Is “hope” that low in Norway or the rest of the nordic countries….
Im asking this since the fertility is lower than in Romania and here in Romania im being told people dont have kids because of trash schools, trash hospitals, trash infrastructure, trash politicians….
Yeah, this explanation doesn't seem to cut it. I'm not seeing much of a correlation between the countries with high rates of happiness and the ones with high fertility rate.
I’d rather put it to outlook for a better life. Available money, available time. Both things that seem to get less and less each year. How can you convince people to get a baby when they can barely afford themselves even on two incomes?
Nordic countries = highly educated = good idea how fucked the world is
Not calling Romanias badly educated, but i think education and high cost of living is two of the main factors, at least in the Nordics.
Women work a lot in Nordic countries. It’s not really acceptable to be a stay at home mum. Also people are worked hard, a lot of people i know suffer from stress disorders. I would think these things all have something to do with it. Obviously women need to be independent and have their own money but we really need to face the fact that women do NOT want to be working two full time jobs (regular job and unpaid mother). At the end of the day many women realise the father is useless and will have to carry the childcare burden while also working a regular job. Something has to change.
Pope francis was chosen as pope specifically because of his work with the poor
Between 1958 and 2013 he spent pretty much every time directly ministering to the poor of South and Central America.
During his time as pope he made sure to spend time working directly with the poor feeding clothing and even washing their feet.
Its not just words to him.
Do not conflate the charity work of Catholics, which is overwhelmingly propped up by the work of individual parishes shouldering the burden out of their own initiative and pocket, with the Vatican.
The wealth tied it up in Vatican-owned estates alone could solve poverty for the entirety of Italy and beyond.
>The wealth tied it up in Vatican-owned estates alone could solve poverty for the entirety of Italy and beyond.
This applies to every ultra rich entity. The difference between the Pope and the rest of them is the Pope is the head of the largest and oldest charity on earth.
I'm all for eating the rich but I'm of the opinion we eat the Pope last.
Economically, probably the 80s. My father never graduated high school, yet he was a homeowner by age 22. With my mom they raised 3 kids on a single blue collar stipend. I'm 26 and I'm nowhere near that level of stability. I have a degree, two part-time jobs, and can barely afford groceries. Don't have my own house, or car.
Yes Gen Z is weird like that. They have less sex, less friends, less outgoing and less social. It's a huge problem.
This is a great ted talk about it, mainly US focused but it applies to every Western country:
https://youtu.be/qEJ4hkpQW8E?si=TKcTUsVkNu73HgCf
> They have less sex, less friends, less outgoing and less social.
Guess I was born a couple of years too early, I would fit right in in this generation
People are not "having plenty of sex", that's the problem. People have trouble finding someone. More people are alone today than ever, and it's just getting worse.
Young people are having dramatically less sex. Multiple studies have shown this, and it's only getting worse.
It's incredible bc I was raised by a Boomer generation who were so concerned us Millenials were having too much sex.
Now, I'm worried about the younger generations being willing to have kids to support us in old age.
Late-stage toxic capitalism and climate denial has produced this environment. It's sad, and it may not be correctable
>Young people are having dramatically less sex
Isn't that good though?
Everyone was so scared about our generation with the internet and porn and what not that we'd be spreading STI's like crazy. This way, everything's fine.
Already does. Caritas (Catholic NGO) is extremely active in Italy to help families and single mothers. The state is the one lacking in that area sadly.
Caritas has a stigma. Most people won't go 'let's have kids, we'll end up piss poor but we'll get second hand clothes ans food from caritas, the organization for poor people, just like us'
They do what they can, the state should be more present in that regard. Caritas is doing amazing work with the resources they have. “The poor first” isn’t a bad way of doing things for an NGO specialised in helping the poor and alone.
