The Fertility Crisis: Capitalism's Next Challenge, with Sir Niall Ferguson
What this covers
For years, the world worried about overpopulation and our capacity to sustain ever-increasing numbers of people. Now, the worry is underpopulation—and recent numbers are stunning. Fertility rate is the average number of children that are born to a woman over her lifetime. According to the United Nations, this number is currently 1.64 in the U.S.: If it stays this way, in three generations there will only be half as many young Americans as there are today, holding immigration constant. In China, this number is even lower: one child per woman. Just eight countries are expected to account for more than half the rise in global population between now and 2050.
Economic theory is based on the idea of expansion, and humanity has been expanding since 1500. If that is about to change, then the very foundation of our economic theory will need rethinking.
Acclaimed author, historian, and filmmaker Sir Niall Ferguson (Stanford/Harvard) joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss why we're heading toward a global population decline and what it all means for civilization. They discuss how factors like climate change, immigration, reproductive rights, artificial intelligence, and the trade-offs women face between career and motherhood are influencing decisions to have children. What are the implications of falling birth rates not just for the market economy but also for geopolitics and intergenerational conflict? Can we reverse trends in fertility before it is too late?
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com (https://pcm.adswizz.com) for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Source description (no synthesized summary yet).
Global fertility collapse driven by women's economic opportunity and control over reproduction is creating an unstable population system with severe economic and geopolitical consequences that current policy tools cannot reverse.
- Fertility decline is universal across cultures and economic systems once women gain education and labor market opportunity, not determined by government incentives
- Population systems lack self-equilibrating mechanisms unlike markets—once below replacement fertility, exponential decline continues without inherent stabilizing forces
- Aging populations with shrinking workforces will create fiscal crises, military vulnerability, and generational conflict that immigration and robotics cannot fully solve
This asset isn't compiled yet
You're seeing its claims, ranked. Compile it to build the argument threads, weight them, and check each claim against your library — the full view.
Women's increased education, professional opportunities, and reproductive control (through contraception and abortion) have been the primary drivers of declining fertility rates regardless of culture, geography, or history—wherever women have control over fertility, total fertility rates drop steeply.
“a lot emanates from the changing situation of of women the more education more Educational Opportunity women have the more professional opportunities they have that the more likely family sizes to be limited it's not just the pill there's a gradual shift in the course of the 20th century towards greater control of fertility including of course abortion”
Environmental factors like pesticides and other chemical pollutants may have dramatic impacts on human fertility and are not adequately appreciated; reduced population would allow elimination of such toxins, but the alternative (massive population using agricultural intensification) requires ubiquitous pesticide use.
“I'm actually concerned that environmental factors can have Dr atic impact and this is really not only unhealthy but worrisome environmentalist is not just being concerned about climate change there are a lot of other things to support 8 billion people and potentially 10 billion people on Earth we have to use a massive amount of pesticides a massive amount of fertilizer a massive amount of uh of chemical products that we don't know the the the long-term impact of and uh and maybe even this lack of fertility is driven by many of this decid”
Humans are sometimes rational and economic, sometimes not; people are very self-serving and their economics and rationality are directed at their own short-term well-being rather than at long-term human survival, suggesting short-termism more than irrationality drives demographic decline.
“I guess that's maybe maybe the point is not that we're not economic or not rational just that we're very very self-serving and our economics and our rationality are directed at our own short-term well-being rather than at the long-term uh existence of humanity right”
The real economic factor driving fertility decline is women's career-fertility tradeoff: women face a real cost in choosing between professional achievement and motherhood that no policy intervention can completely eliminate.
“I think there is an economic calculation going on but it's not not got to do with public finances so I think the economics comes in in that women are making a choice between Career and motherhood and there is a tradeoff there that no amount of policy intervention completely gets rid of this”
Government restrictions on abortion and contraception have been tried (Iran) and do not work—people will circumvent restrictions and it will not be pleasant—and history shows that while governments can use coercion to lower fertility rates, it seems very hard to coerce people to have more than 1.5 children.
“I think it's been tried Iran would be one place and it doesn't work I mean the truth is that no measures seem capable of reversing declines in fertility and if you create the kind of restrictions you're talking about people will get around them it won't be pleasant uh but they will get around them so I think one of the key lessons of history is that when governments try to change the total fertility rate in the upper Direction They can they can bring it down China did India did you can use coercion to lower fertility but it seems to be really hard to coers people to have more than one and a half children”
Women's rights and labor-force participation (which are unambiguously good things) may come at a long-term cost in the form of human extinction, creating a moral paradox: something that is right in one time-frame (women's freedom) may be wrong in another (species survival).
“even though it's very uncomfortable territory surrounding women and our entrance into the labor force and our right to work and be be fully realized human beings all of which I am obviously incredibly Pro but it is interesting that it has that it may come at a cost and right now I think would say the cost is not a cost because anything that slows down are the rapid escalation of the number of people on earth is probably a good thing but eventually it may be a cost and it's an interesting thing to think about right something can be very right on one level and perhaps something that Generations from now if they real if the human race really is dying off we'll look back in second guess”
The more education and professional opportunities women have, the more likely family sizes are limited, and a gradual shift over the 20th century toward greater control of fertility—including abortion—has occurred globally, even as some countries tighten abortion laws
“it looks as if a lot emanates from the changing situation of of women the more education more Educational Opportunity women have the more professional opportunities they have that the more likely family sizes to be limited it's not just the pill there's a gradual shift in the course of the 20th century towards greater control [9:26] of fertility including of course abortion I mean globally we've moved towards more liberal abortion rules even as some countries including the United States have have tighten their law the global Trend over the last three decades is for abortion to get easier”
Economic calculation for fertility comes in through the tradeoff women face between career and motherhood, a tradeoff that no policy intervention can completely eliminate
“I think there is an economic calculation going on but it's not not got to do with public finances so I think the economics comes in in that women are making a choice between Career and motherhood and there is a tradeoff there that no amount of policy intervention completely gets rid of this”
Sperm counts are way down by some measures by roughly half over the last 50 years, and people hypothesize dating apps may be responsible for the paradox that as mating became more efficient through technology, sex became less appealing.
