Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 81

Thread: Germany's Falling Birth Rate - Source of National Alarm

  1. #41
    Bloodhound
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Jäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Atlantean
    Gender
    Posts
    4,379
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    66
    Thanked in
    37 Posts
    If it is not possible to reverse the demographic decline, an “intelligent immigration policy” will be necessary, Djerassi said.
    The Jew has spoken.
    "Nothing is more disgusting than the majority: because it consists of a few powerful predecessors, of rogues who adapt themselves, of weak who assimilate themselves, and the masses who imitate without knowing at all what they want." (Johann Wolfgang Goethe)

  2. #42
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Online
    3 Days Ago @ 08:36 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Bavarii, Saxones, Suebi, Alamanni
    Subrace
    Borreby + Atlantonordoid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    Location
    Einöde in den Alpen
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Engaged
    Politics
    Tradition & Homeland
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    9,109
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    218
    Thanked in
    127 Posts
    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*

    Quote Originally Posted by Hauke Haien
    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...
    -In kalte Schatten versunken... /Germaniens Volk erstarrt / Gefroren von Lügen / In denen die Welt verharrt-
    -Die alte Seele trauernd und verlassen / Verblassend in einer erklärbaren Welt / Schwebend in einem Dunst der Wehmut / Ein Schrei der nur unmerklich gellt-
    -Auch ich verspüre Demut / Vor dem alten Geiste der Ahnen / Wird es mir vergönnt sein / Gen Walhalla aufzufahren?-

    (Heimdalls Wacht, In kalte Schatten versunken, stanzas 4-6)

  3. #43
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts
    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.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  4. #44
    Senior Member prodeutsch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, July 28th, 2012 @ 01:36 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Deutschland
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    282
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    A simple solution

    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!

  5. #45
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Dagna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Northern German, Scandinavian
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Norway
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Politics
    Classic Liberalism
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    2,097
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    48 Posts

    German Birth Rate Climbs Steadily

    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


    Die Sonne scheint noch.

  6. #46
    Senior Member Teutonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Last Online
    Sunday, April 15th, 2012 @ 11:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Bayern, Baden, Schwaben, Württemberg
    Country
    German Empire German Empire
    State
    Bavaria Bavaria
    Location
    Oberbayern
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Religion
    Deutsch
    Posts
    320
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    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?
    "Sei, was Du willst, aber was Du bist, habe den Mut ganz zu sein."
    (Albert Leo Schlageter)

    "Deutsche Einigkeit, meine Stärke - meine Stärke, Deutschlands Macht" (Hermann)

  7. #47
    Senior Member Mac Seafraidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, April 20th, 2018 @ 09:21 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    German, Irish, Italian, and either Flemish or Walloon
    Subrace
    Alpinid/Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Delaware Delaware
    Location
    U$$Rael
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Single, looking
    Occupation
    Forum activist
    Politics
    Fascism and National Socialism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    1,632
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Teutonic View Post
    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.

  8. #48
    Schimmelreiter
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Hauke Haien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    Monday, September 4th, 2017 @ 09:59 AM
    Ethnicity
    Deutsch
    Location
    Land der Deutschen
    Gender
    Posts
    1,841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    22
    Thanked in
    19 Posts
    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.

  9. #49
    Senior Member Aptrgangr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Last Online
    2 Days Ago @ 11:12 PM
    Ethnicity
    -
    Ancestry
    Alemanni-Suebi/Irish
    Subrace
    Dalophælid-Nordid
    State
    Hessen-Darmstadt Hessen-Darmstadt
    Location
    Starkenburg
    Gender
    Family
    Hagestolz
    Politics
    reactionary ancap
    Posts
    987
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    92
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    153
    Thanked in
    68 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Teutonic View Post
    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.



    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.

  10. #50
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Æmeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Britain, Ulster, Germany, America
    Subrace
    Dalofaelid+Baltid/Borreby
    Y-DNA
    R-Z19
    mtDNA
    U5a2c
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Indiana Indiana
    Gender
    Age
    57
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Obama
    Religion
    Conservative Protestantism
    Posts
    6,271
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    573
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    522
    Thanked in
    229 Posts

    Germany's Birth Rate Hits Historic Low

    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/artic...#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?

Similar Threads

  1. Austria Has Second-Lowest Birth Rate in EU
    By Verðandi in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Sunday, August 1st, 2010, 01:12 PM
  2. Can Northern Europe's Low Birth Rate Be Remedied?
    By Northern Paladin in forum Germanic Europe & Outlying Islands
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Saturday, July 3rd, 2010, 10:02 AM
  3. Iceland Tops European Birth Rate Chart
    By White Iceland in forum Iceland
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, 04:25 AM
  4. Is the White Birth Rate Too Low to Sustain Our Civilisation?
    By Aspire in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 5th, 2009, 11:47 PM
  5. Declining Birth Rate Threatens the Very Existence of Europe
    By Northern Paladin in forum Germanic Europe & Outlying Islands
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: Saturday, January 1st, 2005, 02:41 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •