All of the photos I've seen of Chinese celebrity families have 3 kids.
Also, China's demographic problem is likely magnified because of the internal passport (hukou) system. Up to 1/3 of urban workers are there illegally, which would make having children very difficult.
Chinese government abolished one-child policy and also the following two-child policy. Actually, at the moment they have the opposite problem: the population is aging and the new generations do not even have enough children to guarantee their generational change.
I wonder if the old one child policy had a knock on effect, changing the societal norms and views of having multiple children? A knock on effect that didn't go away after the law was relaxed perhaps.
I live in europe, and I'm used to standard 40h workweek (and usually not an hour more than that)... but I've also worked (in my younger years) some crazy hours, especially with college lectures+work1+work2.
I don't think the "i'm too tired to have sex" is the problem... I know it's anecdotal, but during that time, the bigger problem was trying to find someone to have sex with (actually going out there and meeting new people). The second problem, with so much work, adding aditional work (a child + extra cost + extra work for childcare + extra time needed) was not a pleasant thought.
If you cannot be with your child for 13+ hours a day, 6 days a week, wouldn't that be a disincentive to having children?
And working all those extra 996 unpaid hours would really grate on my nerves. Especially if the government's official position is not enforced by the government. I'd do the "laying down" version of repopulating the country - i.e. not doing it.
I doubt it. Having children is not first and foremost a consequence of having sex, it's an active choice that you make plans for. When you have to work long hours, have no financial support for childcare, having aging parents to take care of, then there's just no room for having kids. I live in arguably one of the best countries for raising kids, with 18 months parental leave, free preschool, higher education, retirement homes for aging parents, health care, and just a child-friendly work environment overall (even dads are expected to be gone for at least a few months), and it's STILL super hard to raise a child. I can't imagine how hard it must be without all those perks, and I completely understand why many people choose not to.
Also interesting: despite all these policies the birthrate is still as low as 1.7, meaning there must be other factors why people are not having kids globally.
> Having children is not first and foremost a consequence of having sex, it's an active choice that you make plans for.
Who is “you”? Is it a woman that has no financial independence in a society where she may have to fend for herself if she does not have unprotected sex without access to birth control?
Because, until very recently, that probably describes most women’s circumstances when planning to have kids.
I am betting it is not a coincidence that the timeline for women’s financial independence and access to cheap and convenient birth control lines up with declining birth rates.
way to insert an unrelated woke issue into the conversation
> until very recently
how about now? Fact of the matter is even in the developed countries where work isn't stressful and people do have sex, birth rate is still low. So simply encouraging people to have sex isn't the solution if you want more kids. I believe that's the point they are making.
That had nothing to do with wokeness, it's an obvious bias in the observation. Outside of careerists circles, which is a tiny group, things are quite different. The idea that life is plannable is again an indicator of a particular background and culture, that is representative of only a fraction of humans.
Getting children is 100% plannable. Even if you have no access to birth control you can still choose to not have sex. That has nothing do to with background.
Can you explain how it doesn't align with reality? It's not uncommon anymore that people who are 30 years old still never had sex. For whatever reason they were capable of not having sex for ~15 years. That quite clearly says to me it is possible, some people just are willing to take the risk of having a child.
> The idea that life is plannable is again an indicator of a particular background and culture, that is representative of only a fraction of humans
Again you bring up inequality while the discussion is around how to increase birth rate. You didn't even try to link inequality with birth rate. I guess it's cool to raise awareness by hijacking discussion of other issues?
I misread the comment I replied to as stating children were a choice throughout history. But my comment does not have anything to do with woke-ness. It is simply meant to show the extremely high cost of children made explicit now that women do not have to eat that cost.
> I am betting it is not a coincidence that the timeline for women’s financial independence and access to cheap and convenient birth control lines up with declining birth rates.
So we're in agreement? Women are not having fewer kids because couples have less sex, it's because of things like financial independence and birth control that allows (and essentially requires) couples to plan for kids. And when you have to actively chose to have kids in this kind of environment you'll postpone it as long as you can, perhaps limiting yourself to one child, or none at all.