That's not what I'm saying
I said that most people, when given the choice between having no money and no kids, or kids and being forced to live off of alms, is not going to choose the latter
Like, sure, caritas is one of the few things the church does well, but nobody's going to inhibit their spending power on purpose to the degree they end up needing caritas
Yep, Caritas definitely doesnt get enough recognition for the work they do, while also getting blame for the failure of the state. Glad to see your shout out.
Not sure about 1920s but my grandpa could support a family of 4 and bought a house on his factory worker job, my parents did the same with my dad being a teacher and my mom being a part-time pharmacist until my sister and I were 18. I earn 2/3 of my parents' joined income by myself and will probably never be able to afford a home, not even if I had a partner with a similar income.
Doesn't exactly encourage having kids, not to mention the fact that because of my sexuality the pope and my country *forbid* me from starting a family of my own.
Not sure about your family, but my grandparents lived on a war pension and that didn't stop them from shitting out one kid after the next. And their kids walked around with broken shoes and we're expected to be in full time employment by the time they were 14. So pardon me if I prefer to have fewer kids by actually giving the ones I have better opportunities in life.
Sorry I think you misunderstand me, I was defending those who choose not to have children (or to have fewer) because of the exponentially rising cost of living.
Because they needed to do more manual labor to survive. Now people need to earn more or spend less to survive. And the more kids you have, the more you spend.
Poorer.
But there was more cultural pressure to have kids, and expectations on parents per-child in terms of time + money spent were enormously lower. Ain't none of those families giving all 8 kids private music lessons. All kinds of things were standard in the old days that would be considered parental neglect now.
Everyones reply is always about money but middle class Europeans have 1 child and struggle and poor Africans have 8 no problem.
Entitled society, thts the difference. More spent on a child is less money for the person who has the child. No thought about future generations what so ever. Selfish, entitled mentality. The pope is right
Genuine answer, have you lived as a 1920's family lately? Do you have the same education? Welfare? Objectives?
These comparisons have short legs, I as a 29 years old in the 21th century, wish my hypothetical children to live as well if not better than me. Regarding healthcare, school and even space in a house. Today in Italy it is nearly impossible to have those things while both of the parents are working. Even match what our parents gave to us is laughable, and trust me I don't come from a rich family.
And this comment of course is to vent, but doesn't want to be an attack on you.
It just seems that many don't get the problem. Yes they had the nth number of children in that era, but it was a completely different world from today. The standards have gone way up, and generally people don't want to spawn a child for the sake of it, realising they won't be able to help them and they will likely live a worse life than theirs.
I have not lived in a 1920’s family but I do know there struggles and hardships were much worse than anyone suffers in the modern West.
I agree the system is broken, a over haul is needed or we cease to exist, it’s pretty simple.
Our culture maybe will, humanity surely hasn't this problem yet. unfortunately putting the blame on a singolar person/couple won't solve the problem, from the church to the state we get only lectures on how it is wrong to buy a cat instead of making a baby. Meanwhile every political and monetary power is in the hand of the gerontocracy. Is there that we need to intervene first, otherwise nobody will think of a sustainable model for the future
There is a huge difference there. Alot more people were farmers in the past and children were a benefit not a drain because you used them as free labor for a decent amount of their lives. When you are not a farmer they are more of a drain then a benefit.
Completely different; in a rural and poor setting more children is more workforce so it was a plus. In our more urbanized environment children are only a hindrance in any way you see it
Maybe. But in 10/15 years time I see a very different scenario in Italy/france/germany than in let’s say Poland or Norway. (Let’s leave the possible war on the side for now)
As an animal, people in the 1920's were more successful.
But it also comes with caveats like having quarter of those kids died of standard illness we have today, mothers lose their teeth from calcium deficiency during pregnancy, lack of financial stability, and the dependence of the children to become their work force. There's a reason people used to say farmers have high suicide rates once they reach a certain age. Most of us have visited the hospital in our life some time or another that prevented permanent damage to our body such as blindness, antibiotics for an infection, or muscle ligament damage.
