PDA

View Full Version : Germany's Falling Birth Rate - Source of National Alarm



Aeternitas
Sunday, July 31st, 2005, 10:44 AM
Sandwiched between short-term unemployment woes and steadily declining birth rates, Germany has only gradually set about tackling its population problems.

At issue are the impacts of a dwindling birth rate and an aging population on the economy and the workforce in decades to come. It is not an immediate problem, nor is it one which will be unique to Germany, but nonetheless, people here seem to have cottoned onto this distant prospect and woven it into the woes of the nation in a way that other Europeans facing the same, or even worse predictions, have not.

The indicators do indeed show that there will be a disproportionate number of over 60s living in Germany by 2050, but what is it that makes the population of today worry so far ahead about a problem to which other nations seem to turn an ignorantly blind eye?

Steffen Kröhnert of the Berlin Institute for World Population and Global Development says there are two factors which fuel Germany's concern.

"Birth rates in Germany have been falling since the seventies, whereas in other countries the trend only started ten years ago, and it takes time for people to take the problem on board," Kröhnert said.

"But moreover, high unemployment levels led to a lot of talk about empty state coffers. People were not worrying about demographic issues, but when they started to realize how the problems of the labor market were affecting national finances, they began to think differrently," he added.

With arguments abounding that the density of the world population is already too much for our natural resources to sustain, there is the question of whether it is justifiable to continue pushing for greater human growth rates at all.

Kröhnert says the aim is not to spawn a continually bigger population, but to find ways of dealing with the steady decline and the reality that each generation is a third smaller than the one it succeeds.

"It would be enough if the birth rate simply remained stable, but as long as it continues to fall, the imbalance cannot be corrected," he said.

More... (http://www.dw.com/en/tackling-the-birth-rate-problem/a-1660854)

Aeternitas
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 10:26 AM
The number of children born in Germany last year was the lowest since the end of the second world war, the Federal Statistical Office reported yesterday. According to provisional figures, 680,000 babies were born in 2005, down from 1.36 million in 1964.

Germany now has the lowest birth rate in Europe with 8.5 births per 1,000 inhabitants, while in Britain it is 12, France 12.7, the Netherlands 11.9 and Ireland 15.2. The figures also show falling birth rates across former communist eastern Europe and the Baltic states, including Poland (9.3), Bulgaria (9) and Latvia (8.8).

Leading economists said unless Germans started breeding again Europe's biggest nation faced the prospect of reduced growth, economic decline and an elderly shrinking population.

"We are reaching a critical point," Michael Hüther, the head of Cologne's economics institute, told Die Welt newspaper. "The number of births now determines what happens in the next decade-and-a-half to two decades. You can't revise it afterwards. The availability of human capital will get worse, and act as a brake on growth."

He told the Guardian: "The tradition in the 1950s, 60s and even the 80s in Germany was that a mother was only a mother and looked after the children."

Last year Germany's family minister, Ursula von der Leyen, tabled proposals to encourage reluctant couples to have children. They included tax breaks of €3,000 a year for working couples, more nursery places, and a new state-funded welfare scheme that requires men to take two months off for families to get full funding. So far the changes appear to have had little impact and they have been criticised by some as a perk for the well-off.

Experts have pointed to many reasons why Germans are failing to reproduce - a conservative family culture, with women expected to stay at home; schools that finish at lunchtime; and a tax system that discriminates against working women. "I'd like to have children. But to do so now would kill off my career," Steffi Warnke, a 31-year-old PhD student at Berlin's Free University told the Guardian.

"The problem is we study in Germany for a long time. When you reach the stage you are applying for academic jobs you are 30-35. And if you do have kids you don't get much support. Germany is becoming a society of pensioners. You only have to turn on the TV to see that all the programmes are for the over-50s."

The latest federal figures show wide regional discrepancies. The highest birth rate is in former West Germany, with Wiesbaden (10.5), Frankfurt (10.2) and Bonn (10.1) topping the list. In former communist East Germany, by contrast, the birth rate is alarmingly low, with the city of Chemnitz (6.9) registering the lowest birth rate in the world. According to Eurostat, the EU's statistics agency, by 2050 Europe's population will have fallen by around 1.5%, or 7 million people.

More... (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/mar/15/germany.lukeharding)

Bridie
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 03:29 PM
What awful news. :(

Æmeric
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 03:34 PM
How many of the 680,000 infants born in Germany last year were actually German?

Georgia
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 04:14 PM
http://www.zuwanderung.de/english/1_statistik.html

Sex, age and birth rates

In 2003, 3.4 million foreigners (47%) were women and 3.9 million (53%) were men. With an average age of 34, foreigners are younger than native Germans by eight years. In 2003, of the 76,200 children born to foreigners in Germany,


This is all I could find at this time. From personal experience I do know, that you will see many more foreign children on the playgrounds than German children. Also if you check around in the different Kindergartens, you will see the foreign look as the predomininant one. Just go downtown Stuttgart with the Strassenbahn, and the main language spoken by the passengers is not German.
As a culture, German is very pro-education, anti-marriage. And I am not just saying empty words. When I go back for a visit, I live among the people, many times for three month at a time. I interview, I visit, I write..........Their worldview is so different today than back when I grew up.

Yes, there are exceptions. But those exceptions are not the rule.

I asked a young "couple" which had been living together for two years, both of them in their upper-twenties, if they are planning on getting married soon and perhaps start a family. Their answer, which is, sadly so, more than not a typical answer, was and I am paraphrasing: "Oh no, we don't even know yet if we want to be together for the rest of our life. And children, no way. In today's world?"

I asked them how long two people have to live together before they knew if they can spend the rest of their lives together.

My Papa recently told me when he looks around what has become of Germany he feels much shame and sorrow. He stated that he can talk and try to educate, but the young no longer listen to the advise from the old ones.

This is not just a "moral-religious" issue, but it is a matter of survival for a great race, the German race. And that makes is a MORAL issue all the way.

Georgia

Aeternitas
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 05:51 PM
Most significantly for the long-term future, Germans are slowly dying out. During the late 19th century, Germany's birth rate was one of world's highest. In recent decades, though, it has been one of the world's lowest. The fertility rate in recent years has been about 1.4 live births per woman, which is below the replacement level.

With deaths outnumbering births, demographers estimate that in spite of continued net immigration, Germany's total population -- now some 82 million -- will decrease in the new century. Even if the population was to remain constant, Germany's relative position in the world would continue to decline, given the higher birth rates in most other countries.

Germany is also less "German." According to the most recent official statistics, 7.37 million foreigners and 300,000 asylum seekers live in the country, of whom more than two million are from Turkey. Foreigners now make up nine percent of the total population. These figures do not include illegal aliens, of whom there were an estimated 1.8 million in 1997.

Foreigners tend to be concentrated in the larger cities. In Frankfurt am Main, non-Germans already make up 29 percent of the population. In Stuttgart the figure is 24 percent, and in Munich it is 23 percent. The percentage of foreigners is especially high among the youth. In Munich, for example, 34 percent of those under 18 years of age are foreigners. In the largest city, Berlin, the percentage of foreigners under 18 years old is estimated to grow to 52 percent by the year 2015.

Writing in the semi-official weekly Das Parlament (issue 43-44, 1998), population specialist Prof. Herwig Birg of Bielefeld summed up:


Of all the major industrial countries, Germany has become the most important land of immigration. The number of immigrants per 100,000 of population is several times higher than in the "classic" immigration countries of the United States, Canada and Australia. The German population has a high birth rate deficit, while the birth rate of foreigners [in Germany] has a high surplus. Germany can no longer choose whether it wishes to be an immigration country or not, because the birth deficit will greatly increase due to the dramatically falling numbers of women in their child-bearing years. German society finds itself in a demographically determined existential change, that is, in transition, against its will, toward an immigration society that ignores, suppresses and tabooizes its future demographic problems at the cost of the young generations.
Source (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n6p20_Germany.html)

Blutwölfin
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 05:52 PM
German birth rate falls to lowest in Europe

The number of children born in Germany last year was the lowest since the end of the second world war, the Federal Statistical Office reported yesterday. According to provisional figures, 680,000 babies were born in 2005, down from 1.36 million in 1964.

Germany now has the lowest birth rate in Europe with 8.5 births per 1,000 inhabitants, while in Britain it is 12, France 12.7, the Netherlands 11.9 and Ireland 15.2. The figures also show falling birth rates across former communist eastern Europe and the Baltic states, including Poland (9.3), Bulgaria (9) and Latvia (8.8).

Leading economists said unless Germans started breeding again Europe's biggest nation faced the prospect of reduced growth, economic decline and an elderly shrinking population.
"We are reaching a critical point," Michael Hüther, the head of Cologne's economics institute, told Die Welt newspaper. "The number of births now determines what happens in the next decade-and-a-half to two decades. You can't revise it afterwards. The availability of human capital will get worse, and act as a brake on growth."

Read more (http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,1731118,00.html)

canaria
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 05:59 PM
Low birth rates caused mainly by feminist propagandas.

Aeternitas
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 06:23 PM
To most young couples, the main obstacles to having children are the country's high jobless rates and bleak employment prospects. When times are tough, the last thing on anyone's to-do list will be reproducing. Eastern Germany and most countries in eastern Europe all suffer from depressed birth rates. The obvious solution would be to change economic and unemployment policies.

