In recent weeks we have been focusing our attention on Greece, Germany, Ukraine and Russia. All of these are still pressing issues. However, in each of these cases, readers have called my attention to what they consider to be the basic and even defining dimension in all these issues - and if not right now, then very soon. It's about the dimension associated with population decline and the impact it will have on all these countries. There was a view that population decline would cause a crisis in these and other countries, and that the economy and national strength would be undermined as a result. Sometimes we need to pause, step back from today's crises and look at broader issues. Let me start with some thoughts from my book, The Next 100 Years.
Reasons for population decline
There is no doubt that the population of most European countries will decline in the next generation, and in the case of Germany and Russia this reduction will be very significant. In virtually all societies, from the poorest to the richest, fertility rates are declining. To maintain population stability, the fertility rate must remain at 2.1 births per woman. If this indicator is higher, then the population is growing, if lower, then it is declining. In the advanced industrial world, the fertility rate is already well below 2.1. In middle-class countries such as Mexico or Turkey, the fertility rate is declining, but will only reach 2.1 between 2040 and 2050. In the poorest countries, such as Bangladesh or Bolivia, the fertility rate is also declining, but will only reach 2.1 by the end of this century.
This process is generally irreversible. It is primarily a consequence of urbanization. In agricultural and low industrial societies, children are a productive asset. Children as young as 6 years old can be involved in agricultural work or simple types of help in the workshop. Children become a source of income, and the more you have, the better. Equally important, in such societies there is no retirement plan other than the family, making it easier for large families to support parents in old age.
In mature urban societies, the economic value of children declines. In fact, children are turning from tools of production into objects of mass consumption. In urban industrial societies, childhood employment opportunities are declining, but educational requirements are expanding significantly. Children now need support for a much longer period, sometimes up to the age of 25. Children cost a huge amount of money, and only a small portion of it is returned to the parents, if at all. That's why people are having fewer and fewer children. Birth control simply provided a remedy for what had already become an economic necessity. For most people, a family of eight children would be a financial disaster. Therefore, women on average have either two children or fewer. As a result, the population is declining. Of course, there are other reasons for this decline, but urban industrialism lies at the heart of such changes.
There are people who predict an economic catastrophe as a result of this process. As someone who was born into a world in which explosive population growth caused economic disaster, I am inclined to believe that the end of the baby boom will be greeted with delight. However, the idea that population decline, especially during the transition period before older generations move on, will leave a relatively small number of workers supporting a very large group of retirees - especially now that life expectancy in developed industrial countries is increasing. In addition, the debts accumulated by older generations will be transferred to the shoulders of the younger generation, which has decreased in number. Therefore, there is reason to say that life expectancy is the main economic dislocation. In addition, some experts believe that a country's political power will decline as its population declines, as there will be fewer armed forces to deploy—and pay for—with a smaller population.
The most obvious solution to this problem is immigration. But the problem is that Japan and most European countries have significant difficulties integrating immigrants. The Japanese, for the most part, don't try to do this at all, and those Europeans who have tried it - especially with migrants from Islamic countries - have found that it is not so easy. In the United States, the fertility rate for white women is also about 1.9, meaning that the white population is declining while the African-American and Hispanic populations are offsetting the decline. In addition, the United States manages migration effectively, despite some challenges.
Two points must be made on the issue of immigration. First, an American solution to rely on migration would mean significant changes to what has historically been a thorny issue in American culture: race. The United States can only sustain its population if the white population becomes a minority in the long term. Second, some traditional sources of immigration—Mexico, for example—are exporting fewer immigrants today. As Mexico moves up the economic scale, emigration to the United States will fall. Therefore, countries of the third stratum, where there is still a surplus of population, will serve as a source for immigrants. Europe and Japan do not have a viable model for migrant integration.
Impact of population on GDP
The real question, however, is whether population decline matters at all. Let's imagine that there is a smooth downward population curve and the decline rates are 20%. If the downward sloping GDP curve coincides with the downward sloping population curve, then per capita GDP remains unchanged. Problems, based on such a simple assessment, will begin if GDP falls more than population, and if its fall is not synchronized with population, which will contribute to the creation of negative or positive bubbles. This can lead to destabilization.
