UN Babies wanted: Nordic countries crying for kids

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/babies-wanted-nordic-countries-crying-kids-033117429.html
Oslo (AFP) - "Norway needs more children! I don't think I need to tell anyone how this is done," Norway's prime minister said cheekily, but she was raising a real concern.

Too few babies are being born in the Nordic region.

The Nordic countries were long a bastion of strong fertility rates on an Old Continent that is rapidly getting older.

But they are now experiencing a decline that threatens their cherished welfare model, which is funded by taxpayers.

"In the coming decades, we will encounter problems with this model," Prime Minister Erna Solberg warned Norwegians in her New Year's speech.

"There will be fewer young people to bear the increasingly heavy burden of the welfare state."

In Norway, Finland and Iceland, birth rates dropped to historic lows in 2017, with 1.49 to 1.71 children born per woman. Just a few years earlier, their birth rates hovered close to the 2.1 level required for their populations to remain stable.

"In all of the Nordic countries, birth rates started dropping in the years after the 2008 financial crisis," University of Oslo sociologist Trude Lappegard told AFP.

"The crisis is over now but it's still falling."

From Copenhagen to the North Cape, from Helsinki to Reykjavik, demographics across the Nordics reveal two things: there are fewer large families, and women are waiting longer before having their first child.

There's no single explanation, but financial uncertainty and a sharp rise in housing costs are seen as likely factors.

In the long term, this means there will be fewer people of working age to pay taxes that fund the generous state welfare systems.

These systems pay for, among other things, lengthy parental leaves, which in Sweden can last up to 480 days.

- Paying for pregnancies -

Experts present differing diagnoses and prescriptions to remedy the situation.

In Norway, one economist concerned about the effect the slowing demographics will have on economic growth has suggested giving women 500,000 kroner (50,000 euros, $58,550) in pension savings for each child born.

Another has suggested that, on the contrary, women in Norway who reach the age of 50 without having had a child should be paid one million kroner, since children also cost society a lot.

Finnish municipalities have already decided to loosen their purse strings to encourage locals to get busy under the covers.

The town of Miehikkala, home to 2,000 people, is offering 10,000 euros for each baby born and raised in the municipality.

"The number of childless individuals is growing rapidly, and the number of women having three or more children is going down. This kind of fall is unheard of in modern times in Finland," said Anna Rotkirch, a family sociologist at the umbrella organisation Finnish Family Federation.

In Denmark, Copenhagen has meanwhile turned its attention to men, who are in less of a hurry to become parents than women, with a campaign aimed at raising awareness about how sperm quality declines with age.

- Immigration boost -

The Nordic region already boasts a wealth of family-friendly initiatives, such as flexible working hours, a vast network of affordable daycares and generous parental leave systems.

But when all that is still not enough to encourage people to have more children, immigration can be a lifeline -- or a threat, depending on the point of view.

Sweden may have a falling birth rate, but it still comes in second in the EU behind France with 1.85 children born per woman in 2016.

That is largely due to Sweden's decades-long history of immigration: immigrant women tend to have more children than the average Swede.

With 2.6 children per woman in recent years, the town of Aneby in southern Sweden has one of the highest rates in the country, a phenomenon attributed to the fact that it opened its doors to immigrants two decades ago.

"Aneby welcomed around 225 Eritreans in the early 1990s and just after that (it took in) refugees from the Balkans. 1994 was a demographic record for the town," local official Ola Gustafsson told AFP.

But population growth among minorities has also fuelled fears.

A former justice minister in Norway, Per-Willy Amundsen of the populist far-right, made headlines when he called for family allowances to be reduced after a third child.

His stated goal was to stop Somalis who, he said, had a higher "birth production" rate than "ethnic Norwegians".
 
n Norway, one economist concerned about the effect the slowing demographics will have on economic growth has suggested giving women 500,000 kroner (50,000 euros, $58,550) in pension savings for each child born.

Another has suggested that, on the contrary, women in Norway who reach the age of 50 without having had a child should be paid one million kroner, since children also cost society a lot.
Lol what
How would giving women 100k for not having children improve the birth rate? Did whatever talking head "expert" even know the question they were responding to?
 