Dating is also just a PitA for most people given the current payoff and the alternatives available, which doesn't help either. Few people enjoy a second job over their existing full-time job with a potentially much lower or even negative payoff.
It's super hard because you want your child to have a better life than you, and from the get go.
Parents nowadays want the trajectory of their child to be transposed upwards from the get go, and then be an up& to the right chart for their whole life.
This was never the case in human history, people never really put much thought into reproduction, matter of fact people never really put much thought into anything.
Very little time to wonder and price odds when you gotta go out and hunt to keep yourself alive.
People aren't having children because they think too much about outcomes for themselves, for their potential children and so forth.
Nature wanted reproduction to be impulsive, the whole planning for is humans shooting themselves in the foot.
I agree on the planning part, but I think the difficulty of raising a child is not only due to parents putting in more effort, although it's certainly a big part. Personally, we try to not put high expectations on our son, we don't have or plan on tons of extracurricular activities etc, but the first few years of their life is super hard anyway because of the constant sleep deprivation, the stress from having to perform at work despite this, and next to no free time for yourself or your relationship to your spouse. I think the reason it's harder now is mainly because both parents are expected to (and need to) work, and there's little support from the "village", because there is no village anymore. Grandparents live far away, kids don't just hang out in droves while one parent keeps an eye out through the kitchen window etc. There are so many factors that make parenting really time and energy consuming.
Where I live in the US southeast, non-professionals tend to get married at around 20-24 years old, then tend start having kids within a year or two of getting married. Income doesn't really factor at all.
At least on the more conservative side, perhaps one reason this works economically is the culture of the wife staying home, and the husband working. Although the overall income is much lower, this makes the dollar cost of each additional child small - kids don't eat that much, and there are no child care costs. By having kids young, both your parents are still healthy and active.
As someone with a kid whose spouse took extra time off work, it’s still a ton of work.
I’d argue with a stay at home parent full-time until they are teens it’s still a massive undertaking. One well worth it (in my opinion), but if your life goal is money and career advancement kids don’t help in that regard.
Yep, me and wife have an arrangement currently where I do all childcare outside of preschool (i.e. staying home when sick, drop off and pickup at 4, days the school is closed etc) which turns out to be quite often. I also take more of the household chores, maybe two thirds. In the time that's left I work on my own project. It's still a ton of work, but much more manageable than when we both worked full-time.
Well the conservative side you are saying doesn't work these days because raising kids is not something that used to be in 90's. As a parents I think everybody want to see their children get high quality of life, luxurious things, good school etc. So both parents have to go to work to fulfill these demands. And we are taking about US which provides lot of incentives to parents tbh. And most of the time the costs starts to grow when children starts to go school.
You’d be surprised the number of upper-middle class professionals I know who had a kid “by mistake” despite their being reliable ways to plan kids. It obviously clashes with the biological drive and risk taking.
Most of them were ambivalent about having a kid (or more kids) so the unexpected pregnancy was taken in stride but I was surprised how many were unplanned.
>What a proactive approach. I wish Western governments emulated it.
They have. They've decided that importing the entire third world into the West is the only solution. The West as we've known it for 2000 years won't make it past 2100 due to this demographic shift. There is no turning back, there is no undoing what has been done. Europeans and White people are the only shrinking demographic in their home countries.
>Wonder what the Native Americans think about the “West” they knew for 2,000 years. Or anyone who has read the history of the Americas would know.
You're literally proving my point. Looking at what happened to Native Americans is one of the best examples why illegal immigration and importing backwards/conflicting cultures is detrimental. I wonder if there were bleeding heart leftists among the Native American population that were pro importing more and more Europeans. "They will only bring us strength! Look at all the great things they're bringing!"
I was under the impression you were claiming the “West” had not changed in 2,000 years.
It does not really matter though. Change is the only constant. My preferred strategy would be to implement policies that keep bringing in desirable future citizens that continue to give out tribe an economic edge. Not sure why we do not hand STEM graduates (at least Masters and PhDs) green cards with their diploma.