However, there is no reason to believe that GDP will decline along with the population. The basic structure of society, its production mechanism in the broadest sense, will not be destroyed by population decline. Let's also imagine that the population is declining, while GDP is falling less - or even growing. As a result, per capita GDP will increase and the population will become more prosperous than before.
One of the key variables mitigating population decline may be continued advances in technology that drive productivity growth. We can talk here about automation or robotics, but growth in individual productivity has been occurring in any production environment since the beginning of industrialization, and the rate of growth has been accelerating. Given the smooth and predictable decline in population, at a minimum, it can be assumed that GDP will decline to a lesser extent. In other words, with population decline in advanced industrial societies, even without taking into account immigration, per capita GDP can be expected to grow.
Changes in the relationship between labor and capital
Population decline may have other, more drastic consequences. The world's population remained stable until the mid-16th century. Population growth rates began to increase around 1750 and rose steadily thereafter until the early 20th century, when they skyrocketed. In other words, since European imperialism and especially in the 20th century, the population has been constantly growing. Over the past 500 years, the population has increased at an increasingly rapid rate. This means that throughout the history of modern industrialism and capitalism there has been a surplus of labor. And there was always a shortage of capital, that is, capital was more expensive than labor in equivalent terms, and given the constant production of more and more people, the supply of this indicator caused a decrease in the price of labor.
For the first time in 500 years, the situation is beginning to change. Firstly, fewer people are being born today, and this means that the labor supply will be reduced, and the price of any type of labor will increase. Nothing like this has ever happened before in the history of industrial man. In the past, the main scarce element was capital. However, at the present time capital, if we understand it precisely as a means of production, will be in excess, while labor will be in high demand. The economic enterprises operating now and those created by the next generation will not disappear. In extreme cases, they may remain underutilized, meaning reduced capital returns. If we translate this into a similar monetary form, it will mean the following: we are entering a period when money will be cheap and the cost of labor will constantly increase.
The only condition under which such things would not happen would be a significant increase in productivity, which would result in a surplus of labor. If this happens, we will undoubtedly find ourselves in a revolutionary situation in which the relationship between labor and income will change. Let us imagine a more gradual, albeit intensive, improvement in productivity - in this case there will still be a surplus on the side of capital and a deficit on the side of labor, and this will be enough to lower the price of money and increase the price of labor.
This would mean that in addition to rising per capita GDP, the actual distribution of wealth would also change. Nowadays, wealth accumulation is changing significantly and it is concentrated in fewer hands, while the gap between the upper middle class and the middle class is also widening. If the price of money falls and the price of labor rises, then the great existing imbalances will shift, and the historical logic of industrial capitalism - if not to put it on its head - will undoubtedly be reformulated.
It should also be remembered that the three components of production are land, labor and capital. The value of land, understood more broadly as real estate, varies in some way with population. With a declining population, the demand for land decreases, which causes a reduction in housing prices and leads to a further increase in per capita GDP.
The path to an approximate balance will be thorny and fraught with financial crises. Thus, for example, declining home prices could pose a risk to the net worth of the middle and upper class, as adjustment to a world in which interest rates are permanently lower than under the first era of capitalism would conflict with expectations, pushing financial markets into the region dark alleys. The mitigating element in this case is that population decline is transparent and highly predictable. There is time for home owners, investors and everyone else to adjust their expectations.
Similar things will not happen in all countries. The states of the middle and third layer will experience their reductions after developed countries have adapted to new conditions, which will be an additional reason for the imbalance of the system. And countries like Russia, where populations are shrinking outside the context of a strong capitalist infrastructure, will see their per capita GDP decline depending on commodity prices, including oil. Populations are also declining in countries without advanced industrialism, as well as in places where there is only urbanization and a decline in pre-industrial agriculture, and the consequences are even more severe. There are states where there is no safety net for the poor, and Russia is one of them.
My argument is that population decline will significantly change the functioning of the economy, but for the advanced industrial world it will not be catastrophic - quite the opposite. Perhaps the most important change will be that where bankers and financiers have dominated for the last 500 years, the key element in a labor-scarce society will be the sources of labor that will need to be negotiated. I have no idea what this business model will look like, but I have no doubt that other people will be able to figure it out.
The representative of the Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Thomas Buettner, presented a report on various scenarios for the possible development of the demographic situation for discussion by delegates. They were designed to analyze how trends in fertility rates might affect population growth and aging over the next three centuries.
