I faced the lack of preparation in the school system where I grew up in Western Canada.
In Grade Three we had a huge influx of students from a nearby new subdivision. I went to school from 7:00 AM to 1:00 PM and the second class went to school from 1:30 PM to 7:30 PM. With the same teacher !!
My next school out in what was the “suburbs” of our small city. We had only one Grade Four class that had 60 ( yes SIXTY ) students with only one teacher, with no educational assistants. We had an extra row of desks, and the desks were within three feet of the front blackboard and within four feet of the lockers at the back. I consider my Grade Four teacher as one of my heroes of my education.
By the next year they doubled the size of the school. In Grade Ten my high school was hit by all the students coming from another new subdivision that did not have a high school yet.
At University it was the same.
Demographics is a science yet politicians refuse to acknowledge the hard facts of what is coming and we in North America will suffer from this deliberate ignorance. Most boomers are looking in the rear view mirror ignoring the bumpy road ahead for them and their children.
In the 70’s I worked in the Office of Energy Conservation in my province. I learned about the coming threat of climate change. We were on the leading edge of energy efficient housing.
But we did not study the social impacts of aging combined with climate change and auto dependent suburbs.
We are now like Wylie E Coyote holding a stick of dynamite with a very short fuse.
now we are seeing the opposite: just 10 years ago we were running classes all day during the week, and some on weekends: dozens of students were lined up in the hallways trying to add classes. now my classes don't even fill up, and there are lecture halls and lab rooms that sit empty most of the day (some no longer used).
and it is going to get worse.
Also, without pre-allied health students, we would not have a biology department: our ~ 40 biology majors have the same professor for 3 of their core classes.
As sure as the sun rises, there was always going to come a time of flat or declining population. Anything that can't go on forever.. So, the pearl clutching is because it's now, not later? Why would later be better?
It’s some top tier wackaloonery, this BIGGER BETTER FASTER LOUDER MORE MORE MORE idea that some can’t seem to back down from.
As though anything can double forever.
FWIW, back in the ‘80s, when we were in the early stages of Reagan’s voodoo economics set on turning a productive concretely rooted economy into a combinaton consumerist shopping mall and speculation casino, the financial press (e.g., Barron’s) was full of articles/essays of people noting that, while the model could run for some time, eventually the exponential function would run down like weary clockwork.
I figured that “covid,” like the 2008 “crash,” was just the few with the power to do so turning everything to their own pockets before pumping then jamming the brakes for everyone else.
Also, later is better because later is “not my problem” for some.
It seems that anyone not historically minded can’t get past measuring the rate of change by their own life alone rather than acknowledging the large slow moving events that relentlessly altering the world.
Sorry, but you lost me at “with baby boomers voting to elect conservative and populist governments who promise to keep things the way they are” huh?🤔 I wouldn’t exactly qualify 10 plus years of the Trudeau/Carney Liberals, or 10 years of McGuinty/Wynne Liberals in Ontario, nor Olivia Chow as conservative or populist. Ahhh yes - it’s Doug Ford and the boomers fault again. Except all the boomers I know voted Liberal. Of course housing is “provincial”, yet any provincial initiative to build in Southern Ontario and especially the GTA has been met with NIMBY and activists at Queen’s Park screaming GREEN BELT! GREEN BELT! All the while the Liberal Federal government continue to keep the floodgates open on newcomers to Canada, despite their promise to scale back, and all the demographic problems they caused. Come on Man. You’re worried our “populist” government is not paying attention to climate change. Yet we just elected the former head of GFANZ, UN Climate Change head, as PM. Oh, he and his government will take care of climate change alright. Be careful what you wish for, as you’re about to get it. 🇨🇦
Are you sure it isn’t a doom plague? Or a tsunami? Or a death quake? Or a planet busting killer asteroid? Or a Yellowstone eruption? Or a Siberian Traps? Or a Singularity?
You forgot to mention one very important data point - WHEN did this start? And WHAT precipitated it? And at least in the US, what was the role that Government played in accelerating this trend?
As you have said, this has been a long time in the making. However, for this topic, the present state of demographics (and near term future) was already determined by those actions in the past. Fixing the present/future will not happen without recognizing the genesis of the problem...
However, in this case, while they may not be direct "causation", they certainly are powerfully connected to the drop in the baby rates. One is REALLY direct; the other is not one that most people realize.