"The West" roughly means Europe/Western culture/world [0]. Everywhere has always had some level of change always, but there has never been a demographic and cultural decline alongside a wholesale importation of backwards cultures like the one we're seeing in Europe.
>My preferred strategy would be to implement policies that keep bringing in desirable future citizens that continue to give out tribe an economic edge.
That's exactly what's causing this decline. For the capitalist class, importing cheap labor that will not align with the prevailing culture is EXACTLY what they want.
> Not sure why we do not hand STEM graduates (at least Masters and PhDs) green cards with their diploma.
Not sure why we don't grow our own people organically versus replacing them with immigrants from backwards countries and cultures.
>Because there's a risk they turn out like you, instead of being a desirable citizen.
You're exactly right. Citizens that fund the government, created the inventions of the Western world that have revealed the world onto itself, can think for themselves and don't want to fall off the cliff like lemmings are no longer "desirable citizens". We need NPC leftists that will continue to support the fall of their culture, country, and lifestyles!
> Not sure why we do not hand STEM graduates (at least Masters and PhDs) green cards
you don't want to create incentives for people to get into academia for reasons other than interest in academia. From what I've heard (not a scientist), science is in crisis with the rise of bogus researchs & paper mills.
I think transerable work visa should be good enough for security. Once they have establishes a career in a few years, they should be able to get green card via some sort of point system or employer sponsorship.
If 'the West' is primarily made up of people who think like you then good riddance. OTOH, the rest of us are adaptable and curious. We like new cultural synthesis; new immigrants are a source of fun new restaurants, new media/arts, and new ideas to explore.
People have been sounding the call of '[People who look different] are coming! Our culture is doomed!' for mellennia, and thankfully we learn not to cares what they think. We will keep progressing and leave them to stew in their ignorance and spite. For more than 2000 years people complained about the barbarians invading, but once we learn to ignore the shrill cries of alarm we look around and the barbarians are nowhere to be seen, just a bunch of new citizens with interesting new ideas.
> The majority of the world is made up of people like like me.
No, it really isn't. You are a rather pathetic troll account trying to amuse us I guess, but I have seen better work from the 4chan crowd. Your limited understanding of history and current politics is not even worth engaging in. Enjoy being wrong and no one really caring.
Yes, it really is. Soyboy leftists like yourself are an exceedingly small population stuck in a bubble. Most of the world is OK with having a home land for their people.
>You are a rather pathetic troll account trying to amuse us I guess
So pathetic that you just can't help but get triggered by the facts.
>but I have seen better work from the 4chan crowd
We all have, but I don't have to be near as crafty to work here. Thanks for the compliment.
>Your limited understanding of history and current politics
Full understanding of history and politics, even if they'rr against the narrative you mean.
>Enjoy being wrong
Projection because deep inside you know I'm right, that's what bugs you.
Trump supporter? People have been migrating and integrating since the dawn of humanity… civilization still survives fine and in fact thrives and evolves as new cultures develop. It’s your tribal fear mongering that is the primary cause of concern to me.
Countries, ethnicities and national boundaries shift with the times, ease of migration and economic trends. The world has 7.9 billion people in it, so the fate of the “whites” as a race is of little concern to humanity…
Your posts have been wild, but the last statement here is the biggest stretch of all.
There's a difference between actively eliminating a group of people, and that same group of people choosing not to have kids due to the requirements of "success" in their own culture.
Even though I don't agree with you in the slightest, I somewhat sympathize with you simply because I think you truly believe your perception is a reflection of reality as the saying goes. When it feels like the world is against you or apathetic towards you, that's a terrible thing.
Let me preface my point with this. I'm not white, but I am 'Western' culturally speaking. Unlike you seem to be able to do, I can acknowledge the flaw of western culture and still appreciate the positives like scientific and technological progress.
Ultimately, this is the truth of the matter. For centuries, Western European cultures have actively sought conquest of new frontiers with wealth and power being the two primary motivators. This set the stage for our modern trade network, technology, and capacity for migration.
