording children, it is about people not wanting children.
>>18291710No, western governments are trying to destroy the west not save it
>>18291710>>18291712Also its funny how history repeats itself, one of the reasons Rome became Christian is because Christians had the majority of children, since they didn't practice abortion or female infanticide.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t0kMoqsr7wSo it seems like as the American empire falls apart, Christians once again (this time the Amish) will repopulate society.
>>18291721Amish aren’t the only ones having kids, but you’re right. Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.
>>18291728You're right, you also have the Mormons. I fully believe that in the future the American west will be dominated by the Mormons and the east by the Amish.
>>18291721There is similar development in Finland, the Laestadian Lutherans in the western coast are pretty much the only white people having children.
>>18291731Calvinists have big families too.
>>18291733>>18291735Based. Now if only the e-tradcaths and orthobros could stop LARPING online and actually put their words into actions and had families the future would be secured.
>>18291710For what do you want more population? More population right now only brings more problems, you need more resources, more jobs, more roads, more hospitals, etc.
>>18291742>For what do you want more population?1. Because humans existing is inherently good.2. So that society will not collapse.
>>18291742Why do you want death?
>>18291721Russia will probably be responsible for the majority of white children for the next few centuries.
>>18291759Lol absolutely not, they're throwning all of their able-bodied men into a senseless meat-grinder. Russia has absolutely no future.
>>18291738Despite how it might appeal online with disproportionate discourse about "liberal women", women outnumber men in all denominations and are much less likely to be atheists than men are. Tradlarpers literally have no excuses to stay single.Also it is funny how zoomers are less atheist but also much less religiously affiliated, they might just meet someone to marry if they actually went to the church and met fellow Christians for once instead.
>>18291759Russia has a lower birthrate than USA.
>>18291762>Also it is funny how zoomers are less atheist but also much less religiously affiliatedI think's it's probably because:1. They don't even have the energy to be religious or put their beliefs into practice.2. Nobody ever even taught them how to be religious in the first place.
>>18291742Life does not in fact only bring problems.
>>18291710Russia’s already doing this
>>18291743>humans existing is inherently goodNot if you have too much population and it creates problems. The best countries to live are always said to be Norway, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland and one of the main reason is that they have little populations and everything works fine.>So that society will not collapse.For that you only need 2 kids/woman to keep your population. Not an endless increasing population.
>>182918512 kids per person is exactly breaking even. Having only 2 kids is the first step on the road to extinction
>>18291710Why do you want more people?>Because society grows strong! Humans are good!Then import Niggers, jeets and mexicans>No! Those are not good humans, they should become extinct instead! Muh whites should rule the Earth!White rule is what pushes both for browns being shit people and declining white population. What the fuck do you want then?
>>18291871Whatever number of children that allows your society to keep more or less the same population and that it doesn't get old.
>>18291710>Late Roman laws>Has nothing to do with Late Antiquity and is a failed law which effectively only targeted elite women
>>18291710The Men's Rights movement has been garnering tremendous support online worldwide and has already been increasingly implemented in polities from America to China.You are not seeing how the rise of anti-feminism has been a necessary precondition to the eventual legal reformation against misandrist and thus antinatal policy.Before this decade is over, I am certain such laws will proliferate, provided the left-wing does not experience a resurgence.
>>18291882>White rule is what pushes both for browns being shit people and declining white population.that is ZOG policy and Jews are not white>What the fuck do you want then?Institutionalized systematic positive eugenics, and the desistence of virtually all positive dysgenic programs.
>>18291710Hungary already has them, there are some other places with them, too. Tax credits for children and such.It's no use though. Because as >>18291714 said people just don't want children. Our Current birth-rate 'problem' is both that and the emergence of contraceptives.>>18291742Global Economy is founded on the idea of perpetual growth as a baseline and will violently fold in on itself if perpetual growth stops. >>18291851The ideal TFR for a sustained population is around two to three. That way you also account for excess deaths.
>>18292697Experts say that global population will stabilize at around 11 billion. What will happen with the economy then?
>>18292699It stagnates at first. It probably becomes unable to support all the dependents it has generated and then breaks down, in my view at least.
>>18292739Before that automation would do that too. The question is how is the socioeconomic system is going to work when a big percentage of people won't have a job. That will be the main issue of the future. And if you add more and more population to that then it will be a bigger problem.
What if "mother" was considered a paid government job? Not just a tax benefit or a bit of assistance, I mean a full living-wage career. Having more children would increase your wage, up to a point. There's enough buzz these days about a UBI that I think this could be a feasible compromise position. You could also create laws that forbid discriminating against resumes of women with motherhood gaps, and randomly audit corporations to make sure their hiring practices are abiding by it.