Neighboring western Europe and Scandinavia, in contrast, boast flourishing child-care systems that don't even leave parents out of pocket. Affordable kindergartens and whole-day schooling allow working mothers and fathers to head to the office without feeling guilty, while shorter education and training periods make it possible to shimmy up that career ladder with plenty of time left to think about the best moment to start a family.

State support for families is just as generous as it is in Germany, but it's paid in the early years -- unlike here, where it's sparingly dispensed and reduced as soon as a child is sent to kindergarten.

So rather than watching that glacier, Germany should start watching its neighbors, where birth rates are in far better shape. But even if the country learns its lessons, the results would only become apparent in the next 30 years.

That's the thing about glaciers -- they take their time. But they can't be ignored.
More (http://www.dw.com/en/opinion-how-to-boost-the-german-birth-rate/a-1935744)

Sigrid
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006, 07:30 PM
"Growth" for socialists, means continuous expansion of their welfare base and extreme taxation so they need millions of people, not necessarily high grade, to help them keep the machinery going. For super capitalists it means continuous expansion of their markets and investments. Every environmentalist knows that humans are depleting the earth's resources and that drinking water is becoming scarce, so scarce that some countries have already started desalinating the sea.

The problem is not falling European birth rates so much as it is burgeoning immigrant birth rates and massively growing third world populations in so-called developing countries. During the baby boomer years populations grew out of control, fuelling super capitalism and consumerism. Houses got smaller, tower blocks appeared, trade unions became militant and the world headed for meltdown. When women gained their freedom and the contraceptive pill was invented populations could return to a manageable level in first world countries and the standard of living for many improved drastically. Women's health improved and women began to live longer more productive lives, having fewer healthier and better educated children.

But that was before the welfare state had entrenched itself after things reached boiling point and fed thousands and eventually millions of people into the benefits system, ruining motivation among the youth and encouraging directionless, dislocated lifestyles that led to the dissolution of the nuclear family and the birth of the yuppie generation.

Because people will not vote socialist parties out of power and have little alternative in a world dominated by political correctness, important economic changes emanating from Asia have been ignored and welfare states once dependent on large industrial power bases and masses of working class people to pay their dues are collapsing. They need people to fuel their system and are using immigrants as a plug to stop their entire socialist empire from crashing to the ground.

Europeans have never been folk groups that lived in vast hordes of starved illiterate dependents. They stem instead from warrior bands and tribes of nomads and hunter gatherers turned farmers and merchants.

The elite is panicking. It is desperate. It is relying on fear to motivate people to accept hordes of immigrants into artificially created multicultural societies because it refuses to make the necessary changes to a new economic establishment.

We are living in the final days of socialism in the west. They can no longer treat the natives like scum. Those days are over. The crunch is coming. It is important to realise this and to plan new lives, new types of activity and new business moves to cope with the end of socialism and the beginning of the end of the old western empires as the new eastern empires rise up. There is no stopping them. They will overpower the situation because they have the cheap available labour. China is one huge factory. People must accept this and look to a new dawn.

Be happy. The terrible days of industrial serfdom are at an end for Europeans and only just beginning for the east. One day they will also rise up against their masters and demand workers' rights, but at the moment they are still emerging from the carapace of communism and things will rush into a superheated economic cone.

The west has the chance to take stock and to make other plans. It's hard to say goodbye but it must be done. The old millennium is over. A new age is being born. Embrace it. It's the cosmic age. We are going to the stars.

Georgia
Thursday, August 17th, 2006, 05:00 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4793997.stm

German births decline to new low



Germany has seen another decline in its birth rate, which is Europe's lowest.


Official figures show that the number of births fell by a further 2.8% last year. Meanwhile, the mortality rate rose by 1.5% compared with 2004.
The birth rate is exceptionally low in the former East Germany, where the city of Chemnitz is thought to have the lowest birth rate in the world.
Economists say Europe's population decline threatens to damage economic growth for decades. The data from Germany's Office for Federal Statistics show there were 686,000 births last year - half as many as in the early 1960s.



Germany has had the lowest birth rate in Europe for some time and this trend has been confirmed.
In 2005 it had 8.5 births per 1,000 inhabitants, compared with 12 in Britain, 12.7 in France and 15.2 in Ireland.
The German cabinet approved proposals earlier this year for a new state allowance to encourage people to have children. Germany registered 830,000 deaths last year - an increase of 1.5% over the 2004 figure.

Atlas
Thursday, August 17th, 2006, 07:24 AM
Low birth rates caused mainly by feminist propagandas.

Correct, and beside, can't force german women if they don't want kids.

Bridie
Thursday, August 17th, 2006, 07:53 AM
It's not only feminist propaganda that has caused such a drop in birth rates. It's no way near as simple as that.

Nicola_Canadian
Thursday, August 17th, 2006, 08:44 AM
There is a solution -

Neues Kinder-Glück bei den Schröders
http://www.bild.t-online.de/BTO/news/aktuell/2006/08/17/schroeder-kind-adoption/schroeder-kind-adoption.html

Gundahar
Thursday, August 17th, 2006, 08:06 PM
Today we have Kindergartens that have immigrant children only, except one or two natives. I know them first hand myself. Is so said to see, how our own people wither and Turks and Arabs are increasing. Its a vicious cycle, the immigrants are raising the unemployment rate and are destroying the welfare state. Therefore many native Germans are left in a state of insecurity and dont want to have children anymore. The best is, that our politicians keep telling us, that we need the immigrants because they will pay the pensions for us younger generation. Not only is this a lie, because if we were really decreasing, natives would get more children sooner or later. Even if they were right, at what a price are we paying just for pensions! I would give my pension gladly away, if I could stop the immigration by doing so. However, its a lie because a lack of population would let the unemployment rate go down and so the insecurity would be banished, people would start to have more children. But through the immigration and the excessive breeding of the immigrants, we dont even decrease, we dont stagnate, we even increase. I dont have to say that these people are neither native germans, nor in the most cases even of european origin. So we become a folk of Turks and Arabs, all with the blessings of the polticians and the lobbies.

Weiler
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 03:56 AM
Here's an article I encountered describing Cloppenburg - which is south of Oldenburg - and how it manages to achieve Germany's highest birth rate.

It says much about how important religion and tradition are in maintaining a healthy birth rate. Being able to have many children is far more than just a monetary issue:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06260/722225-82.stm



Looking for ways to boost birthrate
Germany hoping fertile Cloppenburg can serve as model

Sunday, September 17, 2006
By Jeffrey Fleishman, Los Angeles Times


CLOPPENBURG, Germany -- Children are scarce in Germany, but not in this farming region of slaughterhouses and churches, where stores close before sunset and there's a baptism every weekend.

. . .

It is unlikely, however, that Cloppenburg's zeal for procreation can be copied. This region's rhythms and religious beliefs, its sense of community and devotion to family, run counter to an increasingly secular, egoistic Europe, some say. In many ways, Cloppenburg, a place of prams and tiny bikes, is a glimpse less of the continent's future than its past.

"It's still accepted here that the woman stays home with the children, at least in the early years," said Markus Meckelnborg, a financial consultant with four children in the neighboring town of Emstek. "The question is, why is the trend going away from what's happening here? People are running away from church for this self-absorbed life and they end up at a shrink's office." Here's a link to a google-maps aerial photo of the town, if anyone wants to see where it is:
Cloppenburg, Germany (http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Cloppenburg,+Germany&ie=UTF8&z=14&ll=52.842787,8.035147&spn=0.03743,0.10849&t=k&om=1)

Weiler
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 04:00 AM
Incidentally, does anyone know where to get data on fertility rates for each state in Germany? I've searched the web to no avail - but I also don't know much German, which hinders my ability to do so.

If this is available at the municipality level, that would be even better.

Bridie
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 11:21 AM
Study: Men in Germany Are Scared to Start Families


http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,1943089_1,00.jpg (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657,00.html) Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Germany faces problems with low birth rates (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657,00.html)


Low birth rates and the ageing population in Germany have dominated media in discussions about how to pay for health care and social security. Now, a study says it is men who are primarily responsible for fewer births.


In its study, the Robert Bosch Foundation found that "men are scared to start families," said Ingrid Hamm, managing director of the foundation. The study says one in four men in Germany do not want children, whereas one in seven women prefer to remain childless. In Eastern Germany, that rate is lower, with one in 10 women exopressing the wish to remain childless.

The study was based on responses from 10,017 people. Researchers say the survey was representative, even of the smallest groups in Germany.

Men and women in Germany also differ on the number of children they would like to have. Men want only an average of 1.59 kids; the average number of children women would like is 1.75. Both of these numbers, however, are still higher than Germany's actual average birth rate of 1.37 children per woman.

Under pressure

http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,2019306_1,00.jpg (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657_ind_1,00.html)Bildunterschrif t: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Both men and women in Germany want more babies than the number being born (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657_ind_1,00.html)

Hamm said another reason for fewer children in Germany is that people feel too much pressure. They have long career training periods and then "have to do everything at once between the ages of 30 and 40: get married, have kids, build a house, pursue their careers and save money for retirement," she said. "All that pressure makes people put off having children until later or not at all."

Women, too, are faced with a loss of economic control over their lives if they choose a baby break. For a well-to-do country like Germany, the economic loss is even greater, Hamm said.

She added that, in addition, Germans lack faith in the future.

"In Germany, we have lost a sense that everything will turn out all right. Germans are prone to worrying about the future a lot more than other people," she said.

"German" is not just German, however. The study found that the wish to forgo having children is much stronger in the former West German states. In the new German states (formerly East Germany), fewer women want to remain childless.