The decision makers did not ask or care about the endgame of this activity, though. As wealth grew for the western world, it also grew for its average citizen, and like a drug, we have grown addicted to wealth.
White populations are in decline because they were one of the first groups to largely achieve the manifestation of the idea that "Anyone can be (financially) successful"
In the modern world, if your job doesn't pay you well enough, the only ways to maintain this success are to not have kids, have less kids or have kids later. You maintain this success culturally by making sure the few kids you do have know to follow the same line of reasoning.
Surely you aren't going to suggest that native non whites are forcefully suppressing white births? Or that immigrants are doing the same?
If you removed the immigrant or brown factor, you'd have the same situation as Japan with an aging population and no one to replace it.
The culture that led you to your current state, is also the culture that will be your undoing. I don't know what the solution is, but it's very clear that when financial success is the primary goal of individuals and infinite growth is the primary goal of governments and other institutions, population decline follows. Growth can always be greater, but the amount of time in a day grows ever shorter, and limits of human physical and mental stamina has a hard ceiling.
>There's a difference between actively eliminating a group of people, and that same group of people choosing not to have kids due to the requirements of "success" in their own culture.
And there's a difference between not importing the third world into the West, and importing the third world into the West.
>I think you truly believe your perception is a reflection of reality as the saying goes.
Because it is reality. It goes against the narrative but sometimes reality gets in the way of narratives.
>In the modern world, if your job doesn't pay you well enough, the only ways to maintain this success are to not have kids, have less kids or have kids later.
This is not true since in "the modern world" in the West, those who make the least are the most likely to have kids.
>If you removed the immigrant or brown factor, you'd have the same situation as Japan with an aging population and no one to replace it.
Which is perfectly fine for Japan and their progeny. It may even be the optimal result since Japan has an overcrowding issue in their cities. Suggesting that Japan should import third world immigrants because they'll have a population decline is the exact issue at hand here. Japan doesn't need nor want immigrants, if that slows their growth that's fine for them. At least they have a homeland for their people.
>The culture that led you to your current state, is also the culture that will be your undoing.
Not at all. Maybe the world is overpopulated, housing in the West is critically low in supply, the labor market is historically underpaid right now, etc. Maybe a slowing, or slightly reducing the population is fine as long as there's a homeland for Europeans to turn to.
The "undoing" of the West is importing people who do not share a basis in Western culture. It's also to self-hating Whites who want to accelerate the death of the West by importing backwards cultures. THAT is the undoing, not the slow decline. The West is the only area where the natives are currently being replaced with foreigners, and the natives are actively being denied a homeland by leftists. Leftism is killing the West. Not the current state you described.
I wonder if quite a big part of the problem is that the one child policy normalised single child families for an entire generation.
I know for certain that my wife and I both want to have another child because we both grew up with siblings and can see the lifelong benefits. Children are pretty hard work though, and there's been a lot of moments when we've thought "do I really want to go through all this again".
Take away the normalisation of multi child families and I bet a lot of people would just stick with one.
Which is of course a fairly hard problem to solve - if you aren't having 2.2 children per couple then your population is shrinking.
Yes, with the "One-Child" policy in effect for 36 years (1979–2015), an entire generation grew up with no siblings. With this being mandated, families just didn't plan for 2+ children. Maybe they bought a smaller house, or other lifestyle choices. Now you cannot just flip a switch and expect all of these families have multiple children.
I think there is a switch and that is called incentives. We can see these tactics working at least on Japan. If China government starts providing huge incentives, tax breaks I think couple will think about multiple children. The only problem of China is they can't rely on migrants like west because they may still want cheap labors for manufacturing. And Japan has separate culture problems with migrants.
49 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 98.6 ms ] threadAll of the photos I've seen of Chinese celebrity families have 3 kids.
Also, China's demographic problem is likely magnified because of the internal passport (hukou) system. Up to 1/3 of urban workers are there illegally, which would make having children very difficult.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou
I don't think the "i'm too tired to have sex" is the problem... I know it's anecdotal, but during that time, the bigger problem was trying to find someone to have sex with (actually going out there and meeting new people). The second problem, with so much work, adding aditional work (a child + extra cost + extra work for childcare + extra time needed) was not a pleasant thought.