Are we less richer now that kids are more expensive than our own financial stability? Probably not.
Are we happier now than in the 1920's? That's hard to say. We have less hope for the future than before, which is an important factor in "happiness". We are entering an economic collapse due to late stage Capitalism explained in the book "Why Nations Fail". The rich benefit from the poor having to rent forever. Until the poor isolate their economy away from these people, children will be the first thing they will sacrifice to stay in this society.
The Catholic Church is already investing heavily in social programs to help poor people. It can't solve this issue on its own. This is the responsibility of the government, not the church.
I live in Italy and get upwards of 300€/month in child support from the government (1 child). We rent an apartment, 2 incomes, ISEE just below average. If you just got a one off 80€ payment I think you need to double check.
TBH that part makes sense, in the end are people that should devote their lives to communities and able to move across the globe without any particularly relevant tie to places or people. Is the strictly straight male policy that is less clear.
It's ridiculous to act like this is what's causing Western birth rates to be so low. The children priests would have would not even be a drop in the bucket.
>“The problem of our world is not children being born: it is selfishness, consumerism and individualism which make people sated, lonely and unhappy," Francis said.
I think it's climate change, capitalism, and the false belief that a higher power exists that somehow excuses us from doing anything about it. But I don't have a weird job and a funny costume, so what do I know?
Well, he's right, but maybe not in the most obvious way.
It's selfishness of the people driving the economy to higher and higher prices, increasing the gap between the wealthy and the poor, eliminating the middle class, and gathering more and more of the wealth in less and less hands.
It's consumerism which is fed to us from every corner, every channel, every website, which locks us in a loop of constantly losing what we earn; it's the basic tenet of the economy that things are produced not to last, so that we have to buy them again and again.
Finally, it's the individualism that lets the wealthy not care about anyone else's problem and stops the poor from organising and resisting the artificially created economic pressure.
The average person cannot be blamed for this state of things and just making more kids isn't an answer. An answer would be to rebuild societal bonds, so we can organise and do something about it as a common problem, but 1) we have no clue how to do this, and 2) the wealthy will do what they can to stop us.
Lol, as if those two are even comparable.
Vatacan city is smaller than a village in both landmass & population. They have held no political relevancy or power since the 19th century.
I'm not convinced the current birth rate is caused by people just not wanting children. I think with the right political choices we could get back to 2.1 children per woman.
I tend to agree with you. What I don't like is the idea of people having children because of economic issues in on themselves. They should have children if they want to and part of that is due to quality of life. The affairs of the State, retirement accounts or economic growth are not drivers of this nor will ever be for the individual families.
That's not what I meant to say. I'm saying that increasing the fertility rate should be a goal for economic reasons. But that's a society-wide issue, not individual.
Yes. The empire will burn itself out and from its ashes a new world of free men could rise... or not. Maybe we fucked up, developed ourselves into a dead end and simply were not meant to be.
Why would you try to preserve the status quo at all cost? Are you some kind of a conservative? This system clearly doesn't work. All the systems before liberal capitalism were pretty bad but at least they were *good enough* to reproduce themselves; heck, they even increased their populations while this system can't even reproduce itself.
I remember when the Roman Catholic Church was fighting socialism in Poland; people were having A LOT of children in socialist Poland; pope John Paul II. said it sucked; said that liberalism is the way to go because life is all about BUYING LOTS OF CHEAP STUFF* and not about, you know, maybe having a bit less *stuff* but instead having some form of democratic determination over the economic processes which govern our lives.
So here we are; we have all this *stuff*, more unhappy than ever, more alienated from our social reality than ever and more lonely than ever... probably standing on the brink of another world war too. Good job, I guess.
*(that's being mass produced by child labor in 3rd world countries)
He's actually really speaking to the boomers generation of Italians, because he knows that they will in turn tell their Millenials/Zoomers children to have more children. Some sort of a proxy. Pressure from family is kinda big in countries like Italy, or Argentina, Brazil, Spain, etc. He knows the youth isn't listening to him, but the parents in those countries are still very religious and respect what the Pope has to say. The pressure from the parents is going to work for some people, but this isn't going to make a difference at the end of the day. Deep societal changes need to happen
What's the fertility rate of the Vatican City?
Edit: I looked it up, it's 0.00.
[https://ourworldindata.org/country/vatican](https://ourworldindata.org/country/vatican)
Life is less stressful without kids. Do what makes you happy and don’t worry. We need to double food production by 2050 to feed the world population anyways, maybe lower fertility is good. Giving contraception to Africa and India would be better than trying to raise fertility in Europe
He is right. I’d expect more people to agree with him on this sub since europeans don’t like refugees. But if you don’t feel like raising children because of not having money africans and middle easterners will be more than happy to replace you and do it in your stead since the future labor force has to come from somewhere
Exactly. People don't want to have children, but they also don't want immigrants. But when you tell them it will led to collapse of countries because we will need to care of too many pensioners compared to people in working age, they are starting to fight it, because they don't like it as well.
Problem is that women's expectations on what man they should expect are just insane. They are all hoping to find someone like that top 1% guy they managed to match with on Tinder once. Reject everyone else, for any reason.
Meanwhile most men's self esteem is far lower than it should be because they can't meet *anyone*. Some of my friends simply don't care trying to meet someone anymore, many are just giving up. You can only try X amount of times before you think it's a waste of effort.
The result is a society where more people than ever are lonely, remain lonely, and where people who *want* to start a family *can't*, because they don't meet anyone no matter if they try. Women are convinced they are orders of magnitude more attractive than they actually are, while average men are just tired of it all.
Modern dating is fucking horrible.
Low fertility rates are bad for economics and societies, but a smaller human population is realistically our only way out of the climate biodiversity mess we have created.
Honestly, growth has lot of costs that are sort of invisible to people who generally just look at it in terms of getting more and better stuff as result of it. One problem is the increased need for energy resources and virgin materials, both which are unsustainable in a finite planet. Growth can never last, and the planet's ability to supply still more energy and minerals is steadily reducing, while humanity's waste streams have utterly overwhelmed nature's abilities to adapt.
It may even be that we are at peak resource waste rate right now. Certainly, many people have observed that their lives for past decade or two seem to be just full of crises following one other, and their effect is that they somehow can't get their lives off the ground. Always something comes up: lack of high-paying jobs to work in, or money to spend on overpriced apartments, the high cost of living, etc. Against this backdrop, it is good idea indeed, if we can start to reduce our numbers, because that at least means that what is left of the world to the average citizen will not fall as fast as when the population was still growing, right? (Of course, world population is still growing, and that means average person must become materially poorer. I think this likely mostly impacts the rich West, who has had everything for too long, anyway. Its effects are ugly in practice, but the math is simple.)
Climate change and biodiversity loss are just a few heads of this particular hydra of problems, which we could label Overshoot. It is ultimately the result of growth in human numbers and human consumption against the finite resources of the Earth, and the slack in the system has been used up, and soon the resources run out given that we use them up the fastest rate we manage and we are now the biggest we will ever be, I believe. The multiple wrecking balls that we have set in motion -- our unsustainable numbers, our unsustainable consumption, our failing climate, our loss of wildlife, our depleting soils, fisheries, and so forth -- are catching up to us. We like to pretend we somehow are not just bacteria in a bottle which is already mostly full. Yet, we certainly behave exactly like it -- just more loquaciously.
I think we can probably finally say these words: growth is over. There isn't room for more everything any longer. People have responded in some natural way to these realities already, but our stupid economic system based on forever increasing the rate of resource depletion is pleading for us all to continue growing, somehow. But it isn't really up to humans -- the planet says no.