What's the mystery? Socialism, even democratic socialism like the Scandinavians love, is fundamentally not sustainable, it can only ever temporarily be propped up by these pyramid-schemes of subsidizing others to live off taxes from an ever-crunched middle class... until nobody left is rich enough to tax.

And as the middle class find it harder and harder to bear the burden and have to start cutting things out, having kids ends up being one of those expenses. I mean, what else can they cut?
 
Last edited:
Norway. Richest country in the world that accomplishes jack shit with their wealth. What value does Norway even have to the world? They should be happy that their population is tanking, the natural resources of the country are worth a billion times more than the people.
 
The short explanation is feminism: an entire ideology based around telling women that building a family is evil is going to tank birth rates, obviously.

There is a very common trend in this current wave of feminism to demonize motherhood and pregnancy in general. I speak a lot to younger women in their late teens - early twenties with all these really dumb and horrifying ideas about pregnancy and children. I can only imagine it's shitty teen vogue-esque magazines and bad tumblr facts scaring them into believing, frankly, kind of sexist and false things about mothering and the whole concept of pregnancy. I really really try to explain to them that it's really not that bad and correct some falsehoods but I feel like it's falling on deaf ears.

Feminism is cancer. I can't think of a single thing it's done in the last 10 year's that's been any sort of net gain for women.
 
Bear in mind, having a lot of children before and during the early stages of the industrial age ensured a familial workforce for rural families. As society became more industrialized and urbanized, fewer children were needed to help maintain subsistence holdings and family farms. This isn't the result of purely "Feminism gone rogue", this is the result of progress. With the advancement of technology comes more financial inputs necessary to ensure your child can actually be productive, and survive, in the current age. With this also comes a need for fewer specialized labor inputs as we don't need 10 kids to operate one massive spinning machine in a factory.

The Feminist messaging is clever but it's not the root cause. The reason for producing large families has significantly dropped while the costs associated with it have skyrocketed. It's, legit, no different than families where a daughter is more expensive than a son, only in this case, that child is going to cost a fortune regardless of sex.

As crude as offering monetary compensation for babies may seem, it's probably one of the better options for increasing birth rates.
 
There is a very common trend in this current wave of feminism to demonize motherhood and pregnancy in general. I speak a lot to younger women in their late teens - early twenties with all these really dumb and horrifying ideas about pregnancy and children. I can only imagine it's shitty teen vogue-esque magazines and bad tumblr facts scaring them into believing, frankly, kind of sexist and false things about mothering and the whole concept of pregnancy. I really really try to explain to them that it's really not that bad and correct some falsehoods but I feel like it's falling on deaf ears.

Feminism is cancer. I can't think of a single thing it's done in the last 10 year's that's been any sort of net gain for women.
I don't think it's feminism as much as the internet in general. Pregnant women and mothers do not paint a pretty picture. I wouldn't know that pregnant women sometimes piss themselves, or what their naked bodies look like after pregnancy if they themselves didn't post this stuff all over the internet. Then there's the people confessing their special needs kids ruined their marriage, or they actually just don't like their kids that much. I feel everything I needed to know is posted freely by parents without getting into the weird feminist childfree corners of the internet.
 
Norway. Richest country in the world that accomplishes jack shit with their wealth. What value does Norway even have to the world? They should be happy that their population is tanking, the natural resources of the country are worth a billion times more than the people.

They have the world's nicest prisons, does that count?
 
What's the mystery? Socialism, even democratic socialism like the Scandinavians love, is fundamentally not sustainable, it can only ever temporarily be propped up by these pyramid-schemes of subsidizing others to live off taxes from an ever-crunched middle class... until nobody left is rich enough to tax.
What does that have to do with socialism?
America has a similar dependency ratio.

This is all the baby boomers' fault, made worse by increased lifespans.

Edit: Also democratic socialism is some weird American thing - Scandinavians love social democracy.
 
Last edited:
What's the mystery? Socialism, even democratic socialism like the Scandinavians love, is fundamentally not sustainable, it can only ever temporarily be propped up by these pyramid-schemes of subsidizing others to live off taxes from an ever-crunched middle class... until nobody left is rich enough to tax.