And working all those extra 996 unpaid hours would really grate on my nerves. Especially if the government's official position is not enforced by the government. I'd do the "laying down" version of repopulating the country - i.e. not doing it.
Also interesting: despite all these policies the birthrate is still as low as 1.7, meaning there must be other factors why people are not having kids globally.
Who is “you”? Is it a woman that has no financial independence in a society where she may have to fend for herself if she does not have unprotected sex without access to birth control?
Because, until very recently, that probably describes most women’s circumstances when planning to have kids.
I am betting it is not a coincidence that the timeline for women’s financial independence and access to cheap and convenient birth control lines up with declining birth rates.
> until very recently
how about now? Fact of the matter is even in the developed countries where work isn't stressful and people do have sex, birth rate is still low. So simply encouraging people to have sex isn't the solution if you want more kids. I believe that's the point they are making.
this I cannot agree with since it doesn't align with reality
"whatever" being not in a cohabitate relationship
Again you bring up inequality while the discussion is around how to increase birth rate. You didn't even try to link inequality with birth rate. I guess it's cool to raise awareness by hijacking discussion of other issues?
So we're in agreement? Women are not having fewer kids because couples have less sex, it's because of things like financial independence and birth control that allows (and essentially requires) couples to plan for kids. And when you have to actively chose to have kids in this kind of environment you'll postpone it as long as you can, perhaps limiting yourself to one child, or none at all.
It's super hard because you want your child to have a better life than you, and from the get go.
Parents nowadays want the trajectory of their child to be transposed upwards from the get go, and then be an up& to the right chart for their whole life.
This was never the case in human history, people never really put much thought into reproduction, matter of fact people never really put much thought into anything.
Very little time to wonder and price odds when you gotta go out and hunt to keep yourself alive.
People aren't having children because they think too much about outcomes for themselves, for their potential children and so forth.
Nature wanted reproduction to be impulsive, the whole planning for is humans shooting themselves in the foot.
At least on the more conservative side, perhaps one reason this works economically is the culture of the wife staying home, and the husband working. Although the overall income is much lower, this makes the dollar cost of each additional child small - kids don't eat that much, and there are no child care costs. By having kids young, both your parents are still healthy and active.
I’d argue with a stay at home parent full-time until they are teens it’s still a massive undertaking. One well worth it (in my opinion), but if your life goal is money and career advancement kids don’t help in that regard.
Most of them were ambivalent about having a kid (or more kids) so the unexpected pregnancy was taken in stride but I was surprised how many were unplanned.
What a proactive approach. I wish Western governments emulated it.
They have. They've decided that importing the entire third world into the West is the only solution. The West as we've known it for 2000 years won't make it past 2100 due to this demographic shift. There is no turning back, there is no undoing what has been done. Europeans and White people are the only shrinking demographic in their home countries.
Wonder what the Native Americans think about the “West” they knew for 2,000 years. Or anyone who has read the history of the Americas would know.
You're literally proving my point. Looking at what happened to Native Americans is one of the best examples why illegal immigration and importing backwards/conflicting cultures is detrimental. I wonder if there were bleeding heart leftists among the Native American population that were pro importing more and more Europeans. "They will only bring us strength! Look at all the great things they're bringing!"
It does not really matter though. Change is the only constant. My preferred strategy would be to implement policies that keep bringing in desirable future citizens that continue to give out tribe an economic edge. Not sure why we do not hand STEM graduates (at least Masters and PhDs) green cards with their diploma.
>My preferred strategy would be to implement policies that keep bringing in desirable future citizens that continue to give out tribe an economic edge.
That's exactly what's causing this decline. For the capitalist class, importing cheap labor that will not align with the prevailing culture is EXACTLY what they want.
> Not sure why we do not hand STEM graduates (at least Masters and PhDs) green cards with their diploma.
Not sure why we don't grow our own people organically versus replacing them with immigrants from backwards countries and cultures.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world
Because there's a risk they turn out like you, instead of being a desirable citizen.