"Children in the former GDR were everywhere," Hamm said. "Mothers and fathers both worked, and East German children grew up with the image that being both parent and employee is possible."

"Better policies could boost birth rates"

http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,1853697_1,00.jpg (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657_ind_2,00.html)Bildunterschrif t: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: "Large families are frowned upon," Hamm said (http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_lupe/0,,2071657_ind_2,00.html)

The survey respondents said they would appreciate politicians creating better conditions to help people start families -- such as greater financial support, improved childcare and more part-time jobs created for parents.

Eighty-nine percent of the respondents said they would prefer flexible working hours for employed parents.

Increased financial support from the government would help large families and less qualified people.

On the other hand, better childcare possibilities would encourage those currently without children and aid families with only one child, as well as highly-qualified working parents and women in Eastern Germany, researchers reported.

The study said women desiring a first child wanted the most support, but also that one-fifth of the women who did not want children could still be encouraged through better family policies.

The study also found that families with one child or highly-educated people would most likely choose to have a first or an additional child if family-oriented policies were in place that fit their individual needs.

Hamm said the study showed that having children is just one of many values among Germans; it is not a top priority. Parents with many children are viewed critically, while "it is completely socially acceptable to not have kids here."

"One's status does not increase by having kids," she said.





source : http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2071657,00.html

Ovid
Thursday, November 30th, 2006, 01:37 AM
Bad news. Germany needs more ethnically German children in order that those dirty hairy hands aka Turks and other foreigners wouldn't take over Germany. The situation in Eastern Germany is luckily promising. Eastern Germans aren't so rich, satisfied and liberal than Western Germans. Many of them are also racially conscious.

Jantelover
Thursday, November 30th, 2006, 01:41 AM
Eastern Germans aren't so rich, satisfied and liberal than Western Germans.

Give it time.

Peter
Thursday, November 30th, 2006, 09:56 PM
Figthing against the system it´s difficult, the multiculturalist, multiracial and the all these valours are spreaded by the mass media. And sadly the economy isn´t now good in Germany.

GreenHeart
Monday, January 1st, 2007, 01:39 AM
The question is: Why? Why are they afraid to have children?

Veritas Æquitas
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 06:06 AM
Why? Because the European family unit has no meaning to many people. Because the social welfare system created by White governments in days of yore has been sapped dry by foreigners coming to our countries with nothing to offer. Because Germans, and other ethnic Europeans can't afford to. Because most are more concerned with their drug habits, other addictions, their cars, their material posessions and other things pressed by media outlets like MTV and so on instead of being fruitful and multiplying.

Sad situation but it doesn't mean it's only Germans. It's all of us.
I guess all we can do is wait and see .... Or can we?

Blood_Axis
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 12:34 PM
The question is: Why? Why are they afraid to have children?
I'll make an attempt to answer through my own experience, and although I am not German, I believe it applies.

The key word is insecurity. It seems that these days society & the state is hard at work to leave young people miserable, scared to take initiative, because there are no opportunities out there for them.

First of all, the most productive years of your life (20-25) fly by in your struggle to educate yourself & search for some career option.

Then, in the second most productive period of your life (25-30), at least in Greece, you are faced with unemployment, lack of welfare and financial security, all kinds of hardships and dissappointments.

To the fiancial & job insecurities, add relationship problems, dissappointments and emotional turmoil.

Relationships gone sour, being cheated upon and losing faith & trust in the opposite sex, self-centered worldview, cynism & nihilism arising because you've been hurt too many times.

By the time you are somewhat mature to realize what's been happening to you the last 10 years, you're already reaching 30's and you realize you've taken all the wrong turns.

Of course it is still not too late to make amends in your life and start a family, but you know time is running out and you become more & more stresed by the day.

Will I ever find the one? Will I find him/her on time? Will we be able to support a family, if no external factor interferes?

If you're lucky, you will eventually settle down in your early to mid-30s just in time to have just one kid before your biological clock stops ticking. And you'll be too old and worn out already to enjoy the fantastic experience of parenthood.

Sounds pessimistic but unfortunately it is so true. Then, you realize, one needs to possess Nietzschean will power to decide to take a shot at it. Some people, like myself, have decided not to give it up.

But unfortunately, most people, being materialistic & individualistic as this world makes them, give up and just stop caring.

nicholas
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 12:44 PM
I can't speak for Germans, but it seems to me that many men and women are stuck in the past and looking for perfection. We here in America are taught that relationships come pre-packaged and don't take any work. We are taught to demand perfection in others while beating ourselves up for our inadequacies. We also have educational systems, media, govt, etc that tell the white male what a good for nothing bastard he is so then you have the good hearted, intelligent, virtuous white guy sitting in a coffee shop bemoaning the actions of other men whilst the abusive, low IQ, thuggish individual of minority status sows his oats without a care in the world and doesn't even consider how he's going to deal with the fatherless children he will create.

Blood_Axis
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 01:20 PM
My mom always used to say "try to make something out of yourself, don't end up a miserable housewife with 'no life of your own'..."

Sadly, most "modern", westernized Europeans think this way. Women are nowadays even ashamed to declare themselves as housewives & caregivers.

There is also this common view that when you get married, "life is over".

People think (even I used to think so) that you get married, and then it's sitting at home all day, running after your kids.

Looking at women with children like Jennifer, Bridie, and others, it was so soothing to see them continuing to pursue their interests & hobbies, education & leisure activities, alongside with their family life and caregiving tasks.. :)

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 05:43 PM
“As the family goes, so goes the nation and so goes the whole world in which we live.”
--John Paul II

Irmin
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 08:45 PM
My mom always used to say "try to make something out of yourself, don't end up a miserable housewife with 'no life of your own'..."

Sadly, most "modern", westernized Europeans think this way. Women are nowadays even ashamed to declare themselves as housewives & caregivers.

There is also this common view that when you get married, "life is over".

People think (even I used to think so) that you get married, and then it's sitting at home all day, running after your kids.

This is just such true.

Moreover they often expect that relationship is something pre-packed and the man will bring everything ready into it (house, car, lot of money...), hard to find someone for building together (lack of mutual trust or confidence).

Or there are such who are so infiltrated with the view of "try to make something out of yourself, don't end up a miserable housewife with 'no life of your own" that for a guy it may be very problematic to get over this "pushing off attitude", indeed it may appear even arrogant and it is very difficult to save those girls from their mistakes! I believe it is a big obstacle, at least at the very beginning, to create a relationship with such a girl and find way to her heart. And our years are running, ..., sadly.

Hoping to save one of them soon :( .

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 08:48 PM
However I think it should be mentioned that it used to be quite common for people to marry later. I know among some tribal societies, a man was considered an effeminate pervert if he wanted to associate with girls before the age of 20. What a constrast to modern-day mores; where it's basically the opposite.

Anyways, it was really only with the Baby Boomers that it became common practice to marry early.

Irmin
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 09:25 PM
However I think it should be mentioned that it used to be quite common for people to marry later. I know among some tribal societies, a man was considered an effeminate pervert if he wanted to associate with girls before the age of 20. What a constrast to modern-day mores; where it's basically the opposite.

Anyways, it was really only with the Baby Boomers that it became common practice to marry early.

I will think about what you say, but mark we are mostly speaking about people after 20, early marriage not being our problem really.

And tell me how many of the people is strong enough to abstain of sex untill marriage. I would like to note at this point that I agree with Adolf Hitler's words - "if early marriage is not attained, love not having the right place for playing is searching another places to manifest itself, what we get is only "prostitution of love" then, sexuality being a natural part of human nature".*

*Forgive me my rough translation, I'm writing it by heart as I remember it from my non-english copy of Mein Kampf.

Many further problems are springing from such a state of society. "Such a decline of sexual life caused falls of great cultures before" - as He stated. One needn't cite any philosophers here, it should be obvious that family is basic cell of society. Knowing that most of the "simple" individuals are rather lasy units submisive to actual trends, present development could be fatal for us.

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 09:28 PM
Yes I'm well aware of many of the issues you described; although from a more Catholic perspective.

D'Vadder
Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007, 12:40 AM
I talked to some girls I know and their answers were like this:

It's not cool or I wanna make a career... This is the problem of our Music-Television-Generation. Only 1 of 10 told me that she want's to have a family with a european and the others don't care with which ethnicity they will have a family after they succeeded in their jobs... :thumbdown

forkbeard
Monday, November 3rd, 2008, 10:43 AM
The German birthrate is crazy. You don't need to work to have babies. Its never been easier or safer. The state pays people to breed but only the immigrants are doing it , how dumb is that? everything is done by machines now, people just don't need to work. The state is making people work so they won't think!
I haven't worked for twenty years and have eight children in marriage and some without.
No, I'm not an inferior type in fact it is because I know I am a superior type that I will not work, I have 3 degrees including 2 masters degrees. Its that I will not contribute to a society that is deliberately exterminating my people, erasing my culture and history.
Every Germanic should do the same. Withdrawal of labour is a revolutionary act.
As to fathering and bringing up children; this is easy. There is an instinct that kicks in once your woman is pregnant. Just as a tiny brained sparrow knows how to build a nest, all the problems of housing etc all immediately disappear.
I got my advice from Ben Klassens book " Natures eternal Religion" This book has guided my life since I was 18. If just some Germanics adopted this religion we would be saved from extinction.

forkbeard
Monday, November 3rd, 2008, 11:03 AM
Having babies can become a fashion in a small village. Each of us needs to set an example. I think people are too fussy. Men want a supermodel and women want Brad Pitt. Both are rare types and unrealistic.
Each person can set their own standard. I didn't care about looks or intelligence. Blue eyes and health were an important criteria for me . The minimum height the same as my mother and most importantly someone that wanted lots of babies.
We have had eight children but because of the competitive nature of women there are many local families with more than us. One woman has 14 children.
It shows we can breed back and compete with the invaders of our lands.