“there are natural reasons for falling fertility sperm counts are way down that's part of what's going on here by some measures by half over the last 50 years then there's all this distraction that people suggest is the explanation people are on their phones instead of in the sack I'm particularly interested in the the Paradox that as we've made made mating more efficient through dating apps we've somehow made sex less appealing”
Societies need significant populations to maintain complex systems like the British National Health Service, which requires many people to fill menial tasks as well as nursing and medical roles; immigration compensates for low fertility to keep these systems staffed.
“you need to run Britain's beloved National Health Service without immigrants because you need a lot of people to run hospitals particularly to do the menial tasks but also actually to to staff uh the nursing and and uh and doctor's jobs”
Countries with very low total fertility rates determinately boost their populations through immigration because they find fertility decline and shrinking populations unacceptable; the fact that nearly all Western countries scramble to attract immigrants reveals deep dissatisfaction with the prospect of population decline.
“if it were so obvious that we should just uh learn to stop worrying and love population stagnation and decline then why are so many countries so eager to attract immigrants because one of the odd things about the world today is that countries with very low tfrs determinately boost their population through immigration the United States does it in the most eccentric way possible by having an open border other countries are somewhat more deliberate about whom they attract but there aren't many Western countries that just shrug their shoulders and say oh well we'll just be fewer then to run Britain's beloved National Health Service without immigrants”
The opportunity cost of women's time has skyrocketed historically—from a world where women couldn't vote, had no independent life, and couldn't even attend movies alone, to today where even non-working wealthy women have extensive opportunities—making the opportunity cost of having children much higher than before.
“think about a woman in the beginning of the 20th century she couldn't vote she couldn't go around she couldn't have a life on her own probably she wasn't even able to go uh to the movie when the movie by herself okay so uh now even if you don't walk but especially if you are rich you don't walk you have the word of your uh disposal right you can do so many things and there is an opportunity cost of having a child and of of course raising the child”
Fertility decline was not accurately predicted because it was underappreciated how low total fertility rates would fall in first-world countries and eventually everywhere, and people failed to recognize that populations do not self-equilibrate at stable levels but undergo steep exponential declines once below replacement.
“we didn't really pay enough attention to the declining fertility rates in first of all the Western World and then just about everywhere when the total fertility rate which is in effect live births per woman falls below 2.1 you're below replacement and that actually started to happen quite a long time ago so this this was something that I don't think people thought much about until they suddenly woke up and realized that human population was likely to Peak sooner than we thought and then the interesting part that most people still have not got their heads around is that population could fall as drastically as it Rose in the 20th century”
The cross-sectional relationship between fertility and women's education in the United States has recently become U-shaped: more highly educated women are now starting to have more children compared to the recent past when there was a monotonic inverse relationship.
“the cross-sectional relationship between fertility and women's education in the us has recently become u-shaped meaning that more Highly Educated women are actually starting to have more children”
A third of the decline in US fertility since 2007 was due to declining unintended births, and there has been a striking phenomenon of declining sexual activity among 18-24 year old men, with approximately one-third reporting no sexual activity in the past year.
“people have got better at avoiding unintended pregnancy a lot better about a third of the decline in fertility in the US since 2007 was just due to the decline in unintended births but there's also this striking phenomenon of declining sexual activity which is the really large proportion s of 18 to 24 year old men who have no sexual activity in the past year like it's a third”
Women are the primary decision-makers in fertility, not men; men's preferences about having children matter less than women's because women bear the biological and primary caregiving burden.
“this is where Bethany should comment because it's it's really women who are the decision makers much more than men”
The fiscal system depends on continuous population growth; as population declines, pension and debt obligations become unsustainable without either massive immigration or radical restructuring.
“the fiscal component because we have set up a pension system and we set up a level of debt that is really dependent on some continuous growth in the population at least not a rapid decline in the population and as the population is declining then we're forced to do maybe massive immigration in order to keep the tabs uh going and to to pay for stuff creating enormous social problems”
The Haber-Bosch process for nitrogen fertilization dramatically expanded global carrying capacity; without it, maximum sustainable population would be about 2 billion (current: 8 billion).
“I was reading somewhere that if uh the German chemistry during war war I had not understood how to use fertilizer uh the maximum amount of population that we could support today would be 2 billion and we are at eight so I think that there been like a gigantic discovery that expanded our ability to support a larger population”
The cost of bearing a child (9 months of pregnancy) is secondary compared to the cost of raising a child, and most of the burden falls on parents after birth, not during pregnancy.
“you can work during most of that process assum uing you have a healthy normal pregnancy you can work almost until the the end of it the the cost becomes the cost becomes having the child um um the the blip to me of being pregnant and and giving birth is absolutely nothing compared to compared to the work and the effort and the time spent on raising children”
Fertility decline to below 2.1 TFR is everywhere and universal, occurring faster in some places (Italy faster than England, Iran as fast as the US), suggesting it is not due to economic systems or government incentives but to something more fundamental
“it seems to me very interesting and a problem for economics that the trend towards low fertility to a TFR below 2.1 is everywhere and it's come down faster in Italy than in England it's come down as fast in Iran as in the United States so I don't think it's got much to do with the kind of economic system or the incentives [16:45] certainly through the through the government that exists uh to have children”
The geopolitics of current conflict are mainly a technology problem rather than a manpower problem, as evidenced by the Ukraine war where armies are small by mid-20th-century standards and soldiers are old (average Ukrainian soldier age is 44) rather than young conscripts.
