The pace of babies born each year in the U.S. has slowed to a new record low, according to an analysis of 2023 birth certificate data published Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Last year’s slowdown marks an official end to the uptick in new babies that began during the COVID-19 pandemic. At least 3,591,328 babies were born in the U.S. in 2023, down 2% from the 3,667,758 born in 2022.

  • pdxfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    7 months ago

    As the article points out, US has been below replacement birthrate(2.1 children per woman) since 1971. Immigration is the only reason the US has continued to have a growing population since that time.

    1.6 is bad but many industrial countries have the same issue–only they don’t have strong immigration draw(or don’t allow it) to fall back on. East Asia (Japan, South Korea and now China), as well as southern European countries (Portugal, Spain, Italy) have had crushingly low birth rates for years.

    Social programs, entitlements and politics are incredibly affected.

    At the end of the day, people are being worked so much and are so stressed they can’t enjoy or don’t want to entertain bringing a new life into what for many countries is a vicious cycle of exploitation.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 months ago

      There was also a sharp decline since 2008, due to the financial crisis.

      The obvious solution is to force American women to keep unwanted children against their will, rather than implementing streamlined immigration reform.

      • ShepherdPie
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        And step 2 is to shame them for having children if they can’t afford them.

      • FirstCircle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        The rest of that solution is to ban any kind of birth control a woman might choose on her own.

    • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 months ago

      For my wife and I, our decision to not have kids came early in our marriage. We’ve never been super well off, but we get by. There have been times where we have had trouble paying rent. Neither one of us can imagine trying to just afford a child, much less raise one.

  • Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The 1% can make their own wage slaves.

    The next time you pay monthly tribute to your landed lord, really savor the moment. I bet your kids are just tickled pink to pay to exist, just like you right?

    Thanks mom and dad, a fucking bill!

    Reproduction is child abuse.

      • Alto@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        7 months ago

        While dramatic, it echos a sentiment a lot of us have. I am on a good career path. I will never own a home. I likely won’t retire. Unless something drastic changes, I can’t see any of that slowing down, let alone getting better. That’s not even to speak of climate change, increasing world tension and aggressive postering, or any of the other shit plaguing the world right now.

        I hope with all my heart we get to a place where I feel comfortable bringing a child into this world, with the promise of a better future for them. That’s not the world we currently live in.

        • Crackhappy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Thanks, that makes a whole lot more sense than your previous comment.

          You’re right, this is no world to bring a child into.

          Edit: Your keyboard may have a small issue with your “e” key. You’re missing a coupl.

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      In our lifetimes at least, yes. An aging population means more people who need help and less people to supply it. We all need more help as we get older, and we’re already facing staff shortages for geriatric care. And of course if you’re in the US, there’s genuine fear of SS not being available once we’re eligible to use it.

      We could probably change course and mitigate these issues by increasing pay for Healthcare workers to incentivise taking care of the elderly, reducing or eliminating student debt so more people can seek higher education in Healthcare, improved access to Healthcare to prevent problems while we’re young so they don’t catch up with us when we’re old, and easier paths to legal immigration so we can bolster our population while continuing to collect taxes for more robust social programs. But that probably won’t happen because the people in charge are too old and/or wealthy to ever be affected by this kind of thing.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      If you want ponzi schemes pay as you go systems like social security and Medicare to work it’s a terrible thing.