Aptrgangr
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 04:02 AM
Birth control pill inventor laments demographic ‘catastrophe’

Vienna, Jan 11, 2009 / 02:10 am (CNA (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/)).-

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/images/ppdjerassi090109.jpg
Mr. Carl Djerassi

The chemist who made a key discovery leading to the invention of the birth control pill has written a commentary calling demographic decline in Europe a “horror scenario” and a “catastrophe” brought on in part by the pill’s invention.

Mr. Carl Djerassi, now 85 years old, was one of three researchers whose formulation of the synthetic progestagen Norethisterone marked a key step in the creation of the first oral contraceptive pill, the Guardian reports.
In a personal commentary in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard, Djerassi said his invention is partly to blame for demographic imbalance in Europe. On the continent, he argued, there is now “no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction.”

“This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete,” he wrote.
Djerassi described families who had decided against reproduction as “wanting to enjoy their schnitzels while leaving the rest of the world to get on with it.”

The fall in the birth rate, he claimed, was an “epidemic” far worse but less highlighted than obesity. In his view, young Austrians who fail to procreate are committing national suicide.

If it is not possible to reverse the demographic decline, an “intelligent immigration policy” will be necessary, Djerassi said.

(...)
Birth control pill inventor laments demographic ‘catastrophe’ (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14730)

Hauke Haien
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 04:58 PM
His invention facilitated and coincided with social changes that would have taken place in any case. Those changes were not geared towards introducing Communism, their purpose was to eliminate everything that interferes with a single-minded pursuit of economic productivity that no longer serves any purpose beyond itself. As a consequence, the ability to provide for and raise good children, material and personal contributions to the community, or indeed anything beyond the accumulation of lifeless things through economic success carries no social prestige anymore and is laughed at as stupid, backward-minded or even undesirable and despicable.

Have a child and you are irresponsible for taking up the space an outsider might fill out on this planet. An immigrant is as good as a child. You are not racist, are you?

Hang on to your native culture and you are a primitive hillbilly who has not yet heard of Britney Spears and Beyonce Knowles and the inspiring masterpieces of music and film they produce. How can our silly little traditions with a depth of centuries possibly compete with those marvels of civilisation?

Promote motherhood and you are a wife-beater. Don't ask me for the reasoning behind this.

Demand the reconstruction of kinship communities and political disentanglement and you are a lamentable relic of the past, waiting to be bombed by the benevolent forces of globalisation whose march to victory is presented as inevitable in order to make it so.

Löwenherz
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 06:40 PM
[T]heir purpose was to eliminate everything that interferes with a single-minded pursuit of economic productivity that no longer serves any purpose beyond itself. As a consequence, the ability to provide for and raise good children, material and personal contributions to the community, or indeed anything beyond the accumulation of lifeless things through economic success carries no social prestige anymore and is laughed at as stupid, backward-minded or even undesirable and despicable.
There's probably a better place to put this, or it could start a new thread, but it seems to tie in here as an aside. Watched a video last night called The Story of Stuff (http://storyofstuff.com/index.html), which lasts twenty minutes and does a pretty good job of showing up the absurdity of modern consumerism. A sad state of affairs, but maybe as more people start to re-think, we'll see some changes.

Oh, and I think the 'purpose' is to make a very few people very rich at everyone else's expense....

SouthernBoy
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 09:28 PM
Nobel felt remorse too. :(

Why not restrict the use of contraception for some people? Tattooing a big "Y" or "N" on their foreheads would work. ;)

Jäger
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 10:07 PM
If it is not possible to reverse the demographic decline, an “intelligent immigration policy” will be necessary, Djerassi said.
The Jew has spoken.

Sigurd
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 10:25 PM
Dear Mr Djerassi --- ever heard of the saying "You reap what you sow?" Well ... whilst your analysis of your invention aiding a demographic downturn, it's a bit late for lament now, isn't it...? How come this remorse didn't come like ten years ago, when there started to be more deaths than births already? Well... *rolling eyes*


snip

Don't forget the line of: If you have more than a single child then you are an anti-social benefits scrounger. After all, only the underclass breeds like rabbits. Never mind that two hundred years back, even Maria Theresia had more than a dozen children...

And of course - put children before your career and you're unprogressive and backwards. If you are a woman choosing to be a stay-at-home mother then you're equally antisocial, and most likely an uneducated breeding machine.

O tempora, o mores... :|

Agrippa
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 02:10 AM
Contraception however, is just a small part of the bigger picture on which we can see, that having children, especially more than two, is detrimental to your social and financial status in many areas of Europe, that alone and the whole attitude of the people as well as the structures of the system, have to be blamed for the very low birth rates.

In many countries, the birth rates were very low even before the pill, they were quite low even before abortion was allowed, the fundamental issue is the mentality of the majority in the West and a sick system which works against the European people and the freedom of mankind as a whole.

If concentrating to much on "minor issues" one might miss that, but to solve our problems, we need a new order and new standards for our societies, nothing less.

For the women and men the real question should always be, why they dont want children, and even if, why not more than two. Contraceptives and abortion, in fact its not that new in a certain way, but in the more distant past, even more so before Christianity actually, there was a strong value of the bloodline, of offspring, the heir(s). Now with Christianity this value of blood and legacy was already weakened, became even more weakened by the bourgeois, with the last strikes being done by Liberalism and Cultural Marxism.

Compare with this f.e.:
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=40331

The most basic problem for the women comes from the fact, that their social status and well being, is no longer, in any way, dependent on their reproductive success. In the more distant past, a woman which gave birth to healthy children, especially a heir, had a lifted status, she was even "a complete woman" just from that point on in a way. She had the status of the matron in later life, could expect respect for their achievements and was part of a larger family and social community of related people - everything in a ritual context quite often.

Now, a woman giving birth to children has, from a rational point of view, almost things to lose only with little being left for making motherhood attractive beside her very personal-emotional preferences, while losing options for her career, that way at least status, money for sure, probably being left alone with the child if the partnership is breaking up. That way, giving birth to children, founding a family, is just one "way of life", one personal decision and "attitude" beside others, an individualised "lifestyle". Considering those facts in a Neoliberal, Capitalist society and you know why you dont have enough children in Europe, its a structural damage and contraception is just a very small part of it.

In another forum, some further questions appeared, I adressed the situation before WW1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_France

France was a Liberal and Bourgeois country earlier than the other nations, especially if comparing with Germany, one can see that the different structure, mentality and policy led to Germany being some decades behind France.

But the German birth rate was going down prior to WW1 as well, the demographic change is deeply rooted in occidental Europe's structures, dont underestimate that.

At the time of the pill, we had the first steps into the direction of family destruction, individualisation, comsumer society, cultural Marxism, Feminism/emancipation etc.
Yes, the pill had an effect, shouldnt be underestimated neither, thats for sure, but you can't blame it for the full scale effect, it was just a mean, a useful mean for contraception, but if the structures would have been different, people would have still gave birth to even more children than prior to WW1!

In the later 1940's and 1950's, there was a new image of the "housewife" created in Europe, largely an imitation of the consumer oriented urban-suburban families and women in the USA. This was based on no sort of healthy spiritual and ideological foundation, it was a strange construct and with the beginning effects of cultural Marxim and Liberal individualisation, it couldnt survive on the long run, since it was just a weak facade without healthy roots, not enough for the post war generation. That was inevitable, but this example also shows the great effects of such, even weak, artificial and short lived, measures on the birth rates, even affecting both the economic as well as mental background for founding families, giving birth to children - the effect was interestingly particular strong, if not strongest, in France, after the won WW2 and better living conditions, an interesting phenomenon to look at.

Also very interesting is the fact, that Japan had a very low birth rate for quite some time too, with a very controlled society, with limited ressources and without a real perspective for growth and glory. Now you might guess when the birth rate was lifted? When they feudal rules were forgotten, conditions became better and of course, the people had a perspective, the will to not just survive, but to grow, to expand - which is, in the end, a very positive outlook.

So in the empire of Japan the population grew as it had to for achieving what they wanted to achieve. It was the different mentality making the difference even before the ecomomic changes (!). Families and children are just part of a greater structure, you can't solve such issues individually if wanting a solution for the whole, thats what everybody should keep in mind. Therefore moralistic approaches are often faulty, if not considering the "rational motives" behind individual decisions, which often have no sort of bad deeds at all...

And biological rationality, economic decisions going much beyond Capitalism:
Well, not really, because an individual hasnt to be Capitalist of ANY SORT to come to this conclusion, but just economically rational from a much wider human perspective. I mean that humans act and think usually in some way always economically, which means every motivation is finally based on some sort of, biologically and psychologically determined, cost-benefit relation - EVERYTHING.

This has not to be strictly economic in a material way, it just means that what you want and do gives you some sort of satisfaction, because its appealing to your biologically and psychologically determined needs.