The effectiveness of tax resistance as a means to stop a hostile regime or dictatorship is complex and depends on various factors. Here are some considerations:
Collective Action: For tax resistance to be effective against a dictatorship, it would require widespread participation and solidarity among the population. A significant number of people refusing to pay taxes could undermine the financial foundation of the regime.
Impact on Government Revenue: Dictatorships often rely on tax revenue to fund their operations, including security forces and public services. A substantial decrease in tax revenue could weaken the regime's ability to maintain control and provide for its citizens.
Government Response: Authoritarian regimes typically respond harshly to dissent. Tax resistance could lead to increased repression, including arrests, violence, and crackdowns on civil liberties. The regime may use force to maintain order and punish those who resist.
International Attention: Widespread tax resistance could draw international attention to the regime's actions, potentially leading to diplomatic pressure, sanctions, or support for opposition movements from other countries.
Alternative Strategies: While tax resistance can be a form of protest, it is often more effective when combined with other forms of resistance, such as civil disobedience, protests, and grassroots organizing. A multifaceted approach can create more significant pressure on a regime.
Historical Context: There are historical examples where tax resistance has played a role in broader movements against oppressive regimes. However, these movements often faced severe challenges and required sustained effort and sacrifice.
Public Support: The success of tax resistance also depends on public sentiment. If the majority of the population supports the regime or is apathetic, tax resistance may not gain traction.
In summary, while tax resistance can be a tool for challenging a hostile or dictatorial regime, its effectiveness is contingent on various factors, including the level of public support, the regime's response, and the overall political context. It is often part of a broader strategy of resistance rather than a standalone solution.
A big part of the problem is that our services systems are effectively legalized ponzi schemes. They take money from new "investors" to pay out old "investors". Obviously it's not quite the same, but in one crucial regard it is: if new contributors dry up, the whole house of cards collapses, or at the very least it becomes an extremely raw deal for those new contributors. Ponzi scheme operators can't typically force new investors into the scheme, but the government can and will.
We are certainly not ready for this. If we think things are difficult for young people now wait until this really starts kicking in.
The only way out of it I can see is for medicine and aged care to become automated over the next decade or two. AI and robotics synthesis.
On the plus side, at least when young people get old and demented they'll be able to spin up endless copies of GTA San Andreas and repeatedly forget and rediscover the storyline!
Canadians talked a lot about boomers and demographics in the 90’s (remember the pig and the python?) we just have a completely inept government and signed our sovereignty away to corporations. And how will we fill gaps in labour healthcare and taxes? Immigration immigration immigration. So don’t expect rising wages any time soon. Just import more workers.
The self inflicted wound of a generation that ushered in the sexual revolution now looks down the loaded barrel of a demographic crisis of their own making. More prosperous than any generation in history, they failed to do the one necessary thing: bring forth the next generation and bequeath a better world than they inherited.
No, but a birth rate of 2.1 children per woman on average would keep the population stable and systems such as healthcare and welfare state programs sustainable. Birth rates in most advanced nations have been under the 2.1 replacement level for some time. So concerns about the population doubling just aren’t relevant anymore in advanced nations.
Perhaps the predicted number of deaths as a result of healthcare cuts in the federal budget will help to solve this problem. Trump way smarter than everyone gives him credit for.
Lest you think I am flippant, I am 61 so I share your concerns. We are putting a lot on the younger generation to solve.
I call BS on the climate change narrative but demographics are definitely a problem in the western world. But I will point out that we have had mostly liberal and progressive governments in Canada that have not taken steps to change and or to strengthen infrastructure of our social, economic and physical environment. Instead they have entered into wasteful, virtue signalling and corrupt spending. Doesn’t look promising for next generation and it’s not due to a changing climate.
I am a leading edge Boomer, born in 1946, now 79.
I faced the lack of preparation in the school system where I grew up in Western Canada.
In Grade Three we had a huge influx of students from a nearby new subdivision. I went to school from 7:00 AM to 1:00 PM and the second class went to school from 1:30 PM to 7:30 PM. With the same teacher !!
My next school out in what was the “suburbs” of our small city. We had only one Grade Four class that had 60 ( yes SIXTY ) students with only one teacher, with no educational assistants. We had an extra row of desks, and the desks were within three feet of the front blackboard and within four feet of the lockers at the back. I consider my Grade Four teacher as one of my heroes of my education.