“the geopolitics of conflict today is is mainly a technology problem rather than a Manpower problem and that means that the war of the future if the US and China do go to war will be a war of of machines much more than it will be a war of of men and in that war of machines the Chinese will have more machines they'll have more robots they'll have more drones they will they will have really considerable capacity”
Rational immigration policy requires two rules: (1) do not allow immigration to expand the foreign-born share of population too rapidly (e.g., from 10% to 20-30%) to avoid political backlash, as exemplified by Canada's recent overexpansion; (2) bias immigration selection toward skilled workers because unskilled immigrants are not an obvious fiscal positive and can be net negative.
“if you allow immigration to happen too rapidly so that foreign born share of the population shoots up from 10 to 20 or 30% you will have a political backlash ask Canadians how that's going Ian it's very interesting to me that Canada's overshot they had a rational policy in terms of criteria but the scale was too much so I think the first rule of immigration policy is do not go too fast if you want to maintain the legitimacy of your policy and the second rule has to be to select to have a bias in favor of skill because unskilled uh immigrants as far as I can understand from various studies that have been done are not an obvious fiscal positive in fact can be can be net negative”
East Asia (particularly China) is decisively ahead of the United States technologically in robotics and will acquire humanoid robots far sooner than the US; China will have far more robots, providing them considerable military capacity advantage in future conflict.
“I think it's very interesting that the one area where China is decisively ahead of the United States technologically today is robotics they will have far more robots they will definitely get to the kind of robots Elon preny has before we do and so the the conflict of the future when the United States and China finally go to war at some point uh later this Century could be between an immigrant Army and a robot army that's a plausible future”
Infant mortality was historically very high, so family size (number of live births) was partly motivated by the expectation that half would not survive; if you wanted surviving heirs, you needed to have many children, a very different world from today
“the key thing for me that we forget is how high infant mortality was and so family size in the sense of the number of live births was partly motivated by a sense that half of them wouldn't make it and if you wanted to [8:53] have any surviving airs you better have a good number of of children it's a very different world from the world that that we live in today”
Historical fertility was driven partly by high infant mortality rates (with roughly half of children not surviving), so parents needed to have many live births to ensure any surviving heirs, creating a fundamentally different context from today where child survival is near-universal.
“the key thing for me that we forget is how high infant mortality was and so family size in the sense of the number of live births was partly motivated by a sense that half of them wouldn't make it and if you wanted to have any surviving airs you better have a good number of of children it's a very different world from the world that that we live in today”
About a third of the decline in U.S. fertility since 2007 was due to the decline in unintended births, and there is a striking phenomenon of declining sexual activity among 18-24 year old men, with a third having no sexual activity in the past year
“women who are the decision makers much more than men and people have got better at avoiding unintended pregnancy a lot better about a third of the decline in fertility in the US since 2007 was just due to the decline in unintended births but there's also this striking phenomenon of declining sexual activity which is the really large proportion s of 18 to 24 year old men who have no sexual activity in the past year like it's a third”
Falling populations lead to economic stagnation and contraction; aging societies are less creative than youthful ones; the world of shrinking population will be characterized by the opposite of the dynamism that marked rapid human population growth—a rather desolate prospect.
“if you have falling populations you have economic stagnation contraction aging societies Japan is the sort of uh leader here but Japan is telling us what our future will be and our future will be schools will have to be converted into Elderly Care Homes and elderly or aged population is a less creative population than a youthful one so the world of shrinking population will be a world with precisely the opposite of the dynamism that characterized the period of Rapid human population growth it's a rather desolate Prospect”
Pension systems and government debt are structured on the assumption of continuous population growth; rapid population decline creates an unsustainable fiscal burden on working-age people.
“we have set up a pension system and we set up a level of debt that is really dependent on some continuous growth in the population at least not a rapid decline in the population”
Population is falling everywhere except in Sub-Saharan Africa; nearly all remaining global population growth through 2100 will occur in eight African countries: Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Philippines, and Tanzania, where fertility rates remain very high (e.g., Congo at 6 currently).
“the population is falling everywhere except pretty much in subsaharan Africa and so one of the interesting qu qualifications to be made to the argument is that as population declines everywhere else population continues to rise at least in the next 30 Years in eight countries Democratic Republic of Congo Egypt Ethiopia Nigeria plus India Pakistan the Philippines oh I forgot Tanzania so in the remainder of the century if you go up to 2100 nearly all the population growth will be in Africa because the tfrs are coming down there but they're still really high I mean it's like in six in Congo right now”
Congo's current fertility rate is 6, much higher than developed nations, but fertility is declining globally and will eventually decline in Africa as well.
“the tfrs are coming down there but they're still really high I mean it's like in six in Congo right now”
Sperm counts have declined by approximately 50% over the last 50 years by some measures, contributing to falling fertility.
“there are natural reasons for falling fertility sperm counts are way down that's part of what's going on here by some measures by half over the last 50 years”
Germany's development of synthetic fertilizer during World War I dramatically expanded global population capacity; without that discovery, Earth could support only about 2 billion people rather than the current 8 billion.
“if uh the German chemistry during war war I had not understood how to use fertilizer uh the maximum amount of population that we could support today would be 2 billion and we are at eight”
The total fertility rate in the United States is 1.64 children per woman, and if this rate persists, in approximately three generations (roughly 100 years) there will be only half as many young Americans as today.
“in the us the total fertility rate is 1.64 if the fertility rate stays at this level big if in three generations roughly a hundred years there will only be half as many Young Americans as today”
Perhaps wealthy women who choose not to work do have more children but the pattern is not visible in aggregate data because it is concentrated in specific geographic and social regions, not broadly distributed across wealthy populations.