A woman could be highly motivated to help other people, to do something for society, getting self-esteem by doing so and being admired by others for that. Now that doesnt have to mean she wants a family, or giving birth to children, because she could decide to, exactly for the reasons mentioned above, to stay childless, as an active nun, member of a social aid organisation or physician etc.
For doing what she does, she needs time and energy, if having a family and children, she either couldnt do that, f.e. because its forbidden like for a nun, or because it takes too much flexibility away like for the social aid member and time for the physician.
This is a clear decision and if wanting to "be good" in the field she decides to act for, which is crucial for her self-image, she might as well think of getting no children exactly for the very same reasons.

Now its a simple decision for the woman, even a very idealistic and absolute anticapitalist one, for or against children for her particular goals and way of life.

This is contradictory in itself to most traditional societies, especially the vast majority of women in those and this is the core of the whole issue.
While such women and their decisions against families were in most traditional societies a small exception from the rule, it became far more common these days.

Whether the reason is idealistic, social status, career or security oriented, financial, consumer and hedonistic etc. or, most likely for most, a combination of it, is of secondary importance for the effect.

The point is the very personal "lifestyle" decision of every single individual which can choose between a lot of, in the end quite similar, concepts with or without family and children.

If founding a family, you personally decided to do so, are no way better off or having any great advantages of any sort, but have to pay for your very personal decision, without getting anything back, often not even from the close family, being worth even one quarter of the efforts you have to invest in that personal decision from a rational perspective and if ignoring the children themselves - the "children issue" being adressed later.

Simple put, the society must give a woman which gives birth to healthy children and good new group members, which raises them with a good motivation and gives them a good education, a great bonus, a great advantage, which does more than just outbalance the disadvantages such a woman has in comparison to a childless one, so that in the end, the woman will feel personally better off, with a higher social status and more as well as qualitatively better options, than the average childless woman. Thats the point.

The rest being done by the women's natural disposition for children and childcaring, but the absolute minimum is to outbalance the negative effects of childbearing from the "economic" (in the widest sense!!!) perspective and this goes far beyond merely financial considerations. It has a lot to do with the quality of life, the options you have on the longer run, as well as time management and support, social status and acceptance.

In this individualised world the children dont really belong to you even, you have very limited rights over them and the structures might lead to a situation in which you being left by your children or they turn against you (much more often than in the pre-Civilisation, traditional past). This lack of social cohesion and justified investment, if talking about children has to be considered.

This means for me that many couples get children nowadays for the wrong reasons too, because that they god children at all, doesnt mean they "act healthy" or have a better, more rational motivation than a childless person. They might got the children just because the women thinks they are cute as newborns, which means they just have children for their small period and to look at, without thinking too much about their future at all, or for cementing their rotten relationship, or for being able to give everything to the newborn, in some way of "perfect childlife" image, in which all being subordinated under the will of offering a "perfect world to a small individual being".

That sort of "perfectionism" of a highly, pathologially individualised manner, can even be the reason for getting no children at all (!), because many quite high standing women, influenced by this highly moralistic individualist outlook, think they can't keep up such a "perfect environment for the small being" right now or never, leading to the fact, that they get their first child much too late or none at all. At the same time they work and pay for morons and low level individuals getting children, for which they can't care properly - even in social organisations, high standing women without children often care for lowest level women and their children - is this rational? Of course its not, but its part of the individualist outlook, with one being not able to suffice their own exaggerated, unrealistic and finally impracticable standards, with which they got indoctrinated with, whereas the others being not able to achieve a minimum standard for their often already genetically and prenatal defective children. Its the best example for whats going wrong in our current society and system actually, with the good will and traits of one group leading to their factual extinction and the bad will or inability of the other to their relative prosperity. This relates to my Eugenic perspective on things, but it clearly relates also to the general defects of our current society.

Also interesting are all sorts of surrogats, the ways of substituting the own children for many women, among those are jobs with children as well as movies and especially animals. This is also a long story, but to keep it short, many focus their attention on similar objects which substitute the biological need, at least to some degree, for caring for the own or at least closely related children.

I dont say these tendencies are that new or wrong in every case, but they are a poor and false motivations for getting children or surrogates if being left alone. This also leads to dumb situations created by dumb people, like parents saying they just want one or two children, for giving them their full attention or parents which lost a child saying, they dont want to give birth to more children, to not trying to "substitute the dead one" which was such a precious individual that this would be some sort of "moral crime" in front of it (!!!).

All those cases just reflect a highly individualised and wrongly moralising, weak and decadent situation in the West, even among many of those having children, not talking about the asocial ones, which dont care about their offspring in a sufficient way at all.

So if talking about the demographic catastrophy and the lack of newborns, we have also to talk about the situation of families, parents and children as a whole, because in the end, the low birthrates are just part of, symptom of a much deeper going serious disease and defect, in which a more natural outlook, which was always oriented on the bloodline and community, being largely lost.

There is, for most people in the West, no deeper understanding for the value of the bloodline, family tradition and conservation of this and the community as a whole. If that would exist and work, the role of the woman and her status would be much more related to her role as mother, the upholder of the bloodline and group. Automatically, all women which fail in this role, would lose social status, with a few exceptions of women which might have produced really, really great values for the group in other fields. But even thinking about an average job, being and losing relationships with different males, hedonistic activities here and there, being an alternative to the role as mother and upholder of the blood line, would be just ridiculous in such a society - as it is if looking at the big picture, the longer term consequences and biological rules of course.

Contraception could be still practised and even accepted then, it would just give personal options in a certain frame, in which there would be no real longer term alternative to founding a family for the vast majority of women, while the absense of the pill and banned abortion without changing anything else would just lead to a very negative pressure without any positive motivation instead, which is neither good for the individual nor the group in my personal opinion - to an unnatural state like we had it in the 1950's and of course illegal abortions, acts of desperation and many destroyed (reasonable) life plans.

For a longer term healing and rational perspective, the structures have to be changed according to the real needs of the people, women and men, as well as the group as a whole. The personal view on and plan of life has to be in accordance with what the individual should accomplish for the group, thats the way it should be and for that a lot of things, from education to economic structures, have to be changed.

P.S.: Something more on "economic decisions" from an evolutionary perspective, which is a quite ironic story actually. Because every healthy economic decision being based on potential higher reproductive success. Now those programs work, whether they have an actual effect or not. F.e. an individual will try to get a partner and having sex, even if being infertile. All those investments during the search for a partner and for keeping up the partnership could be, in theory, used "in a better way" for an infertile individual, f.e. by investing everything in closely related people or great programs for the well being of them and not caring for an own partner and family. But as we all know, most human won't act that way, it would be quite unnatural even, since the whole program works whether it leads to actual effects or not.

The same is true for many other aspects, as in the historic past having material wealth and security, a high social status, regular sex and the like, so the very same things most members of our current society still thrive for, were essential for their biological = reproductive success. So trying to "be accepted", having "a career", even being able and actually doing hedonistic acts, everything is perfectly on line with the evolutionary programs - it worked for the historic past, but not the current situation and structures, in which those drives being exploited and abused by a system, in which the individual member being still largely motivated based on this biological programs though.

Its quite similar to our nutrition and preferences if its about food. To prefer fat and sweet food is just natural and works perfectly in palaeolithic environment, but unfortunately, it might not work as good in a modern consumer oriented society, in which the good taste might be produced by ingredients bad for our shape and health under the current circumstances, since many tastes being just imitating artificially by our modern industrial production, as many natural needs being imitated, manipulated, distracted and exploited by our modern society and system, in the end by individuals abusing these weaknesses in a conscious or unconscious way, since even those exploiting it with advantage, might do so in a rather instinctive but nevertheless harmful way for the majority of individuals and the group as a whole.

Since to care for children in a much more direct way, was, especially for males, not necessary, because if being fertile, the children came "automatically", if acting like the programs "told it" the individual. Now contraception is one part of interception, but only a smaller part, because from the time of larger groups, even more so civilisations, the link was already largely broken, it still worked, but much worse, since the small groups with many related people, extended family and direct kin as well as group selection, were the environment for which "the programs were written" originally and in which they worked best.

Now some of the people acting the best for the old programs, have the least reproductive success, while those which act on a more animal-like, below-higher-human level, without further considerations for reproductive success, are more successful, directly and indirectly supported by the better variants, which, by being less instinctive and more rational on a higher level, being also more prone to distraction in a degenerated social and cultural environment. As we can see, many lower level variants are actually too dumb for contraception, its not that they always want children more than their higher level counterpart, they are just not able to prevent the pregnancy.

They lack the will, determination, consequence and intelligence to do so, as well as the chance for social and sexual (selective) rise. In the situation of positive selection, they would have lacked the very same traits too of course, the will, determination, consequence and intelligence, as well as chance for social and sexual (partner selection/selective) success for being able to raise a larger number of healthy children. The same determined career or party woman without children, we all might know from our personal environment, might have been a great and absolutely determined aristocratic mother of the past, which planned her partnership and pregnancies, planned the education and well-being of her family, actually tried to plan everything - for her family and children- probably even group and not just an individual, short-lived career, if being not immunised by some sort of alternative value-system (read ideology).

So in the end, the whole problem, as explained above, comes from the sociocultural decoupling of individual social-economic and individual sexual (reproductive) success, as well as individual social-economic and general, collective biological (extended kinship, group interests, majority interests) success.

I might add something for his person and invention: Its similar to the nuclear technology or current genetic research, he invented a mean, which could have been used without too much harm for the individuals and groups, just giving another, quite useful option, its the whole framework, the way it being applied and promoted, the social and political environment which finally produces the good or bad effects in the first place.

prodeutsch
Wednesday, January 28th, 2009, 10:59 PM
Since this is my first post on one of my favorite subjects! The solution is quite simple, have more children! If you value your culture and you Germanic Heritage have more children. If you don't want Deutschland to be an Islamic State have more children. It is disengenious when do-gooders say that having more children endangers the planet! I guess it would if you were from a poor country that can't feed itself.