By the next year they doubled the size of the school. In Grade Ten my high school was hit by all the students coming from another new subdivision that did not have a high school yet.
At University it was the same.
Demographics is a science yet politicians refuse to acknowledge the hard facts of what is coming and we in North America will suffer from this deliberate ignorance. Most boomers are looking in the rear view mirror ignoring the bumpy road ahead for them and their children.
In the 70’s I worked in the Office of Energy Conservation in my province. I learned about the coming threat of climate change. We were on the leading edge of energy efficient housing.
But we did not study the social impacts of aging combined with climate change and auto dependent suburbs.
We are now like Wylie E Coyote holding a stick of dynamite with a very short fuse.
Thank you, Barry!
now we are seeing the opposite: just 10 years ago we were running classes all day during the week, and some on weekends: dozens of students were lined up in the hallways trying to add classes. now my classes don't even fill up, and there are lecture halls and lab rooms that sit empty most of the day (some no longer used).
and it is going to get worse.
Also, without pre-allied health students, we would not have a biology department: our ~ 40 biology majors have the same professor for 3 of their core classes.
so my upbringing was, here in Europe back decades ago with 40+ kids in class, ... eeeh, charm? :)
As sure as the sun rises, there was always going to come a time of flat or declining population. Anything that can't go on forever.. So, the pearl clutching is because it's now, not later? Why would later be better?
It isn’t a question of now or later. It is a question of sustainability. Boomers have an almost allergic reaction to facing their own mortality.
Later is someone else’s problem.
It’s some top tier wackaloonery, this BIGGER BETTER FASTER LOUDER MORE MORE MORE idea that some can’t seem to back down from.
As though anything can double forever.
FWIW, back in the ‘80s, when we were in the early stages of Reagan’s voodoo economics set on turning a productive concretely rooted economy into a combinaton consumerist shopping mall and speculation casino, the financial press (e.g., Barron’s) was full of articles/essays of people noting that, while the model could run for some time, eventually the exponential function would run down like weary clockwork.
I figured that “covid,” like the 2008 “crash,” was just the few with the power to do so turning everything to their own pockets before pumping then jamming the brakes for everyone else.
Also, later is better because later is “not my problem” for some.
It seems that anyone not historically minded can’t get past measuring the rate of change by their own life alone rather than acknowledging the large slow moving events that relentlessly altering the world.
This.
Sorry, but you lost me at “with baby boomers voting to elect conservative and populist governments who promise to keep things the way they are” huh?🤔 I wouldn’t exactly qualify 10 plus years of the Trudeau/Carney Liberals, or 10 years of McGuinty/Wynne Liberals in Ontario, nor Olivia Chow as conservative or populist. Ahhh yes - it’s Doug Ford and the boomers fault again. Except all the boomers I know voted Liberal. Of course housing is “provincial”, yet any provincial initiative to build in Southern Ontario and especially the GTA has been met with NIMBY and activists at Queen’s Park screaming GREEN BELT! GREEN BELT! All the while the Liberal Federal government continue to keep the floodgates open on newcomers to Canada, despite their promise to scale back, and all the demographic problems they caused. Come on Man. You’re worried our “populist” government is not paying attention to climate change. Yet we just elected the former head of GFANZ, UN Climate Change head, as PM. Oh, he and his government will take care of climate change alright. Be careful what you wish for, as you’re about to get it. 🇨🇦
A time bomb?
Are you sure it isn’t a doom plague? Or a tsunami? Or a death quake? Or a planet busting killer asteroid? Or a Yellowstone eruption? Or a Siberian Traps? Or a Singularity?
Add in Long Covid, which is affecting all generations and reducing the workforce, and it’s a perfect storm.
You forgot to mention one very important data point - WHEN did this start? And WHAT precipitated it? And at least in the US, what was the role that Government played in accelerating this trend?
As you have said, this has been a long time in the making. However, for this topic, the present state of demographics (and near term future) was already determined by those actions in the past. Fixing the present/future will not happen without recognizing the genesis of the problem...
And naming them.
while these 2 questions, when and what, are important, it is critical to remember mantra - correlation is not causation.
Very true in many cases!
However, in this case, while they may not be direct "causation", they certainly are powerfully connected to the drop in the baby rates. One is REALLY direct; the other is not one that most people realize.
