Junior Ganymede
We endeavor to give satisfaction

No Children Today, No Entrepeneurs Tomorrow

August 21st, 2012 by G.

I reluctantly support the Romney-Ryan campaign because they are tentatively, hesitantly, squeamishly, addressing America’s short-term economic and budget problems. Neither they nor anyone else is addressing America’s long-term problem, which is demographic and familial.

Comments (6)
Filed under: Deseret Review | Tags: , ,
August 21st, 2012 09:45:17
6 comments

Agellius
August 21, 2012

Sounds like it’s too late to do much about it. Still, it would be nice if they at least acknowledged the problem.


Adam G.
August 21, 2012

The long-term problem can’t be avoided. But how long-term the long-term problem is is now in our power.

I honestly think that acknowledging the problem would partially correct it, since I don’t think the anti-birth propaganda has been entirely without effect.


Zen
August 21, 2012

I doubt most of the drop is due to anti-birth propaganda. What I am seeing is a lot of fun people who simply have other priorities, such as career, fun, or simply themselves. Simply, it is selfishness and self-centeredness.

Of course, it is no small irony that greater selfishness leads to greater poverty.

Considering how marriage and birth rates are dropping, this is going to continue for a long time.


Vader
August 21, 2012

I do not believe politicians, even the best of them, should be expected to address the long-term problems. These are matters of culture, and, in general, democratic government is corrosive to culture. This is why there must be a wall of separation between democratic government and most other cultural institutions, such as family, church, and private business.

His Majesty, of course, is very much in favor of limiting democratic government. Unfortunately, with him, it’s the “democratic” and not “government” he wants to limit, which is a mistake I think Americans had also best avoid.


Agellius
August 22, 2012

“I do not believe politicians, even the best of them, should be expected to address the long-term problems.”

I don’t see why it would be inappropriate for the government to address the problem as it addresses, for example, global warming. It’s a looming potential catastrophe about which things should be done. So why not public service announcements saying, “The fewer kids we have, the faster the nation will go down the drain”, and explaining why. Also maybe tax incentives to have kids.

Maybe even preferential treatment for couples that are capable of having children, and incentives for providing a lifelong, stable environment in which to raise them. : )


Agellius
August 22, 2012

“These are matters of culture, and, in general, democratic government is corrosive to culture. This is why there must be a wall of separation between democratic government and most other cultural institutions, such as family, church, and private business.”

I don’t think it’s realistic to think if culture as developing in isolation from government. Government is a part of culture. If democratic government is corrosive to culture, then it will (and does) corrode culture, notwithstanding any imaginary wall between them.

Although really, what it does is install a new culture in place of what was there before. Which, of course, is the culture we’re living in and lamenting nowadays.

Leave a Reply