I myself did my part, I have 5 children, all blue eyes and blond hair. Smart, motivated, taught about their culture and heritage. I decided long ago that the "good" guys would not be outnumbered!

Dagna
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 08:10 PM
German birth rate climbs steadily

Family Minister Ursula von der Leyen has confirmed that Germans are having more children, saying that the tough economic situation is prompting growing numbers to seek security within the family.

In an interview with newspaper Bild am Sonntag, the minister said there has been a marked increase in births among women between the ages of 30 and 40.

In 2007, Germany registered 12,000 more births than in the previous year. The upward trend continued last year with 517,549 children born between January and September 2008 – an increase of 3,400, according to the newspaper. The Federal Statistics Office estimates that a total of 690,000 children were born in Germany last year.

Von der Leyen, who is to present a report on families in Germany on Monday, said her ministry had discovered that more German men had warmed to the idea of having kids.

In 2007, the minister, a mother of seven, introduced parental leave benefits for German fathers which allow them to stay at home on two-thirds of their salaries for a year. The measure was meant to raise Germany’s birth rate which has long been one of the lowest in Europe.

“The desire to have children is rising among men. The role of the father is changing today,” von der Leyen said.

The minister said the severe economic recession in Germany was leading to fewer abortions and divorces, adding that the family offered a safe refuge for many people.

“When the economy falters, the family becomes more important,” she said.

http://www.thelocal.de/national/20090215-17441.html

Teutonic
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 08:55 PM
This is a beautiful thing. but I have one question, how many of these are actual Germans and not a bunch of Ausländer breeding Germans out of Germany?

Mac Seafraidh
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 09:05 PM
This is a beautiful thing. but I have one question, how many of these are actual Germans and not a bunch of Ausländer breeding Germans out of Germany?

And let's especially not hope it's Jews. As they already control the BRD, they breed like a plague as well.

Hauke Haien
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 09:41 PM
The overall birth rate increases with the percentage of foreigners, especially Muslims, who are exempt from degenerate Western values and consciously try to remove themselves from their influence. What's more, the human rights cultists let them run free. This double standard is motivated by the idea that heterogenisation will make it impossible for us to regain our ethnic nation without major conflict and the fat cats do not want economically productive Germans, and especially women, to waste their time with children.

Really, is there anything that is more lovely and humane than this wonderful liberal democracy? I would consider it an honour to risk my life defending this great civilisation. The future of my people is obviously worth nothing compared to the historical responsibility of maintaining this highly moral order.

Aptrgangr
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 09:51 PM
This is a beautiful thing. but I have one question, how many of these are actual Germans and not a bunch of Ausländer breeding Germans out of Germany?

The cartoon reads: welfare for parents - go! go! go! - the copulation cheergirl celebrates lucky German motherhood.

http://www.wiedenroth-karikatur.de/KariAblage0806/WK080821_ElterngeldGeburtenIslam.jpg

I did not find statistics about the percentage of children born to foreigners except for the state of Hessen: 45.4% with at least one foreign parent in 2007.

Æmeric
Monday, May 24th, 2010, 11:47 PM
Germany is shrinking — fast. New figures released on May 17 show the birth rate in Europe's biggest economy has plummeted to a historic low, dropping to a level not seen since 1946. As demographers warn of the consequences of not making enough babies to replace and support an aging population, the latest figures have triggered a bout of national soul-searching and cast a harsh light on Chancellor Angela Merkel's family policies.

According to a preliminary analysis by the Federal Statistics Office, 651,000 children were born in Germany in 2009 — 30,000 fewer than in 2008, a dip of 3.6%. In 1990, German mothers were having on average 1.5 children each; today that average is down to 1.38 children per mother. With a shortfall of 190,000 between the number of people who died and the number of children who were born, Germany's birth rate is well below the level required to keep the population stable.



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1991216,00.html?artId=1991216?con tType=article?chn=world#ixzz0otECMczh


What I wonder about this & other reports on fertilities rates from Europe is this: Are these rates just for German women, women holding German passports (including naturalize Turks, Arabs etc..) or for all women legally domicile in Germany, including foreigners?

Agrippa
Tuesday, May 25th, 2010, 01:44 PM
What I wonder about this & other reports on fertilities rates from Europe is this: Are these rates just for German women, women holding German passports (including naturalize Turks, Arabs etc..) or for all women legally domicile in Germany, including foreigners?

Such numbers like those are usually meant to represent all birth, so including all ethnicities, regardless of citizenship.

Also ethnoracial statistics are a big problem in Europe, since its in many areas forbidden zu make them at all!

Only migration background - so if having one or more ancestors of foreign citizenship in the last generation, is something observed at times, but not even that regularly or in all areas.

To give you an impression, this is the map for France, in which ethnic statistics are forbidden, showing the percentage of newborns which have a higher risk for drepanocytosis - sickle cell anemia (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikip edia.org%2Fwiki%2FSickle-cell_disease).

This diseases is practically absent in France and very low among European Europids, most common among blacks, but also common among Europid/Caucasoid North Africans and Near Easterners.

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/396/carteu.jpg (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fimg28.im ageshack.us%2Fimg28%2F396%2Fcarteu.jpg)

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/396/carteu.jpg

Compare with this map:

http://forums.skadi.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=105274&stc=1&d=1274792346



People who are heterozygous (Aa) for sickle-cell trait also have moderately good resistance to malaria because some of their red cells are misshapen and deflated, but they rarely develop the severe life threatening anemia and related problems typical of homozygous (aa) sicklers. Those who are homozygous dominant (AA) produce normal red blood cells, which makes them excellent hosts for malaria. Therefore, in falciparum malarial environments, nature selects for heterozygous sicklers. At the same time, it selects against homozygous sicklers and people who produce normal red blood cells.http://anthro.palomar.edu/synthetic/synth_4.htm (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fanthro.p alomar.edu%2Fsynthetic%2Fsynth_4.htm)

Its related to the endemic Malaria and spread even in populations with close to zero Negroid influences by the force of natural selection.

So I guess they included Algerians and Near Easterners.

Still its bad enough, since its definitely about non-Europeans primarily, but not necessarily black, especially not fully black - mixed ones for sure too.

But more informations could enlighten us in this question.

Still its quite for sure, that it is about non-European immigrants. Just look at the percentages!

In many German cities newborns are already predominantely of foreign stock - luckily of mostly Europid and often even more European Europid one, unlike in Britain or France.

But still, bad enough and the German births are even much, much lower.

Also considering, that in Germany the difference between higher level and lower level is worse, because German women with higher education and general standard get significantly less children, being fully exploited in the Capitalist circus and influenced by Liberal-Individualist, career orientation, Hedomatic (hedonistic-materialistic) and Cultural Marxist degenerations.

And living in fear of losing their jobs, becoming a social case themselves with low status and even more dependence...

First Western Europeans lose their ethnic majority, then their cultural dominance and finally their racial one, becoming a shrinking minority in their own homelands. It is no longer about ethnic or even racial full purity, but real survival in the sense of whether a significant portion will exist in some generations or not - if nothing being done, rather not.

Rara Avis
Saturday, August 28th, 2010, 08:21 PM
ATLAS; what a wonder avatar image! I love it..:thumbup

Perhaps someday, once the world is purged of the 8.8 billion unneeded humans it is infested with, and then the planet can settle into a normalcy of an abundant Agrarian paradigm once again, only then will women want to produce children without reservation.
We need food and fresh water,shelter and safety, not stuff manufactured in factories that break the family budget and cause them to go into debt trying to acquire it...

Human Priorities are totally out of control today...

Northern Paladin
Sunday, August 29th, 2010, 12:20 AM
How many of the 680,000 infants born in Germany last year were actually German?

maybe 25% :~(

Untersberger
Sunday, August 29th, 2010, 03:50 AM
Let me ask ALL German People whom are following this thread. (It applies to ALL Germans across Europe).

How many children do you wish to have in your lifetime?

Simple question!

Please do write your answer with all sincerity.

Melisande
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 07:39 PM
However I think it should be mentioned that it used to be quite common for people to marry later. I know among some tribal societies, a man was considered an effeminate pervert if he wanted to associate with girls before the age of 20. What a constrast to modern-day mores; where it's basically the opposite.

Anyways, it was really only with the Baby Boomers that it became common practice to marry early.

Go back to the Renaissance/15th/16th centuries and you'll see that throughout Europe marrying girls off at 13-14 was quite common. Age crept up and up throughout the 17th and 18th centuries and by the 19th century, it was understood that it was risky for a 15 year old to start bearing children; plus resources were definitely getting tight. Average age at first birth went up to around 20.

We still have a bimodal curve in the world: cultures where first births take place at around 14-15 and the others, where the age is going up and up. The teen pregnancy rate in California has dropped dramatically over the past two decades - with 17 being the average age for a teen having a child, as compared to 15.5 in 1955. The American South still has a nodal point for teen pregnancies of about 15.5 (Alaska does too). I hope we can all agree that 15.5 or 16 is too young for a girl to become a mother.

On the other hand, with first time mothers' ages in the second group (the older mothers) now rising and rising, that automatically limits the numbers of births a woman can have. A woman who has successfully managed birth control to the age of 35 to have her first child is going to successfully manage waiting to have a second one - and in the end, many, many women are opting for just one.