First one was the invention/discovery of The Pill.
Anyone want to take a flyer on the second one?
No they should have added a bedroom and bath on first floor when Theyveere 60 years old
The effectiveness of tax resistance as a means to stop a hostile regime or dictatorship is complex and depends on various factors. Here are some considerations:
Collective Action: For tax resistance to be effective against a dictatorship, it would require widespread participation and solidarity among the population. A significant number of people refusing to pay taxes could undermine the financial foundation of the regime.
Impact on Government Revenue: Dictatorships often rely on tax revenue to fund their operations, including security forces and public services. A substantial decrease in tax revenue could weaken the regime's ability to maintain control and provide for its citizens.
Government Response: Authoritarian regimes typically respond harshly to dissent. Tax resistance could lead to increased repression, including arrests, violence, and crackdowns on civil liberties. The regime may use force to maintain order and punish those who resist.
International Attention: Widespread tax resistance could draw international attention to the regime's actions, potentially leading to diplomatic pressure, sanctions, or support for opposition movements from other countries.
Alternative Strategies: While tax resistance can be a form of protest, it is often more effective when combined with other forms of resistance, such as civil disobedience, protests, and grassroots organizing. A multifaceted approach can create more significant pressure on a regime.
Historical Context: There are historical examples where tax resistance has played a role in broader movements against oppressive regimes. However, these movements often faced severe challenges and required sustained effort and sacrifice.
Public Support: The success of tax resistance also depends on public sentiment. If the majority of the population supports the regime or is apathetic, tax resistance may not gain traction.
In summary, while tax resistance can be a tool for challenging a hostile or dictatorial regime, its effectiveness is contingent on various factors, including the level of public support, the regime's response, and the overall political context. It is often part of a broader strategy of resistance rather than a standalone solution.
You know what to do…
Japan seems to get along fine.
Yes we need to work out how a smaller population works. I think that is your message.
Others want to restack the pyramid with more humans, pushing off the problem.
A big part of the problem is that our services systems are effectively legalized ponzi schemes. They take money from new "investors" to pay out old "investors". Obviously it's not quite the same, but in one crucial regard it is: if new contributors dry up, the whole house of cards collapses, or at the very least it becomes an extremely raw deal for those new contributors. Ponzi scheme operators can't typically force new investors into the scheme, but the government can and will.
We are certainly not ready for this. If we think things are difficult for young people now wait until this really starts kicking in.
The only way out of it I can see is for medicine and aged care to become automated over the next decade or two. AI and robotics synthesis.
On the plus side, at least when young people get old and demented they'll be able to spin up endless copies of GTA San Andreas and repeatedly forget and rediscover the storyline!
Canadians talked a lot about boomers and demographics in the 90’s (remember the pig and the python?) we just have a completely inept government and signed our sovereignty away to corporations. And how will we fill gaps in labour healthcare and taxes? Immigration immigration immigration. So don’t expect rising wages any time soon. Just import more workers.
The self inflicted wound of a generation that ushered in the sexual revolution now looks down the loaded barrel of a demographic crisis of their own making. More prosperous than any generation in history, they failed to do the one necessary thing: bring forth the next generation and bequeath a better world than they inherited.
Utter MSM garbage.
You can’t keep doubling populations and economies forever to turbocharge the exponential function.
A new economics is needed.
No, but a birth rate of 2.1 children per woman on average would keep the population stable and systems such as healthcare and welfare state programs sustainable. Birth rates in most advanced nations have been under the 2.1 replacement level for some time. So concerns about the population doubling just aren’t relevant anymore in advanced nations.
Perhaps the predicted number of deaths as a result of healthcare cuts in the federal budget will help to solve this problem. Trump way smarter than everyone gives him credit for.
Lest you think I am flippant, I am 61 so I share your concerns. We are putting a lot on the younger generation to solve.
Anyone who wants apartment buildings everywhere has never lived next to one. It fucking sucks.
I call BS on the climate change narrative but demographics are definitely a problem in the western world. But I will point out that we have had mostly liberal and progressive governments in Canada that have not taken steps to change and or to strengthen infrastructure of our social, economic and physical environment. Instead they have entered into wasteful, virtue signalling and corrupt spending. Doesn’t look promising for next generation and it’s not due to a changing climate.