“I guess I was just thinking that you would you would see you you would see and maybe it's too soon also but you would see across the board more women who who have chosen to stay home having having more children and you know maybe that is happening um in some places in the country just not in wealthy urban areas”
The total fertility rate (TFR) falling below 2.1 puts a population below replacement level, which started happening long ago in the Western world, but most people did not think much about it until they suddenly realized human population was likely to peak sooner than expected
“when the total fertility rate which is in effect live births per woman falls below 2.1 you're below replacement and that actually started to happen quite a long time ago so this this was something that I don't think people thought much about until they suddenly woke up and realized that human population was likely to Peak sooner than we thought”
Governments have tried to reverse fertility decline and have failed (Iran is an example), and coercion to lower fertility works (China, India) but coercion to raise fertility does not seem to work—people will get around restrictions
“I think it's been tried Iran would be one place and it doesn't work I mean the truth is that no measures seem capable of reversing declines in fertility and if you create the kind of restrictions you're talking about people will get around them it won't be pleasant uh but they will get around them so I think one [19:50] of the key lessons of history is that when governments try to change the total fertility rate in the upper Direction They can they can bring it down China did India did you can use coercion to lower fertility but it seems to be really hard to coers people to have more than one and a half children”
Countries with very low TFRs determinately try to boost population through immigration, and many Western countries do not simply accept population decline, which reveals they are not truly comfortable with falling populations
“well if it were so obvious that we should just uh learn to stop worrying and love population stagnation and decline then why are so many countries so eager to [21:58] attract immigrants because one of the odd things about the world today is that countries with very low tfrs determinately boost their population through immigration the United States does it in the most eccentric way possible by having an open border other countries are somewhat more deliberate about whom they attract”
Women's entrance into the labor force has massively increased the value of their time and therefore the opportunity cost of having children, which is the big change driving fertility decline
“the big big change is women have entered the labor force in a massive quantity the the value of their time has skyrocketed and so as a result the the cost of having a child as kired”
Economic theories based on the idea of expansion and human growth have been foundational to capitalism since the 1500s, but if human population is about to begin declining, the fundamental foundations of economic theory need to be rethought.
“I want to talk about fertility precisely because this is a podcast about capitalism economic theories based on the idea of expansion and Humanity has been expanding certainly since the 1500 if that is about to change then the foundation of our economic theory need to be rethought”
The total fertility rate (TFR) in the United States is 1.64, and if it remains at this level, in three generations (roughly 100 years) there will only be half as many young Americans as today
“the fertility rate is the average number of children that are born to a woman over her lifetime in the us the total fertility rate is 1.64 if the fertility [1:34] rate stays at this level big if in three generations roughly a hundred years there will only be half as many Young Americans as today”
By the 2070s-2080s, when global population begins declining and Africa's fertility has also dropped, there will be no immigrant solution remaining to offset developed nations' population decline.
“there'll be a point reached when we run out of Africans too and then we'll be in the world of the the I guess the 2070s 2080s when the global population will Decline and there won't be an immigrant solution that will be a world that I don't think Luigi's grandchildren will actually find very enjoyable”
Robot armies have military advantages over human armies because robots do not require sleep and can continue fighting indefinitely, while human soldiers must rest.
“the evidence already shows that that the pure AI beats the human with the AI at least human soldiers have to sleep whereas robot armies could just continue the slaughter until their batteries ran down”
Immigration policy should be biased toward selecting skilled immigrants; unskilled immigrants are not an obvious fiscal positive and can be net negative by various studies, whereas very few countries are getting this right.
“the second rule has to be to select to have a bias in favor of skill because unskilled uh immigrants as far as I can understand from various studies that have been done are not an obvious fiscal positive in fact can be can be net negative so very few countries are getting this right”
The United States pursues an 'eccentric' immigration policy of essentially open borders compared to other developed nations, which more deliberately select immigrants by skill, suggesting the U.S. is taking a more passive approach to population maintenance.
“The United States does it in the most eccentric way possible by having an open border other countries are somewhat more deliberate about whom they attract”
The global trend over the last three decades has been toward easier abortion access even as some countries including the United States have tightened laws, and Ferguson expects future generations in about 3-4 decades will regard the enthusiasm for fetal abortion as a weird historical anomaly.
“globally we've moved towards more liberal abortion rules even as some countries including the United States have have tighten their law the global Trend over the last three decades is for abortion to get easier and I think future Generations will wonder why human beings developed such an enthusiasm for killing fetuses I think that will seem like a weird thing in about three or four decades from now”
Public debt and future liabilities (Social Security, Medicare) may discourage fertility because when young people have children who will be heavily taxed to pay for aging populations, their own utility from having children is reduced, making them more likely to choose non-taxable goods like art instead.
“I think one of the thing that as an economist I like to to believe is one thing that lead to fewer children is the fact that now we are burdening future generation with enormous amount of liabilities right if you think about the size of the public debt and the size of the Social Security Medicare Etc liability maybe it's too much of an economist perspective but you think about I buy a painting or I have a kid now I derive the utility of the utility of the kid but if the kid is heavily tax my utility is tax as well and so I'm more likely to opt for a painting that is not going to be tax rather than the kids that is STX”
Climate problems culminate before global population starts to decline, so falling population does not solve imminent climate problems being created now, and there is risk that as humans shrink in population, another species—particularly artificial intelligence and AI-enabled robots—will occupy the vacated ecological and technological niche and become very numerous.