>>18292747>You could also create laws that forbid discriminating against resumes of women with motherhood gapsThis is already illegal but companies just do it anyway, or legally discriminate on some other factor. Mothers really are worse workers so they will always find something. You would need outright quotas to make it work
>>18291759christ you /pol/tards are ignorant.
>>18291762This chart says zoomers are more atheist. 18-29 are 27% of atheists and 38% of agnostics while being 19% of the population. It even says religious affiliation (which obviously can be very loose) basically tracks population share except for zoomers which is probably a life cycle effect
>>18291710Human existence sucks ass. Suffering will always outweigh happiness by a lot. Having children therefore is evil.
>>18292747That sounds like a good idea. And if your children get better results in education you get more money, if your children are better members of society you get bonus.The possible problem is that many people would do just that and not get a job. So yeah you will get more population but many people living from the government paying them to raise children.
>>18291710Mass illegal migration? Oh wait, that destroyed Rome. Uhh, sexual freedom? Oh wait, that destroyed Rome.
>>18292612And eugenics are good for what?>SystematicSo you're a bootlicker? You know it's not nobody's fault you can't take agency for anything you are capable of doing.
>>18291743Society has a population cap of roughly 3 billion if you want everyone to have a high quality of life. Any more than that and you're just turning the world into India.
>>18292743Society will reset into feudalism.
>>18292803Then just stop doing it when the birthrate stabilizes. It would be 10x cheaper and less damaging than importing billions of Guatemalans per year.
>>18291710Most western countries already does that by giving subsidized housing/childcare/food and a bunch of progressive tax breaks for every child. Its part of why the somalis scammers targeted day cares.
>>18292821Is that why the Georgie Guidestones got blown up, the number changed from 500M to 3B because reasons?
>>18291743>1. Because humans existing is inherently good.Explain yourself right goddamn now.
>>18292861Who gives a shit about what some rocks say? We are perfectly capable of sustaining that population NOW with the technology available. The rich kikes in charge just don't want to carry out sensible policy to restructure society around this because more people = more tax cattle = more retarded consumers to spend money at goymart. It's unsustainable no matter how many retarded economic systems you try to throw at it.
>>18291721Amish, Mormon, and Ultra Orthodox Jews will inherit America. It shall be as it was in the past: America belongs to wacky religious sects.
>>18293810
>>18293786
>>18291710We're already starting to do that. It's not working, just like it didn't work back then.The same thing that happened then, is going to happen now and into the future.
>>18291762Women don't have beliefs, they just follow whatever the trends are. They used to be the ones pushing the hardest for conservative/family values. Society shifted away from that, so they did too.Push society back to conservative/family values, and the majority of women will change tune.
>>18292803>The possible problem is that many people would do just that and not get a job.That's not a problem. It means that there's more jobs for men.
>>18291882>No! Those are not good humans, they should become extinct instead!correct
>>18293810I'm fine with the Amish strategy.
>>18291759More Russians are aborted than born. Their country is still an atheistic bolshevized shithole.
>>18291721>Also its funny how history repeats itself, one of the reasons Rome became Christian is because Christians had the majority of children, since they didn't practice abortion or female infanticide.No it was because the Christians had to abandon their filial system and instead of filial nepotism practiced inter-faith nepotism, which allowed them to infiltrate the administration to an extent where ruling the empire without accepting them became impossible. The simple fact that Christians were city dwellers whole pagans were, well, pagus, hints that the fertility gradient is a fake narrative.Political change comes from the top and goes down, not the other way round(and religion is an inherent part of politics).As for the topic some countries do practice it but it brings cosmetic differences. If you want to actually increase birthrate by handing out gibs you have to pay mothers something like 60th percentile salary just for being mothers(of 3) and somehow not generate inflation spiral which I'm afraid isn't going to happen.The major problems for fertility are incentives to overinvest in children (South Korean families spend 1/3rd of their budget on education of their usually single child and SK is the posterchild for low birthrates), disintegration of normal forms of relationship making, a forming geographical separation of sexes(something very few people seem to be noticing), miscegenation and popularisation of anticonception. It would take too long to explain why are those a problem and how, but if you want to fix it you would either have to fix the incentives which I think would start from restricting freedom of movement(serfdom would be a known and working mechanism for that) and banning the internet, which would be very impractical or some form of conscription-like scheme for women where they're forced to give certain number of births and the kids are taken by the state to be trained to be the next generation of menial workers and cannon fodder.
>>18294562>a forming geographical separation of sexesSource on this? Sounds big if true