In 2011, the world population reached seven billion people. The growth of the world population is increasingly taking place in developing regions of the world, primarily Africa. In this regard, the share of population growth in developed countries has fallen sharply and continues to decline.
UN experts believe that such trends are creating an imbalance in population distribution, which is increasingly affecting development prospects and the ability to ensure long-term stability.
Under one scenario in which current fertility trends remain unchanged, the world population would reach 3.5 trillion by 2300. At the same time, 3.15 trillion would live in Africa. The population of Asia in 2300 would reach 325 billion, the population of Latin America and the Caribbean - 19 billion. Oceania would have about three billion inhabitants. The population of North America, by contrast, would grow by only half a billion people, while the population of Europe would fall to 0.1 billion (100 million) people.
RUSSIAN CROSS
Over the next 15 years, Russia will face a sharp decline in population, say experts from the Center for Strategic Research.
According to the center, at the beginning of this year the population of Russia was 146.8 million people. In recent years, natural demographic growth in the country was observed only in a short period from 2013 to 2015, but it was insignificant and was largely due to the influx of migrants.
Since last year, the country's population has been declining. So far the decline is insignificant, but experts believe that in subsequent years it will only increase.
The authors of the study calculated that by 2035, the volume of natural population decline in Russia could reach 400 thousand people. They also cited data from a UN forecast that states that in 30 years Russia's population will reach 128 million.
According to the Russian Foundation, the origins of depopulation should be sought in the policies pursued by the aggressive liberal forces that came to power.
The topic of the alarming demographic situation in Russia has become popular in recent years both in the Western media and in various studies by local research and analytical centers. Thus, a fairly authoritative organization Population Reference Bureau released a report from which it follows that the population of Russia will be steadily declining. And the population of the whole world (and, in particular, the United States), according to forecasts of this organization, on the contrary, will grow rapidly.
Graph of population decline in Russia
According to official statistics, the current population of Russia is about 142 million people. According to Population Reference Bureau forecasts, by 2025 the population of our country should decrease to 133 million people, and by 2050 - to 117 million people. According to American analysts, the reduction in the number of Russians will occur against the backdrop of a steady increase in the world population as a whole: if in 2009 it was estimated at 6.8 billion people, then by 2025 it should increase to 8.1 billion people, and in another quarter century - up to 9.4 billion people.
Europe, according to American researchers, “is likely to become the first region in history where the population will decline in the long term as a result of low fertility, primarily in Eastern Europe and Russia.” Now there are about 738 million so-called “Europeans” in the world; by 2050, according to American forecasts, there should be 702 million people left.
As for the United States itself, researchers assess its demographic prospects very optimistically. The current population of the United States is approximately 310 million people. By 2050, according to the forecasts of the mentioned bureau, it could reach 399 million people, or even 423 million or even 458 million people, depending on the rate of immigration.
Margaret Thatcher - British Prime Minister 1979-1990
However, this, of course, is their problem, and we have enough of our own. As you know, forecasts of the “extinction” of Russia have been made more than once. According to some reports, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once stated that Russia had enough population of 30 million people to ensure the extraction and transportation of natural resources to Western countries.
One way or another, with the beginning of the notorious “market reforms” of the 90s, the gloomy forecasts of Western experts regarding the decline in Russia’s population began to come true. This number began to decline rapidly. Today Russia occupies one of the first places in the world in terms of mortality, especially for men of working age; by the number of murders; suicide; alcohol poisoning; on the scale of drug consumption and tobacco smoking; by low birth rate; by the number of abortions; in terms of infertility levels among both women and men; by the number of divorces; by the number of orphans and children deprived of parental care (800 thousand officially registered); by the level of corruption, violence, crime; prostitution and the number of prisoners.
Orphans (cirota.ru)
Over the post-Soviet years, the general level of culture and morality, the patriotic consciousness of the population has critically decreased, and the trend of further spiritual and moral degradation continues. This degradation affected, first of all, the institution of the family, which no longer fully fulfills its main function - procreation, caring for children and the elderly, protecting the young and old. Due to severe depression, anger, and increased stress levels, reproductive energy weakened, reproductive health deteriorated, an epidemic of psychogenic infertility arose, and interest and need for children disappeared.