“the climate problems just they culminate before our population starts to decline so the falling population doesn't really solve the imminent climate problem that we're creating now and then the second problem I have with the the shrinking human species is I don't know I can't help feeling that there may be another species waiting to take advantage of that including the one that we're building ourselves remember there's a new species that we've decided to make and we call it artificial intelligence but it should in fact be inhuman or non-human intelligence and as we build AI enabled robots a new species will be will be there and they will become very numerous very fast”
If a country goes too fast with immigration, raising the foreign-born share from 10% to 20-30%, it will face political backlash and lose legitimacy (Canada example)
“it's clear that if [25:05] you allow immigration to happen too rapidly so that foreign born share of the population shoots up from 10 to 20 or 30% you will have a political backlash ask Canadians how that's going Ian it's very interesting to me that Canada's overshot they had a rational policy in terms of criteria but the scale was too much”
The Ukraine war shows that armies are now small by mid-20th century standards and the average age of Ukrainian soldiers is 44, suggesting geopolitics is mainly a technology problem rather than a manpower problem
“my view if you look at the war in Ukraine which is the biggest [23:31] war we've seen in recent years it's probably the biggest conventional War since the Iran Iraq war the armies are small by the standards of the mid 20th century and the age of the soldiers is amazingly High the average age of the Ukrainian Army is I think 44”
Population is falling everywhere except in sub-Saharan Africa, and future population growth will be concentrated in eight countries: Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Philippines, and Tanzania
“the population is falling everywhere except pretty much in subsaharan Africa and so one of the interesting qu qualifications to be made to the argument is that as population declines everywhere else population continues to rise at least in the next 30 Years in eight countries Democratic Republic of Congo Egypt Ethiopia Nigeria plus India Pakistan the Philippines oh I forgot [26:40] Tanzania”
Human reproduction is mostly out of the market system—even in the most neoliberal economy, uterus for hire is limited—so the overwhelming majority of reproduction is dictated by the social realm, not the market, yet it has gigantic effects on market economy functioning
“even in the most neoliberal economy human reproduction is mostly out of the market system there cases of uterus for higher but they are limited the overwhelming majority of human reproduction is dictated by the social [2:36] realm not the market realm nevertheless it has gigantic effects on the functioning of the market economy”
If people are having the optimal amount of children through rational choice after removing past constraints (starvation risk, needed labor, forced reproduction), then population decline may be better for the environment, lower housing prices, reduce beach crowding, and there is no inherent problem with the shrinking population.
“in the past people were having kids or were forced to have kids either by mistakes or because they needed them to support themselves in the old age now that we have removed those problems people have the optimal amount of kids if the population will shrink a lot that's better it's better for the environment it's better for reduced price of housing it's better because uh the beaches will be less crowded why do we worry”
Western society is highly individualistic and does not think about the species or community as fundamental values, unlike Catholic tradition which emphasizes community and sacrificial values including having children for happiness of God and community.
“Western Society is very individualistic and doesn't really think about the species of the community as as as an element if you take the Catholic religion for example is very much about the community so much so that you have to sacrifice for others including having children for the happiness of God”
The cost of having a child is not equally distributed between genders: pregnancy and childbirth impose significant physical and career costs disproportionately on women, and thus reducing these costs through technologies like gestational surrogacy would reduce the barrier to fertility more than it would reduce child-rearing costs.
“the cost of having a child is disproportionate on the woman with career cost not trival so a lot of women don't see this as as a priority or they postpone in a key fertile ears and then by the time they have the time it might be not feasible I I'm 100% with you it will not impact the cost of raising a child but will imp impact the cost of burying a child”
Women's value of time has exploded historically; a woman at the beginning of the 20th century had almost no autonomy or opportunities, whereas now even wealthy non-working women have a world of options and opportunities available to them.
“think about a woman in the beginning of the 20th century she couldn't vote she couldn't go around she couldn't have a life on her own probably she wasn't even able to go uh to the movie when the movie by herself okay so uh now even if you don't walk but especially if you are rich you don't walk you have the word of your uh disposal right you can do so many things”
Human reproduction is paradoxically mostly dictated by the social realm rather than the market realm, yet it has gigantic effects on the functioning of the market economy, which is why even neoliberal politicians like JD Vance who oppose market intervention are willing to subsidize reproduction.
“even in the most neoliberal economy human reproduction is mostly out of the market system there cases of uterus for higher but they are limited the overwhelming majority of human reproduction is dictated by the social realm not the market realm nevertheless it has gigantic effects on the functioning of the market economy this is the reason why some politicians hello JD Vance averse to intervention in a market system are still happy to intervene and subsidize reproduction”
The United Kingdom's National Health Service requires immigrants to run it because you need a lot of people to run hospitals, particularly to do menial tasks but also to staff nursing and doctor jobs
“to run [22:29] Britain's beloved National Health Service without immigrants because you need a lot of people to run hospitals particularly to do the menial tasks but also actually to to staff uh the nursing and and uh and doctor's jobs”
Elon Musk's concern about species-level population decline is justified; confining humanity to a single planet while the population shrinks is a poor trajectory for the species.
“I'm with Elon on this if we decide to be a shrinking species uh which just confines itself to one planet and goes back down to two billion and maybe below that doesn't look like that doesn't look like a good trajectory for us as a species”
Population decline does not solve climate problems because they culminate before population starts to decline, and AI/robot populations will proliferate as humans shrink
“that doesn't strike me as a taller good plotline for a movie so does this argue then on constraints on individual choices particularly for women given the dire prospects ahead of population decline does it argue for [19:20] constraints on abortion does it argue for constraints on contraception does it argue for other other constraints on women's Behaviour that would create state state incentives to have more children”
Economic theories are based on the idea of expansion and growth of humanity, so if population expansion is about to reverse, the foundation of economic theory needs to be rethought
“I want to talk about fertility precisely because this [2:04] is a podcast about capitalism economic theories based on the idea of expansion and Humanity has been expanding certainly since the 1500 if that is about to change then the foundation of our economic theory need to be rethought”
Population could fall as drastically as it rose in the 20th century, not level off at 9 billion as many assume, because unlike self-equilibrating systems, demographic decline is not self-correcting—it is a complex system on the edge of chaos
“the interesting part that most people still have not got their heads around is that [4:39] population could fall as drastically as it Rose in the 20th century there's a sort of assumption that I encounter a lot when I discuss this with people that we kind of level off we kind of just level off at 9 billion and just call it a day but that's not what happens in any biological population there's a really steep decline that implicit in these low tfrs it's very very hard to project these things accurately and I may turn out to be entirely wrong I wouldn't live to see how wrong I am but maybe my [5:10] grandchildren or great-grandchildren will come on your great grandchildren's podcast and and apologize for Neil's errors but the reality is that we're not dealing here with some self-equilibrating system which is what economists love they love self-equilibrating systems that's the essence of classical economics but it's wrong cuz it's a complex system and it's not selfe equilibria in fact you're on the edge of chaos we end because we choose to have fewer children than we need to have to reproduce ourselves”
The history that will eventually be written by the last surviving historian about humanity will be an account of why human beings chose extinction.