I don't know about Germany, but the number of 18 year old girls polled at high school graduation who say they never want to have children goes higher every year. It was only 5% at about the time I graduated from high school - now it's 18%. Some will change their minds, of course.

Boys at high school graduation still say they want to have children (96% of them want children), so you can see the disparity. It's become a topic of interest among demographers and sociologists. Young women who do not want children still marry - I wonder if the men who marry them are hoping to change their minds about birth?

At any rate, the extreme focus on physical attractiveness (across several cultures, but particularly strong in the youth cultures) means that they are easily manipulated into attempting relationships that are doomed to failure. And, by the time a man is 30, while he may be attracted to 20 year old women, they are still interested in younger men.

If a person is still unmarried/unmated at 30-35, their currency in the "looks department" may start to wane - and then they'll marry someone for some other reason (such as wanting companionship, children, etc.) But now they're starting late and will have fewer children.

The stormy, romantic, looks-based relationships that people have in their late teens and early 20's are perhaps not the best foundation for having babies - and smart young women know this.

I was 28 and 32 when I had my two daughters; women are waiting past that age with greater frequency (especially in Europe). I'm a Baby Boomer. My mother (not a baby boomer) was 16 when she had me, my aunts were 17 and 19 (and not baby boomers) when they had children. We are all part of the same culture - which encouraged us to wait until we were ready and mature to have children, but my notion of ready was different than their generation. Also, my mom admits she wasn't ready.

So, if you want to pull out "Baby Boomers" as the generation who started marrying early, you'll need to convince me. Control for culture and education and see if that finding still holds.

SwordOfTheVistula
Tuesday, April 5th, 2011, 01:01 PM
by the time a man is 30, while he may be attracted to 20 year old women, they are still interested in younger men.

If true, that's a new phenomenon. When I was in my late teens and early-mid 20s in the late 90s and early-mid 2000s, most girls my age I knew would only date men who were at least a few years older. Not too old, like 40s, for most of them (some of them were attracted only to men in their 40s and 50s at age 18-21, but this was a small number). But definitely 30-ish guys. That does seem to have changed in the last few years or so, not sure why.

Frostbite
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 08:38 AM
I don't know how true it is, but a friend of mine from Germany said it was difficult to have/care for children. Especially if you worked. School gets out in the middle of the day, there aren't a lot of daycares etc. Not to mention it's expensive. So for many people who wanted to have kids it's just not practical or it only makes sense to have 1-2.

hyidi
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 12:09 PM
Well, maybe If it was easier for other Europeans Germanic's to migrate to Germany and produce our offspring's,we could help! But for any Europeans to enter any European base country, It's just to hard! There is race hate against whites from our own nations, THAT applies to all European based countries!

Before WWII, European countries were flushed with 99% White Europeans! Lets say Germany lost 10,000 Germans that migrated to Australia, Germany would receive European migrants from England and France to recover those lost 10,000 Germans! Europeans rotated around European based Countries freely,and it worked well! Now today,Europeans are subjected to discrimination just for trying to enter a white nation,while people with out European back rounds are allowed to roam freely around European based countries popping out there foreign offspring's into our nations.

So when Germany loses 10,000 white Germans by migration today,Germany will receive 10,000 migrants with out European back-rounds! It's as simple as that! and this applies to all European based countries,not just Germany!

Weitgereister
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 12:38 PM
In my opinion, the European nations that want to keep their native population need not only to support natives with children (day-cares, tax subsidy, etc), but reshape the image of their culture. Germany in particular seems to have a slew of young people who aren't very interested in their culture, I suppose it stems from their parents and the Nazi taboo.

hyidi
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 01:40 PM
Not good news!


The German Population mirrors the Europe of today. The Population of Germany is made up of native Germans as well as immigrants from other parts of Europe and Asia. A substantial number of German citizens are of African origin.

http://www.mapsofworld.com/germany/population.html

ozhammer
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 02:33 PM
In my opinion, the European nations that want to keep their native population need not only to support natives with children (day-cares, tax subsidy, etc), but reshape the image of their culture. Germany in particular seems to have a slew of young people who aren't very interested in their culture, I suppose it stems from their parents and the Nazi taboo.

Well this Nazi Taboo shouldnt have anything to do with it They are Indigenous and have a right like any sub-species to survive

Just check out the United Nations Charter!

It is the same here in Australia yet for Germany who has a clear culture it is a great disgrace and literal racism against Germans by their own government. What is needed in my opinion is a German Indigenous Party one for their survival.

Media, The Looney Left and the Capitalists all push for a world for themselves but not for us or any native peoples

hyidi
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 02:45 PM
It is the same here in Australia yet for Germany who has a clear culture it is a great disgrace and literal racism against Germans by their own government. Watching a program the other day! A German guard (now in he's late 80's) over heard Hitler say:- 'The German people will never survive with out me' (which I think Hitler was right) the guard response was Hitler's a nut case'. Even Hitler own guards today a brain washed to hate there own supreme government which he fought for 70 years ago!

Is not Germany ran by Jews today? It sounds so!

Hausser
Wednesday, June 20th, 2012, 08:04 PM
tiS1mPEPuBI

Æmeric
Friday, July 13th, 2012, 06:34 PM
The number of births in Germany fell to a post-war low last year despite government incentives meant to reverse a population decline in the European Union's biggest economy, and analysts blamed a lack of sufficient child care support.

A third of all babies born in Germany, still the EU's most populous member state, came from immigrant families, the analysts said, noting that without them the overall figure would have been much lower.

The preliminary data released by Germany's Federal Statistics Office showed 663,000 children were born in 2011, down from 678,000 in 2010.

"As in every year since 1972, the number of people who died was greater than the number of children born. In 2011 the difference amounted to 190,000 people and in 2010 to 181,000," the office said in a report.

Demography experts have forecast that Germany's population could shrink to about 50 million by 2050, based on current trends, and say France and Britain - which now have about 60 million each - could overtake it later this century.

Michaela Kreyenfeld from the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research attributed Germany's declining birthrate, one of the lowest in Europe, to conservative attitudes towards child care and the role of the mother.

"Women are perfectly integrated within Germany's labor market but when it comes to babies, everyone expects a mother to stay at home and take care of the children. This of course deters women from becoming mothers," she said.

The situation is slightly different in formerly communist eastern Germany where, Kreyenfeld said, child care was very good and compatibility of family and career was more deeply rooted.

Germany's birthrate peaked in 1964 when a total of 1,357,304 children were born in the capitalist West and communist East.

West Germans were already having fewer children in the 1970s because of improving conditions for women and their easier access to education, said Reiner Klingholz, director of the Berlin Institute for Population and Development.

"So fewer children were born then, meaning that today we lack potential parents for potential children," he said.

Without immigrant families, the number of newly born children in Germany would reach only 400,000 in a country of 82 million, Klingholz said.

Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has no children herself, introduced relatively generous child benefit payments in 2006, making it easier for women to return to the workplace after having children.

Last month, however, in a move critics say entrenches a more traditionalist view of women's roles, Merkel's coalition also approved a bill on childcare payments that would give parents an allowance to keep their toddlers at home rather than sending them to nursery.

Critics say this policy - championed by Merkel's largely Roman Catholic governing partners in the Bavarian-based Christian Social Union (CSU) - contradicts the government's earlier focus on welfare payments for working mothers.

Source (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-germany-birthrate-idUSBRE8620SV20120703)

How many out 82 million are ethnic Germans and what is the birthrate & TFR for ethnic Germans? With only 400,000 per annum I would guess the TFR is at or below 1.

LdyPrussia
Sunday, August 5th, 2012, 06:48 AM
To sum up some lengthy research, women wait too long to marry and produce less children (1. less fertility 2. less time to bare children 3. spacing difficulty due to their close ages). High taxes and cost of living also reduces births BUT the more socialized the country the less reliance on having children since the govt promises to "take care of you" during your retirement. So they have their 'insurance" meaning less children. There are more reasons, but the ones above seem to prevail. Materialism is not the main reason as older people claim. Legalized abortion also does not help the birth rate in any Western nation but people will avoid this topic as part of the problem. Spirituality also plays a role; looking at Mormons and Amish they tend to have very high birth rates easily around 3-6 children per family. Germanic birth rates in USA are still higher than Europeans, 1.8 (excluding Hispanics too). Like Germany it is not at replacement levels.

Also "foreign-born women tend to have more children on average than U.S. born women" -uggggh. Foreign born seem to view USA as wealthy with generous welfare programs compared to their 3rd world conditions so that life has improved for them, but avg. Americans carry the true cost/expense of having children. They become "wealthier" through all these free govt. programs that do not apply to middle class citizens. We're forced to pay for them like Germany. :( I hope this helps explain some reasons but it is never one reason!

Nachtengel
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 07:44 PM
Germany Now has Lowest Birth Rate in the World

http://whiteresister.com/images/couldbeextinct.jpg

So what is the traitor leader of Germany Angela Merkel doing about this issue?

(Daily Slave)

Instead of encouraging Germans to reproduce at a faster rate, she is advocating policies to bring in third world hordes. It shows once again that most politicians in the West are nothing but treasonous pigs working on behalf of Jewish interests.

BBC:

A study says Germany’s birth rate has slumped to the lowest in the world, prompting fears labour market shortages will damage the economy.

Germany has dropped below Japan to have not just the lowest birth rate across Europe but also globally, according to the report by Germany-based analysts.

Its authors warned of the effects of a shrinking working-age population.

They said women’s participation in the workforce would be key to the country’s economic future.

In Germany, an average of 8.2 children were born per 1,000 inhabitants over the past five years, according to the study by German auditing firm BDO with the Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).

It said Japan saw 8.4 children born per 1,000 inhabitants over the same time period.
http://whiteresister.com/index.php/10-news/801-germany-now-has-lowest-birth-rate-in-the-world

Catterick
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 08:11 PM
Their solution: more immigrants.

It should be easy to raise the birthrate of proletarian white women by way of state benefits. Educated women however in Singapore do not respond. Perhaps good riddance. The non-volkisch self-select themselves for extinction.

Georgia
Friday, August 5th, 2016, 06:20 PM
I visit Deutschland frequently, I refuse to use the word BRD. At large, couples no longer marry, too often they change partners as frequently as their underwear and two of the main reasons they give are that they don't want the responsibility of a child and it is just too expensive to have a child or children. Of course the reason is that values have changed, no longer is it important to have families with children which of course are established by two people having a functional and stable marriage. It is all about here and now, no care for the future of their nation.

In most areas, I have been South, West and East during the last few years, work is available actually more than in the US. The Social Structure with all the benefits is wonderful compared to here. Kindergeld is a nice addition to the family income, maternity leave including money received during that time is quite generous, the Euro still buys quite a bit more food supplies than the Federal Reserve Note; Health Insurance and Benefits are wonderful compared to what is available here and housing and utility prices here have caught up if not superseded the cost for them in Germany....just to name a few. Fuel for cars may be a bit cheaper here; however, at large there is not public transportation system available, no car and one is stranded and totally lost.

So, there is really no valid reason why Germans could not marry and have children except that they have forgotten their responsibilities for the survival of their people - the family unit is the Keimzelle of a nation. Unless there is a change of heart which in turn will change actions Germany and the German population will continue to shrink and eventually die as strangers are taken over implementing their own cultures and values.

Nachtengel
Thursday, October 5th, 2017, 11:29 AM
Germany sees highest birthrate in decades, still lags behind in Europe

The latest government figures reveal that Germany has reached its highest fertility rate since the country came back together at the end of the Cold War in 1990. But the Bundesrepublik still lags behind much of Europe.
Germany’s average birthrate in 2015 was 1.5 children per woman, according to figures released on Monday by the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis). That’s the highest level since reunification in 1990 after the country was divided throughout the Cold War.

But it also means that Germany still lags behind the European Union average of 1.58 children per woman.

France is at the top of the charts at nearly two children per woman (1.96), followed by Ireland (1.92), Sweden (1.85), the United Kingdom (1.80) and Denmark (1.71). Portugal is at the very bottom with 1.31 children per woman.

Germany has struggled with low birth rates and comparatively higher death rates in recent years, leading Destatis to warn of a population decline of up to 10 million fewer people in the country by 2060. Destatis predicted in 2015 that in the short-term, the population would increase over five to seven years with immigration, but in the long-term it would decline again.

Due to record immigration numbers over the past two years, including more than one million asylum seekers, the country hit a record high in its population size of 82.8 million last year.

But even with high numbers of new immigrants, the labour force is expected to begin falling in 2025 in part due to the large number of baby boomers going into retirement, according to the German central bank (Bundesbank).

https://www.thelocal.de/userdata/images/1494839515_TotalFertilityRate_EUComparis on_2015.jpg


https://www.thelocal.de/20170515/germany-sees-highest-birthrate-since-reunification-still-lags-behind-in-europe


German population will grow over coming decades after all, experts reckon

Most expert predictions in recent years have made gloomy predictions about a massive drop in the German population size. But researchers in Cologne have come to a rather different conclusion.
Demographics experts at the Cologne Institute for Economic Research (IW) believe that the country’s population will grow by more than a million to 83 million by the year 2035.

That encouraging figure goes against analysis by the federal statistics office (Destatis), which reported in 2015 that the German population could drop by more than 10 million over the next 40 years.

“The long-expected decrease in the German population clearly isn’t going to happen in the coming decades,” the IW report states, citing a growing birth rate and sizeable immigration as the two main factors behind the unexpected prediction.

https://www.thelocal.de/userdata/images/1507122439_20171004_Germany_East_Shrinki ng.jpg

The IW figures even reckon the German population will grow to 84 million in 2023 before declining slowly over the following decade.

But the trend isn’t set to be even across the whole country. While Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, Berlin and Hamburg are all predicted to grow, the states of former east Germany will see sometimes drastic declines.

By 2035, Berlin will have grown well beyond the 4 million mark, with an extra 510,000 inhabitants expected in the capital. Hamburg is also expected to grow by 162,000, meaning almost 2 million people will call the port city home.

The proportion of young people living in the cities is to grow strongly, according to the IW. But this will come at the cost of the ageing populations of more rural states such as Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia, which are predicted to suffer population losses of over 10 percent.
https://www.thelocal.de/20171004/german-population-will-grow-over-coming-decades-after-all-experts-reckon

Nachtengel
Friday, November 3rd, 2017, 04:05 PM
German population will grow over coming decades after all, experts reckon

Most expert predictions in recent years have made gloomy predictions about a massive drop in the German population size. But researchers in Cologne have come to a rather different conclusion.
Demographics experts at the Cologne Institute for Economic Research (IW) believe that the country’s population will grow by more than a million to 83 million by the year 2035.

That encouraging figure goes against analysis by the federal statistics office (Destatis), which reported in 2015 that the German population could drop by more than 10 million over the next 40 years.

“The long-expected decrease in the German population clearly isn’t going to happen in the coming decades,” the IW report states, citing a growing birth rate and sizeable immigration as the two main factors behind the unexpected prediction.

The IW figures even reckon the German population will grow to 84 million in 2023 before declining slowly over the following decade.

But the trend isn’t set to be even across the whole country. While Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, Berlin and Hamburg are all predicted to grow, the states of former east Germany will see sometimes drastic declines.

By 2035, Berlin will have grown well beyond the 4 million mark, with an extra 510,000 inhabitants expected in the capital. Hamburg is also expected to grow by 162,000, meaning almost 2 million people will call the port city home.

The proportion of young people living in the cities is to grow strongly, according to the IW. But this will come at the cost of the ageing populations of more rural states such as Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia, which are predicted to suffer population losses of over 10 percent.https://www.thelocal.de/20171004/german-population-will-grow-over-coming-decades-after-all-experts-reckon

Uwe Jens Lornsen
Friday, November 3rd, 2017, 09:02 PM
How many out 82 million are ethnic Germans and what is the birthrate & TFR for ethnic Germans? With only 400,000 per annum I would guess the TFR is at or below 1.

I have a number here from year 2011 :

390'000 ethnic Germans were born,
and 270'000 with immigration background .

Thing is, that in schools the young Germans
will become minorities in several years to come;
and at some point immigrants with German passports
will be counted as "Germans" .

I wanted to attach a .gif graph,
but the attachment window does
not work to upload from the local device on Android 6.0 .

https://www.endphase21.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=12505&d=1506598348

Nachtengel
Sunday, November 12th, 2017, 08:55 PM
Germany: the most poorly educated immigrants have the most children

https://diversitymachtfrei.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/dwo-wi-mehrkinder-dreiodermehr-mku-jpg.jpg?w=648&h=9999

https://diversitymachtfrei.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/dwo-wi-mehrkinder-dreiodermehr-mku-jpg.jpg?w=648

The diagram shows the proportion of women who have three or more children in West Germany on the left, and East Germany on the right.

The figures are given for women with high (hoch), medium (mittel) and low (niedrig) levels of education, shown separately for Germans (black) and people of immigrant origin (blue).

As you can see, poorly educated people (which is really just a polite proxy for stupid people) are much more likely to have 3 or more children. And invader families are much more likely to do so. More than 40% of invader families have 3 or more children.https://diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com/2017/11/06/germany-the-most-poorly-educated-immigrants-have-the-most-children/

Verðandi
Thursday, March 29th, 2018, 08:01 AM
https://diversitymachtfrei.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/dwo-ip-geburtennachherkunft-js-jpg.jpg

The German birth-rate has reached the highest level since 1973. The latest figures are from 2016 and show a birth-rate of 1.59 per woman. Unfortunately, it’s not Germans who are being born, but their replacers.

The graphic above shows the birth-rate of German women in blue and foreign women in black. A massive spike in births to foreign mothers is apparent.

“German” here is defined purely by citizenship status so many of these women will not be German by ancestry.

Immigration has been concentrated in west Germany, where the birth-rate rose 8%, while in east Germany it rose by only 4%.
https://diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com/2018/03/28/genocide-by-substitution-germans-are-being-bred-out-of-their-own-country/

LdyPrussia
Thursday, March 29th, 2018, 06:51 PM
Germany is too crowded at 82 million and should allow a natural balance to occur. About every five miles there is a town unless you're in the mountains. Real estate is too expensive for people to upgrade desirable size for more space to expand the family beyond one child. Governments and companies want the profit and control over labor and consumer markets as we know that elderly people do not purchase much products beyond basics. So it makes economic growth difficult, but some labor will be mechanized anyways to cover the labor shortages. Germany may shrink in GDP over time, but it gives a better future for younger Germans and older people who desire to work longer if they enjoy good health. Flooding the market with low-skilled immigrants lead to many serious societal problems as discussed here. It's not worth the risk.