Although, as Russian demographic data show, until the end of the 70s of the last century, population growth continued in Russia. Analyzing the causes of such a disastrous demographic problem today, Foundation for Assistance to the Unification of the Russian People "Russians" notes in his project “The Doctrine of Saving and Multiplying the Russian and Other Indigenous Populations of Russia” that, of course, this problem did not arise suddenly and not at all by chance. Just 100 years ago, at the beginning of the 20th century, the population of the Russian Empire was growing at the fastest pace in the world, and in 1913 it accounted for 7.8% of 1.5 billion earthlings. But over the last century, the country has suffered three terrible demographic blows, which led to a breakdown in the fundamental foundations of life. First - the First World War and the Civil War, then the Second World War, and, finally, the geopolitical catastrophe associated with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Such shocks, notes Foundation "Russians", do not pass without leaving a mark on the health of the nation, accompanied by excess mortality, a decline in the birth rate and a reduction in the reproduction of the people.
Victims of war (ww2history.ru)
According to experts, the most dangerous in terms of the strongest reduction in the birth rate was Fonda, the third strike, struck in 1991. It is no coincidence that since 1992, the beginning of the notorious “reforms” in post-Soviet Russia, the increase in mortality in the country began to openly dominate the increase in the birth rate. Due to the rise in mortality and decline in birth rates over the past 18 years, the nation has lost about 30 million actual and potential citizens (12 million in excess mortality and 18 million in underbirths).
And this despite the fact that the last catastrophe, unlike the first two, was in no way connected with repelling enemy invasions and large-scale military operations throughout the country (with the exception of the war in Chechnya, fierce, but still local). Moreover, after 1991, there were no epidemics, mass famines, natural, man-made or other disasters that would lead to mass death of people in Russia.
Thus, Foundation "Russians" recognizes that the sharp decline in the country's population is not natural, but man-made. It occurs as a result of both the actions of obvious and hidden enemies of Russia, and criminal or unfounded management decisions of the current authorities of the country. Consequently, the origins of depopulation, its root cause, must be sought in the socio-economic policy pursued by the aggressive liberal forces that have come to power.
Former Russian President Boris Yeltsin
But it cannot be said that the demographic catastrophe went unnoticed by society and even some representatives of government bodies. Already in 1999, when the question of impeachment of Boris Yeltsin was raised in the State Duma, among other crimes he was charged with the excess mortality of the Russian population, which took the form of genocide of the people.
As the impeachment commission stated then, “the difficult living conditions of the people of Russia and a significant reduction in their numbers were the result of those measures that were implemented since 1992 under the leadership and with the active participation of President Yeltsin... There are serious reasons to believe that the reduction in numbers the population was also covered by the president's intention. In an effort to ultimately achieve a change in the country’s socio-economic structure and ensure, with the help of the emerging class of private owners, the strengthening of their political power, President Yeltsin deliberately made the living conditions of Russian citizens worsen, inevitably leading to an increase in the mortality rate of the population and a reduction in its birth rate...”
Later, in 2001, the leadership of the Foundation for National and International Security appealed to the Prosecutor General's Office with a statement to initiate a criminal case into the excess mortality epidemic in Russia, as a result of which the Russian population decreased by 5 million people in 1992-2001. In the same year, the State Duma officially characterized the demographic situation in Russia as “catastrophic.”
However, during the 12 years of the Post-Qing period the situation did not change much. Even high-ranking officials now have to admit this. An example of recent statements is illustrative in this regard. Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Nikolai Patrushev. The country's authorities actually admitted that all their demographic measures amounted to the massive importation of migrants.
Fragment of an interview with the President of the Foundation for Promoting the Unification of the Russian People “Russians” L. Shershnev. “The genocide of the Russian people is man-made.”
10 programs to reduce the world's population!
1. Hunger Pact.
The first program is believed to have originated in France in the 18th century in connection with the "Famine Pact". During this period, food shortages arose in many areas of France due to unfavorable weather and poorly developed agriculture. As a result, prices for food and other goods increased. Many of those in the middle or lower classes believed that the aristocracy or other shadowy group regulated grain prices to control the growing population. This led to the "torment war" - riots and uprisings in the affected areas. Ultimately, the atmosphere of mistrust and fear gave rise to the French Revolution.