Except for those rich enough to also pay for the best tax attorneys and influence the government so that they never have to pay.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.
 
I don't think it's feminism as much as the internet in general. Pregnant women and mothers do not paint a pretty picture. I wouldn't know that pregnant women sometimes piss themselves, or what their naked bodies look like after pregnancy if they themselves didn't post this stuff all over the internet. Then there's the people confessing their special needs kids ruined their marriage, or they actually just don't like their kids that much. I feel everything I needed to know is posted freely by parents without getting into the weird feminist childfree corners of the internet.
And all of this is sent through a filter of vanity. Young women see what happens to the body of a mother after pregnancy, and think to themselves "oh god I dont want my body to end up ruined" without considering that most old, childfree women still look like bags of flesh later in life. Once you get old, physical beauty is basically impossible. Even once you reach middle age, the concepts of physical beauty from the teenage years are often a distant memory.

Of course, when you read about things on the internet and take them at face value, this fact becomes warped.

Much like special needs children. Yes, special needs children create a heavy burden on the parents, but the chances of having one of these kids is heavily skewed by the self-selecting nature of the internet. The vast majority of children are completely normal, or if they are special needs, they are relatively mild and live a normal life with maybe 1 or 2 struggles throughout related to said disability. On top of that, many of these conditions can be detected long before birth. Parents of children with severe physical or mental disorders, such as downs, chromosomal disorders, microchephly, ece often either chose to have said babies despite knowing about these problems or never had proper Pre-natal care. Pre-natal care not only weeds out many of these horrible disorders before they occur, but it can also dramatically reduce the risk of other disorders, and a scary number of mothers either dont go to said care, whether due to lack of funds or ignorance, or do go and ignore doctors orders.

When you view information largely through the internet, the risks of these problems occurring, and their severity, are blown out of proportion, viewed through the lens of a teenager with a brain that isnt fully developed and hasnt had experience with the larger world the way a 20 something would. Horror stories seem much more plausible and common when you havent had much experience away from your parents in the real world.

This also goes for young men. The internet would have you believe, for instance, that SJWs rule most major corporations and cities. In reality, while they do have a frightening amount of power, they are a tiny minority of people, and most people care about them as much as your do, E.G. not at all. Most people working professional jobs dont have to deal with screeching dangerhairs, or if they do, they are an annoying pest to be brushed away. Young men have also been lead to believe that they dont matter, that women hate them, ece, and are terrified of having kids and settling down because a woman in said situation could ruin their life. Sure, they could, but for every young couple that splits up there are more that stay together into old age after raising their kids.
 
Couldn't the problem be a combination of feminism AND socialism? The Nordic countries rate pretty high of both of those so this theory isn't too far off. Though I think it has more to do with socialism than feminism and there are good reasons not to jump into motherhood almost straight out of high school that has nothing to do with feminism itself(unfortunately marrying your first love/high school bf/gf isn't that great of an option since most teenagers don't think long term in terms of relationships).
 
There are too many people on this planet, anyway. Every country should be focused on having lower birth rates (at or lower than the replacement rate). The explosive population growth we’ve been experiencing since the Industrial Revolution can’t go on unchecked forever.
 
I don't think it's feminism as much as the internet in general. Pregnant women and mothers do not paint a pretty picture. I wouldn't know that pregnant women sometimes piss themselves, or what their naked bodies look like after pregnancy if they themselves didn't post this stuff all over the internet. Then there's the people confessing their special needs kids ruined their marriage, or they actually just don't like their kids that much. I feel everything I needed to know is posted freely by parents without getting into the weird feminist childfree corners of the internet.

Yeah but like everything on the internet, every normal person and couple who has kids and is happy is probably not posting 24/7 on the internet about it because they have stuff to do and are living their normal lives. The internet is there for complaints and ranting. I mean...this place is pretty much a prime example.

I'm just saying my own experience with younger women is a lot of them seem really uninformed about it and some of it is currently in conjunction with so called feminism culture and media.
 
Back