“the history that will be written one day by the last surviving historian uh whose name will either be fukuyama or Harari will be why human beings chose Extinction”
AI and creative systems can substitute for human creativity and innovation, so fewer people do not necessarily mean reduced human achievement or advancement; the fact that creativity can be externalized to machines means society does not need as many people to maintain progress.
“open Ai and all the AI invention will substitute a lot for people in that Dimension so do we need so many people to be creative when we have system to be creative”
Economists have convinced young people that having children is primarily an economic decision, causing them to calculate the cost of children (including Harvard and Chicago university fees) and rationally conclude they can afford only 1.3 children, which was not how Ferguson's generation of Scots approached reproductive decisions.
“I would hypothesize is that you economists have convinced young people that having children is an economic decision and so they sit down and they they calculate how much it's going to cost to have a child and they see the Harvard fees and the Chicago fees and they they decide the most that they can possibly have is 1.3”
Bethany was shocked by Ferguson's comment about abortion futures because abortion and fertility should not be conflated or discussed in the same sentence, as they are separate topics—abortion concerns women's rights or fetal rights, not fertility decline.
“whether you look at from women's right perspective or from the right of The Unborn perspective either way I don't think that abortion and fertility should should be in the same sentence I think that those are two different topics that they shouldn't be mixed”
Once humans broke the Malthusian logic that overpopulation leads to starvation, there is nothing balancing fertility decisions off—if all people decide not to have children, there are no incentives for others to produce more children
“in a sense if all of a sudden people decide that they don't want to have kids it's not that there are incentives for other to produce more kids so I want to start with you analyzing first at the at micro level and then maybe at the micro level the ferti decision”
Neil Ferguson has five children and attributes his outlier status to loving children, whereas most young men dread becoming fathers, and his generation approached reproductive decisions with less deliberation than modern economists have convinced young people to use
“I'm an outlier uh Luigi I have five children I'm an outlier because I love [6:45] children most young men don't really love children and rather dread becoming fathers but I've found nothing more fulfilling in my life than Parenthood and if I weren't old I'm now 60 I'd be trying to have more children cuz children just are the best so I'm unusual and I'm also a little bit of a a hangover from the feckless 60s I was born in 1964 My Generation I'm afraid approached reproductive decisions in a haze of [7:18] inebriation and lust we didn't have uh dating apps and we didn't have spreadsheets and we really didn't do the math”
Once Malthusian logic was broken—the constraint that high births lead to starvation—there are no longer any balancing mechanisms to stabilize fertility decisions.
“in the fertility decision once we broke the Malian logic that if uh you produce too many kids you don't feed them and so they starve and Etc once we you broke that there is nothing that is balancing them off right in a sense if all of a sudden people decide that they don't want to have kids it's not that there are incentives for other to produce more kids”
Bethany was shocked by Ferguson's conservative stance on abortion, specifically that abortion and fertility should not be in the same sentence given the importance of women's rights and the rights of the unborn
“because the thing that shocked me the most I think of the [35:56] conversation is is how conservative on this point Neil is first first of all I think that is sort of sentence about abortion really threw me off because whether you look at from women's right perspective or from the right of The Unborn perspective either way I don't think that abortion and fertility should should be in the same sentence I think that those are two different topics that they shouldn't be mixed”
The prospect of generational civil war as fewer young people must support an aging workforce is a frightening possibility the world has never reckoned with before, and none of our systems are built to handle it
“I do agree with you I think that's the most frightening thing is the possibility of civil war between [40:40] Generations as you have fewer and fewer young people to support an an aging Workforce and that's something the world has never re reckoned with before none of our systems are built to are built to deal with it”
The u-shaped fertility-education relationship in the US tracks American income and wealth distribution: at the bottom, welfare supports large families in poverty; in the middle, children are expensive; at the top, wealthy women can afford nannies and continue careers while having children
“I think the u-shaped story is interesting because it kind of tracks American Income and wealth distribution so you're at the bottom end of the scale [15:44] there's kind of welfare ways of having a large family as long as you don't mind being wretchedly poor but if you're in the middle that's when it's really an expensive business if you're at the top you can afford to hire the nannies and this is what it's all about for professional women”
Ferguson personally has five children and finds parenthood more fulfilling than anything else in his life because he loves children, unlike most young men who dread becoming fathers; his generation (born 1964) made reproductive decisions in a haze of inebriation and lust without deliberation or spreadsheets.
“I'm an outlier uh Luigi I have five children I'm an outlier because I love children most young men don't really love children and rather dread becoming fathers but I've found nothing more fulfilling in my life than Parenthood and if I weren't old I'm now 60 I'd be trying to have more children cuz children just are the best”
There are upper and lower limits to optimal population; while overpopulation (20 billion) is problematic, near-extinction is also problematic, and the challenge is finding equilibrium.