2. The Human Genome Project.
The Human Genome Project is a major international project to decipher the human genome. However, there is a theory that this project is nothing more than a front for eugenicists who are developing methods to eradicate people they consider "inferior" and unfit for this planet. According to the theory, the ultimate goal of the project is to identify and destroy “bad genes” throughout the world. Identification of the human genome would make it possible to create biological weapons for the discreet sterilization and extermination of inferior races.
3. Global warming.
The very existence of global warming is the subject of much debate. There are also those who believe that the campaign to curb global warming is just a ploy to implement a depopulation program. The theory is that the campaign to reduce fossil fuels and environmentally harmful substances is helping to reduce food and energy production around the world. Such man-made hunger and poverty will lead to worldwide genocide and the destruction of the world economy, which will facilitate the implementation of a new world order.
4. Pandemics.
We are accustomed to thinking of pandemics as naturally occurring outbreaks of diseases that have existed since time immemorial. However, there is a theory that pandemics are far from being of natural origin, but are in fact an attempt to exterminate the Earth's population. For example, it is argued that the Spanish flu, which led to the death of 20-100 million people from 1918 to 1920, was nothing more than a scheme to reduce the world's population. Moreover, all disease outbreaks, including swine flu and Ebola, are considered man-made diseases created by those who want to reduce the world's population.
5. Georgia Tablets.
The Georgia Tablets, also called America's "Stonehenge", is a monument whose origins and purpose remain a mystery. The towering structure, which is located in Elbert County, Georgia, USA, contains 10 commandments, written in 8 different languages [including Russian], which are believed to be followed for the well-being of humanity. However, there is a theory that the monument is a guide for the instigators of the extermination of the Earth's population. Thus, the first commandment states that the population of the Earth should not exceed 500 million in order to “remain in constant balance with nature.” Proponents also believe that the remaining commandments also support the New World Order scenario.
6. Aliens.
According to the defenders of this theory, the New World Order, the Illuminati and other organizations are just puppets in the hands of aliens who want to carry out a depopulation plan. Thus, exterminating the Earth's population will help them reduce resistance when the time comes to take over the world. Presumably, people who cooperate with them will be saved or rewarded for their efforts. Supporters believe that aliens have been working with these people since the era of Nazi Germany, providing them with technology to enslave the rest of the world. When the plan failed, the aliens went into hiding and began working with other secret groups to wipe out the world's population.
7. SPOILER FOR THE MOVIE "Soylent Green".
Soylent Green, a 1973 film set in 2022, depicts an Earth with depleted natural resources and overpopulation. While rich people live in secluded enclaves and control everything, the rest live their lives in poverty, hunger and pollution. The only thing that keeps them going is a mass-produced product from a large corporation called Soylent Green. At the end, a detective working on a murder case learns that Soylent green is made from the bodies of dead people, which is kept secret by the powers that be. Even though it's only a film, there is a theory that Soylent Green is a hint at our future and a blueprint that will prepare us for the inevitable: we will become food for other people.
The Codex Alimentarius was created by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO] and the World Health Organization [WHO] in 1963 and is a set of food safety standards that countries can follow. According to the conspiracy theory, the code is actually a plan to destroy the planet's population by controlling the world's food resources. The Code promotes the spread of genetically modified products instead of natural ones and the gradual abandonment of vitamins and minerals. Supposedly, the ultimate goal is the death of 3 billion people through poor nutrition and the spread of lifestyle diseases. The Code has also been linked to another plan of action adopted by the UN, called Agenda 21, which is also considered a plot to create a new world order.
9. Genocide of the white race.
Another conspiracy theory claims that white people will one day become extinct. As in the theory of "black genocide", there are various methods for this scenario, such as birth control, mixed marriages, and encouraging the influx of migrants.
10. Sexual revolution.
Another theory of depopulation is the use of gay people to reduce the world's population. Propaganda of this way of life contributes to the extermination of the population, as it prevents the production of offspring and the continuation of the human race. It is also believed that feminism is a malicious attempt to reduce the world's population.
One of the problems of many countries of the world, for example, Greece, Germany, Ukraine and Russia, is population decline. Population decline can generate crises in these countries, undermining their economies and foundations.
