The really gung-ho white supremacists and the like fear that minorities will “outbreed” (really ugly term) white people.
Birth rate seems to sink as wealth grows.
So, if you really want to stop the outbreeding, you want the wealth level of minorities to go up and for the wealth of whites to go down!
(I have a feeling my idea is not ready for Stormfront prime time.)
Anyway, my question:
While I recognize that no racist would want to adopt this strategy, is it true? Would the birth rates of minorities go down with greater wealth and/or would the birth rates of whites go up?
I know there is a correlation between wealth and birth rate, but is it cause or effect? If it’s cause, is it reversible if the wealth fades, or would the low rate tend to stick?
Wealth does correlate with birth rate. There’s no such thing as “correlate directly” vs “correlate indirectly.” You must be thinking of that completely different concept… causation.
There’s various components to birth rate. If whites simply abort all their new babies, then poverty wouldn’t do much to reverse the low birth-rate trend (and in fact possibly make it worse).
I think it’s more a question of education and responsibility than of race. Educated responsible people of any race know how many offspring they can support and live accordingly.
I wish somebody would have told me white people are wealthy. I must have always been some other color but was anemic. This question is really about economics not color. The race bit is a red herring.
As Japan became a wealthy country the young adults decided to have possessions instead of children. There have been many documentaries on this over the years. I would look to Japan as a good place to find studies about wealth verses birth rate.
I wouldn’t state it like that. Waiting to have kids until the late 30’s isn’t being “responsible” and knowing “how many you can support.” It’s something else. It may be what Discord said oh deciding to have possessions rather than kids. It may be a much deeper, instinctual effect.
It could very well be in our genes. When resources are low, you breed to compete for the scraps that are left. When they are plentiful, you relax.
Also, yeah, the situation is often phrased to include poor (and supposedly stupid) white people. In fact I don’t know that minorities’ birthrate is all that high once they’ve settled in the US. Their numbers grow because they immigrate.
For many people, their children are their superannuation policy. If you come from a background where you really have little to no savings, and little to no societal support (or expectation of it) then it makes sense to have lots of kids.
In much poorer groups higher infant mortality tends to beget large birth rates, and dramatic changes in health standards may take some time to be reflected in a lower birth rate to counter the increasing number of surviving children.
A wealthy society where there is ample ability to create enough wealth to retire on loses a significant imperetive towards large families. A desire to create the best for those children you do have may well also act to limit the number you do elect to have. Another force is the mechanism by which that wealth is gained by most people. The modern world of the married couple, both with careers. Lots of money to be made and saved. Much less time for kids.
Be happy with the current baby boom. Even if you have no kids of your own, when these kids grow up they can pay the taxes to keep your social security flowing.