“if you had to argue the risks of too many people and a population that continues to explode versus the risks of too few people maybe there's an upper limit and and and a lower limit so I'm I'm pro-human but the idea of 20 billion of us on this planet is a pretty horrifying possibility that said the idea of us making ourselves extinct is is not really a great possibility either”
Even in exemplary egalitarian societies like Finland with substantial support for middle-class families to have children, fertility is still very low, suggesting that economic systems and government incentives to have children do not matter much
“the problem is that there are these great uh exemplary egalitarian societies like I don't know Finland where you don't have the inequality that you see in the United States where it ought to be easy for women because there's there's really uh [16:14] all kinds of ways in which a middleclass family in Finland are supported to have children it doesn't work they still have really low fertility”
Humans are simultaneously economic and self-serving AND non-economic—we think carefully about household finances but vote for fiscal recklessness, suggesting we are irrational or short-term oriented rather than economic
“one thing I was struck by in in this discussion and tell me if if you were as well but is the ways in which human beings are economic and self-serving and then the ways in which possibly were not and he he he seemed to make the argument that one reason we weren't having children or people aren't having children is because they're so budget conscious and per your point about about [42:46] Italy they're sitting down looking at the numbers and saying this this just doesn't work and then at the same time he dismissed the idea that we're really economic creatures by pointing out that we're we're arguing that we're not really thinking about the gigantic national debt and we're and we're voting young people are voting for fiscal recklessness other than in their own personal debt”
Increased public debt and future liabilities (Social Security, Medicare) burden young people and may discourage them from having children because having a child now entails bearing the utility cost of the child's future taxation
“I think that actually one of the thing that as an economist I like to to believe is one thing that lead to fewer children is the fact that now we are burdening future generation with enormous amount of liabilities right if you think about the [10:26] size of the public debt and the size of the Social Security Medicare Etc liability maybe it's too much of an economist perspective but you think about I buy a painting or I have a kid now I derive the utility of the utility of the kid but if the kid is heavily tax my utility is tax as well and so I'm more likely to opt for a painting that is not going to be tax rather than the kids that is STX”
China is decisively ahead of the US technologically in robotics and will develop robots before the US, so the future conflict between US and China could be between an immigrant army (US) and a robot army (China)
“I think it's very interesting that the [23:00] one area where China is decisively ahead of the United States technologically today is robotics they will have far more robots they will definitely get to the kind of robots Elon preny has before we do and so the the conflict of the future when the United States and China finally go to war at some point uh later this Century could be between an immigrant Army and a robot army that's a plausible future”
The majority of people would probably choose short-term happiness over long-term species survival if forced to choose—suggesting humans are biased toward immediate welfare over collective existence
“um it depends and this is if you imagine you want to have a a miserable life but uh the human species is not extinct or you have a very happy life but there is no survival of human species which one do you choose yeah well I think we're all shortterm in our thinking and I think would all probably at least the majority of people would probably choose the latter so I guess that's maybe maybe [43:49] maybe the point is not that we're not economic or not rational just that we're very very self-serving and our economics and our rationality are directed at our own short-term well-being rather than at the long-term uh existence of humanity right”
Artificial intelligence can substitute for human creativity and innovation that would otherwise require high population; so a smaller human population with AI substitutes is not necessarily a problem.
“open Ai and all the AI invention will substitute a lot for people in that Dimension so do we need so many people to be creative when we have system to be creative”
Western society is very individualistic and does not think about the species or community as an element, unlike the Catholic religion which emphasizes community and sometimes requires sacrifice, including having children for God's happiness
“I think that uh Western Society is very individualistic and doesn't really think about the species of the community as as as an element if you take the Catholic religion for example is very much about the community so much so that you have to sacrifice for others [44:20] including having children for the happiness of God”
A world of falling populations will have economic stagnation and contraction, aging societies, and be converted into elderly care facilities, losing the dynamism that characterized the period of rapid human population growth—a desolate prospect
“Here's the the real problem you know it Luigi cuz you're just playing Devil's Advocate if you have falling populations you have economic stagnation contraction aging societies Japan is the sort of uh leader here but Japan is telling us what our future will be and our future will be schools will have to be converted into Elderly Care Homes and [17:47] elderly or aged population is a less creative population than a youthful one so the world of shrinking population will be a world with precisely the opposite of the dynamism that characterized the period of Rapid human population growth it's a rather desolate Prospect”
As fertility declines everywhere except Africa, immigration policy will make Western countries increasingly African in demographic composition over the next 50-100 years.
“I think one of the interesting consequences of what we're discussing is the that the countries that have an immigration policy will become over time more African and then there'll be a point reached when we run out of Africans too and then we'll be in the world of the the I guess the 2070s 2080s when the global population will Decline and there won't be an immigrant solution that will be a world that I don't think Luigi's grandchildren will actually find very enjoyable”
Bethany disputes that pregnancy costs are the primary driver of low fertility, noting that wealthy women without careers outside the home also have low fertility, suggesting career-motherhood tradeoff is not the only mechanism
“if it if the issue were as simple as or if or if that motivation were a major part of the story then I would expect to see women who choose not to work having a lot more children and they don't yes but I look I I want to be very careful because I'm not trying to say we should go back to that period but I'm just no no okay no no no and I don't and I don't think and I don't think you are I'm I'm very clear on that no no but I'm I'm saying the the opportunity cost of [34:24] women's time has exploded”
Environmental factors may have dramatic impacts on fertility that are not well understood, including pesticides and chemical products used to support 8-10 billion people, making fertility decline potentially driven by environmental toxins rather than pure choice
“I'm actually very in interesting and scared by the medical issue now that we're going to have Robert Kennedy Jr Ministry of Health everything is going to be solved right uh but uh I'm actually concerned that environmental factors can have Dr atic impact and this is really not only unhealthy but worrisome environmentalist [38:02] is not just being concerned about climate change there are a lot of other things to support 8 billion people and potentially 10 billion people on Earth we have to use a massive amount of pesticides a massive amount of fertilizer a massive amount of uh of chemical products that we don't know the the the long-term impact of and uh and maybe even this lack of fertility is driven by many of this decid”
Having children was always implicitly an economic decision in the past because people needed children to work, but the difference in the current generation is that economic thinking about reproduction is now explicit rather than implicit