Reasons for population decline
The population of most European countries will decline in the next generation. In essence, the end of the global population explosion has come. In virtually all societies, from the poorest to the richest, female fertility is declining. In order to maintain population stability, the birth rate should remain at 2.1 births per woman. Higher and the population increases, lower and decreases.
In the developed industrial world, the birth rate is already significantly below 2.1. In “middle-tier” countries like Mexico or Turkey, the birth rate is falling and will reach 2.1 between 2040 and 2050. In the poorest countries, such as Bangladesh or Bolivia, fertility is also falling, but the figure of 2.1 will not be reached until the end of the century.
The process is practically irreversible. This is primarily a question of urbanization. In agricultural and low-industrial societies, children are a productive asset. Children can be sent to work at the age of 6 for agricultural work or simple labor. Children become a source of income, and the more you have, the better. Also, the number of children is important because in poor countries there is no pension provision, and a large family can easily support parents in old age.
In a mature urban society, the economic value of children is declining. Children are turning from tools of production into objects of mass consumption. In an urban industrial society, not only are there no opportunities for early employment, but there are also extensive educational needs. Children need support and cost parents a huge amount of money with limited returns. Thus, families have fewer children. For most city dwellers, a family with eight children would be a financial disaster. Therefore, women, on average, have two children or fewer. As a result, the population is falling. Of course, there are other reasons for this decline, but urban industrialism is the basis.
There is another negative economic aspect of the process of population decline. The number of active workers is constantly declining, while a very large group of retirees is emerging as life expectancy in developed countries increases.
One way to solve the problem of natural population decline is immigration. The problem is that Japan and most European countries have serious cultural problems integrating immigrants. The Japanese don’t even try to do this, and, for the most part, neither do Europeans, especially migrants from the Islamic world.
The US also has a birth rate for white women of about 1.9. This means that the white population is declining, but African Americans and Hispanics are making up the birth rate. Moreover, the United States is the most effective manager of immigration, despite current controversies.
Impact of population on GDP
Will GDP shrink as population declines? Not at all necessary. A striking example is Germany, which from year to year demonstrates GDP growth with a slow population decline.
If GDP increases while population decreases, a country becomes more prosperous and its people richer.
If GDP falls below the population decline, there is a negative effect of impoverishment of the people and a fall in the incomes of the country's citizens. Economic and political destabilization occurs.
One solution to the problem of population decline will be continued advancement in technology to increase productivity. Individual labor productivity has been rising in all countries since the beginning of industrialization, and its growth rate is accelerating. Given the steady and predictable decline in population, there is no reason to believe, at the very least, that GDP will fall less than population. In other words, as populations decline in advanced industrial societies, GDP per capita is likely to rise.
Changes in the relationship between labor and capital
Since the beginning of the era of industrialization, people's living standards have risen and the population growth rate has increased steadily. This provided a surplus of labor. The consequence was discrimination against workers in the price of their labor. A striking example is industrial China in the mid- to late-twentieth century, when Chinese workers were willing to work literally for pennies.
For the first time in the last 500 years, the situation began to change on its own. As fewer people are born, the supply of labor will decrease and the price of all types of labor will increase. This has never happened before in the history of "industrial humanity." The means of production will be in abundance, and labor will be held in high esteem.
Increased labor productivity makes money cheap and labor expensive. But this process also has the other side of the coin. If labor productivity becomes too high overnight, a surplus (excess) of labor resources may occur. The result will be a revolutionary situation that will change the relationship between work and income.
As GDP per capita increases, the actual distribution of values occurs disproportionately. We are currently in a period where a sharp accumulation of wealth is happening among a limited number of people, and the gap between the “oligarchs” and the middle class is also growing. If the value of money falls and the price of labor rises, the imbalance will be reduced.
Production requires 3 things - land, labor and capital. The value of land, in the broad sense of real estate, changes in relation to the size of the population. As the population declines, the demand for land will fall, reducing housing costs and increasing the value of GDP per capita.
However, all of the above does not apply to absolutely all countries. For example, in Russia the population is declining even where there are no developed industrial cities. Only in the last 5 years has the birth rate in Russia not been much higher than the death rate. One of the reasons for the start of slow population growth in Russia can be considered the increase in the living standards of Russians and the country’s recovery from a protracted depression.