You're exactly right. Citizens that fund the government, created the inventions of the Western world that have revealed the world onto itself, can think for themselves and don't want to fall off the cliff like lemmings are no longer "desirable citizens". We need NPC leftists that will continue to support the fall of their culture, country, and lifestyles!
To you "desirable citizen" is a baizou [0].
[0] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Baizuo
you don't want to create incentives for people to get into academia for reasons other than interest in academia. From what I've heard (not a scientist), science is in crisis with the rise of bogus researchs & paper mills.
I think transerable work visa should be good enough for security. Once they have establishes a career in a few years, they should be able to get green card via some sort of point system or employer sponsorship.
People have been sounding the call of '[People who look different] are coming! Our culture is doomed!' for mellennia, and thankfully we learn not to cares what they think. We will keep progressing and leave them to stew in their ignorance and spite. For more than 2000 years people complained about the barbarians invading, but once we learn to ignore the shrill cries of alarm we look around and the barbarians are nowhere to be seen, just a bunch of new citizens with interesting new ideas.
The majority of the world is made up of people like like me. It's totally fine to have a homeland for your people, unless you're European.
>OTOH, the rest of us are adaptable and curious.
Then you should travel to different countries to experience different cultures.
>We like new cultural synthesis; new immigrants are a source of fun new restaurants, new media/arts, and new ideas to explore.
This is an NPC meme. Hope all those Truck of Peace attack victims were enjoying their new restaurants as they were slaughtered.
>People like you have been sounding the call of 'non-White people are coming! Our culture is doomed!' for mellennia,
It's within the past 50-100 years, not millennia.
>and thankfully no one really cares what you think.
Apparently you, several other leftists here, and the growing right-wing parties in Europe absolutely care what I think.
>We will keep progressing and leave you to stew in your ignorance and spite.
Just like Afghanistan "progressed" this past six months no doubt.
>For more than 2000 years people complained about the barbarians invading,
Legitimately, and they were pushed back and expelled.
>but once we learn to ignore your shrill cries we look around and the barbarians are nowhere to be seen,
Because they were pushed out, slaughtered, and their culture wasn't integrated.
> just a bunch of new citizens with interesting new ideas.
Islam is neither interesting, nor does it have any ideas worth integrating into the West.
No, it really isn't. You are a rather pathetic troll account trying to amuse us I guess, but I have seen better work from the 4chan crowd. Your limited understanding of history and current politics is not even worth engaging in. Enjoy being wrong and no one really caring.
Yes, it really is. Soyboy leftists like yourself are an exceedingly small population stuck in a bubble. Most of the world is OK with having a home land for their people.
>You are a rather pathetic troll account trying to amuse us I guess
So pathetic that you just can't help but get triggered by the facts.
>but I have seen better work from the 4chan crowd
We all have, but I don't have to be near as crafty to work here. Thanks for the compliment.
>Your limited understanding of history and current politics
Full understanding of history and politics, even if they'rr against the narrative you mean.
>Enjoy being wrong
Projection because deep inside you know I'm right, that's what bugs you.
>no one really caring.
Yet here you are, caring LOLOLOL.
Countries, ethnicities and national boundaries shift with the times, ease of migration and economic trends. The world has 7.9 billion people in it, so the fate of the “whites” as a race is of little concern to humanity…
No, facts supporter. I'm surprised your wife's boyfriend lets you on the internet this early.
>People have been migrating and integrating since the dawn of humanity
No one said otherwise.
>civilization still survives fine and in fact thrives and evolves as new cultures develop.
As the Native Americans how that went.
>It’s your tribal fear mongering that is the primary cause of concern to me.
"Don't be a fear monger! Just because that other loaded gun shot when you pulled the trigger doesn't mean this gun will!"
>Countries, ethnicities and national boundaries shift with the times, ease of migration and economic trends.
Countries shift easily, ethnicities shift slowly, and the ease of migration is ushering in a new ear of decline for the West. Thanks for agreeing.