“wasn't part of having children always implicitly an economic decision a long time ago people wanted to have children because they needed children to go work and so hasn't economics always been part of the backdrop of the decision for having children even if people didn't explicitly realize that so maybe the [8:22] difference in the current generation is more that the economic thinking is explicit rather than implicit or am I not thinking about this the right way”
People are not making fertility decisions because of debt burdens they've accumulated; if people cared about debt burdens, they would vote against fiscal recklessness, but they vote for it
“people are making decisions about sex I don't think they're making them because of the debt burdens that they've accumulated if people cared about these debt burdens Luigi they wouldn't exist people would vote against fiscal recklessness but they vote for it people couldn't care less certainly in the United States about the rising burdens of debt except [14:09] in so far as it's personal debt”
If we assume that people are now free to have the optimal number of children without prior constraints (high infant mortality, economic need, lack of contraception), then population shrinkage is not a problem but a solution—better for the environment, housing prices, and crowding
“I don't see why there is any problem with the utility bust in a sense in the past people were having kids or were forced to have kids either by mistakes or because they needed them to support themselves in the old age now that we have removed those problems people have the optimal amount of kids if the population will shrink a [17:15] lot that's better it's better for the environment it's better for reduced price of housing it's better because uh the beaches will be less crowded why do we worry”
There is a tradeoff between risks of too many people (population explosion, environmental damage) and too few people (economic collapse, replacement by AI), with an upper limit (20 billion seems horrifying) and lower limit (extinction is bad), so we must find balance
“if you had to [38:34] argue the risks of too many people and a population that continues to explode versus the risks of too few people maybe there's an upper limit and and a lower limit so I'm I'm pro-human but the idea of 20 billion of us on this planet is a pretty horrifying possibility that said the idea of us making ourselves extinct is is not really a great possibility either”
Fertility is an exponential system, and once decline begins and is maintained constant, population shrinks very fast—like pandemic exponential curves, but in reverse
“because it's an exponential system I think that everybody has learned with the pandemic how fast an exponential system can go if you start to decline [29:46] and you maintain this decline constant over time the population shrinks very fast”
With a lower global population (2 billion), we can have a clean world without relying on pesticides and pollutants to support 10 billion, and most environmental damage derives from population density and agricultural chemicals rather than absolute population
“if we actually go down to 2 billion we can have a clean world and I understand your idea of oh we lose the creativity but open Ai and all the AI invention will substitute a lot for people in that Dimension so do we need so many people to be creative when we have system to be creative”
Ferguson did not think about the federal debt when making reproductive decisions, and most people are not thinking about the federal debt relative to GDP when family planning, though today's young people do spreadsheet-type analyses of household finances
“I I'm always sympathetic to Chicago style arguments but I don't think many people are thinking about the federal debt relative to GDP when they're Family Planning there is I think an economic so you were not thinking about that I was not I wasn't thinking about any economics I had no idea how I was going to pay for these children of mine it's never been my my question I think today's young people do the kind [11:31] of spreadsheet type analysis of household finances that my generation didn't do we were pretty feckless I don't I had no clue what the net present value of a child was how much it was going to cost me to educate these five children”
The big question is whether fertility decline will be maintained or whether some equilibrium will occur; it seems likely fertility decline will continue because wealth correlates with lower fertility and we do not expect people to become poor
“now the big if it will maintain now so far we have seen that the reacher you get on average the the fewer kids you have except as you mentioned the podcast if in the United States if you are very very rich now you have a little bit more kids than if you are poor but in general with the increase in in wealth we have seen a decline in the in the number of kids so we hopefully we don't expect [30:16] people to become poor and so we shouldn't expect a dramatic change”
The most important innovation to reverse fertility decline would be artificial uterus technology (uterus for rent), which would reduce dramatically the cost of producing children, though short of that, the opportunity cost of women's time is unlikely to change significantly
“I think that the most important innovation would be uterus for rent or the ability to have children outside of a woman utus because that will reduce dramatically the cost of producing children and maybe we're not that far away from that but short of that I don't see a dramatic change because the problem is mostly the [31:19] opportunity cause a women to have children”
Ferguson's generation (born 1964) approached reproductive decisions 'in a haze of inebriation and lust' without deliberation, dating apps, or math, allowing instinct rather than calculation to drive fertility choices.
“I'm also a little bit of a a hangover from the feckless 60s I was born in 1964 My Generation I'm afraid approached reproductive decisions in a haze of inebriation and lust we didn't have uh dating apps and we didn't have spreadsheets and we really didn't do the math we allowed as they say in some parts the world the little head to do the thinking”
The failure to predict the global fertility collapse demonstrates how difficult it is to forecast important phenomena and how frequently experts get major issues wrong.
“I find that really always always interesting and I guess there are lots of examples of times where we've gotten really important issues wrong but what do you what do you think about the the big picture idea that we've been so wrong about about the question of of overpopulation versus underpopulation”
Population decline may create opportunities for more attractive living arrangements—cities can be abandoned and people can concentrate in more beautiful places like New York or San Francisco, potentially improving quality of life.
“we can abandon certain cities as uh uh ugly places and all concentrate in in New York because it's more beautiful or in San Francisco whatever”
Bethany did not think about mathematics or economic calculations when choosing to have her children, and had them relatively late in life, but was able to have both children and a career because of her income level and educational status.
“I think I'm more like you and that I did not think about the math behind having children and I had my children but I had my children quite late in life as well so I also had my career and had lived my my life before I had children and I was luckily able to have both”
Dating apps may be an 'alien conspiracy' to cause population collapse because they correlate with a steep decline in sexual activity, making mating more efficient yet sex less appealing
“I'm particularly interested in the the Paradox that as we've made made mating more efficient through dating apps we've somehow made sex less appealing I think dating apps maybe in [13:37] fact an alien conspiracy to cause the the collapse of human population because they seem to correlate with this deep de steep decline in sexual activity”
Future generations will wonder why humans developed such an enthusiasm for killing fetuses, and this will seem weird in three or four decades
“I think future Generations will wonder why human beings developed such an enthusiasm for killing fetuses I think that will seem like a weird thing in about three or four decades from now but that is a trend that it's it's hard in my my mind to feel entirely good about”
Interpreting Ferguson's comment as economist-like observation that insufficient widgets (children) means future regret is more generous than interpreting it as a political comment on whether women should be allowed to have abortions
“I guess I [36:28] guess I guess I saw him as being purely an economist even though he's not about about the issue and basically saying hey if you don't have enough widgets you're going to regret not keeping all the widgets you you could have had and so I saw it in a very um datadriven way rather than a comment on whether women should or shouldn't be allowed to have abortions”