>The world has 7.9 billion people in it, so the fate of the “whites” as a race is of little concern to humanity…
"The world has 4 billion people in it, so the gate of the 'Jews' as a race is of little concern to humanity..."
Wow, at least you're honest and say genocide of Europeans and Whites is of no concern to you. Disgusting.
There's a difference between actively eliminating a group of people, and that same group of people choosing not to have kids due to the requirements of "success" in their own culture.
Even though I don't agree with you in the slightest, I somewhat sympathize with you simply because I think you truly believe your perception is a reflection of reality as the saying goes. When it feels like the world is against you or apathetic towards you, that's a terrible thing.
Let me preface my point with this. I'm not white, but I am 'Western' culturally speaking. Unlike you seem to be able to do, I can acknowledge the flaw of western culture and still appreciate the positives like scientific and technological progress.
Ultimately, this is the truth of the matter. For centuries, Western European cultures have actively sought conquest of new frontiers with wealth and power being the two primary motivators. This set the stage for our modern trade network, technology, and capacity for migration.
The decision makers did not ask or care about the endgame of this activity, though. As wealth grew for the western world, it also grew for its average citizen, and like a drug, we have grown addicted to wealth.
White populations are in decline because they were one of the first groups to largely achieve the manifestation of the idea that "Anyone can be (financially) successful"
In the modern world, if your job doesn't pay you well enough, the only ways to maintain this success are to not have kids, have less kids or have kids later. You maintain this success culturally by making sure the few kids you do have know to follow the same line of reasoning.
Surely you aren't going to suggest that native non whites are forcefully suppressing white births? Or that immigrants are doing the same?
If you removed the immigrant or brown factor, you'd have the same situation as Japan with an aging population and no one to replace it.
The culture that led you to your current state, is also the culture that will be your undoing. I don't know what the solution is, but it's very clear that when financial success is the primary goal of individuals and infinite growth is the primary goal of governments and other institutions, population decline follows. Growth can always be greater, but the amount of time in a day grows ever shorter, and limits of human physical and mental stamina has a hard ceiling.
And there's a difference between not importing the third world into the West, and importing the third world into the West.
>I think you truly believe your perception is a reflection of reality as the saying goes.
Because it is reality. It goes against the narrative but sometimes reality gets in the way of narratives.
>In the modern world, if your job doesn't pay you well enough, the only ways to maintain this success are to not have kids, have less kids or have kids later.
This is not true since in "the modern world" in the West, those who make the least are the most likely to have kids.
>If you removed the immigrant or brown factor, you'd have the same situation as Japan with an aging population and no one to replace it.
Which is perfectly fine for Japan and their progeny. It may even be the optimal result since Japan has an overcrowding issue in their cities. Suggesting that Japan should import third world immigrants because they'll have a population decline is the exact issue at hand here. Japan doesn't need nor want immigrants, if that slows their growth that's fine for them. At least they have a homeland for their people.
>The culture that led you to your current state, is also the culture that will be your undoing.
Not at all. Maybe the world is overpopulated, housing in the West is critically low in supply, the labor market is historically underpaid right now, etc. Maybe a slowing, or slightly reducing the population is fine as long as there's a homeland for Europeans to turn to.
The "undoing" of the West is importing people who do not share a basis in Western culture. It's also to self-hating Whites who want to accelerate the death of the West by importing backwards cultures. THAT is the undoing, not the slow decline. The West is the only area where the natives are currently being replaced with foreigners, and the natives are actively being denied a homeland by leftists. Leftism is killing the West. Not the current state you described.
I know for certain that my wife and I both want to have another child because we both grew up with siblings and can see the lifelong benefits. Children are pretty hard work though, and there's been a lot of moments when we've thought "do I really want to go through all this again".
Take away the normalisation of multi child families and I bet a lot of people would just stick with one.
Which is of course a fairly hard problem to solve - if you aren't having 2.2 children per couple then your population is shrinking.
You can increase throughput with parallelization or speedups of single threaded performance.
But procreation age is trending upwards, too so I guess this is rather theoretical.