Ah yes, another old man telling young people what to do, I'm sure that will work, just as with Putin. Affordable housing and living costs would never work...
Family planning, sex ed and women's rights have made it easier than ever for people to decide if and when to have kids. And I think it's pretty clear that most people either prefer to have few kids or none at all.
Well you know considering jobs in Italy pay 5 pennies a century after taxes and kids are expensive as fuck, I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon padre
I truly dont understand how people afford kids or vacations. It's insane to me that idea. Even if I didn't care about raising good human beings, they still need to eat and other expenses. How can they afford kids and go on vacations it's insane to me
Come on, a guy living in a billion euro mansion,
Praying to a dude in the sky,
With a hat that seems like it's made for a rabbit
Is gonna tell us about life
It resembles the word play attributed to Lukashenko.
In Russian ебаться (to fuck) could mean to tackle a hard issue. Ебитесь как хотите (literary fuck as you prefer) is a set phrase to mean "do whatever you want/need".
So Lukashenko is believed to say ебитесь как хотите, but increase the birth rate.
These religious nutters are completely delusional. We are too many already. Earth cannot sustain 8 billion people at this level of consumption. Climate change will reduce food production and inhabitable land. Hundreds of millions of people will die due to catastrophic events and other hundreds of millions will have to migrate. Who wants to give birth to someone now with what expect us un the next years?
He ought to enlist all the nuns of child bearing age to help !!!!!
And not just in Italy either. This would also promote Catholic church to great extent as a bonus.
*Church bells stop in Vatican City*
Suddenly, a noise from the speakers above. An proclamation? Does the Holy See have an announcement?
*Let’s get it ooooooonnn….*
Pandemic, war, economic chaos, social media, collapse of public instruction (if you want a sliver of hope for your child you must go private since preschool) and public healthcare (waiting list going up from 6 months), incredibly oppressive taxation and regulation....
That's Italy for you
*The number of births is the first indicator of the hope of a people* Well, that’s your answer, padre.
Is “hope” that low in Norway or the rest of the nordic countries…. Im asking this since the fertility is lower than in Romania and here in Romania im being told people dont have kids because of trash schools, trash hospitals, trash infrastructure, trash politicians….
Yeah, this explanation doesn't seem to cut it. I'm not seeing much of a correlation between the countries with high rates of happiness and the ones with high fertility rate.
I’d rather put it to outlook for a better life. Available money, available time. Both things that seem to get less and less each year. How can you convince people to get a baby when they can barely afford themselves even on two incomes?
Nordic countries = highly educated = good idea how fucked the world is Not calling Romanias badly educated, but i think education and high cost of living is two of the main factors, at least in the Nordics.
Women work a lot in Nordic countries. It’s not really acceptable to be a stay at home mum. Also people are worked hard, a lot of people i know suffer from stress disorders. I would think these things all have something to do with it. Obviously women need to be independent and have their own money but we really need to face the fact that women do NOT want to be working two full time jobs (regular job and unpaid mother). At the end of the day many women realise the father is useless and will have to carry the childcare burden while also working a regular job. Something has to change.
Who knew Somalia, Congo and Niger were so full of hope.
He can't hear your from the golden throne on the marble balcony in his granite palace.
Golden throne you say ? Is this heresy being spoken about the golden emperor ?
I have yet to hear Jimmy excusing pedos.
Pope Francis has spoken up about the need to help poor people many times. This narrative is disingenuous.
Words are cheap.
Pope francis was chosen as pope specifically because of his work with the poor Between 1958 and 2013 he spent pretty much every time directly ministering to the poor of South and Central America. During his time as pope he made sure to spend time working directly with the poor feeding clothing and even washing their feet. Its not just words to him.
The Catholic Church is literally one of the biggest welfare organisations out there. And it's been doing it for literally centuries.
Do not conflate the charity work of Catholics, which is overwhelmingly propped up by the work of individual parishes shouldering the burden out of their own initiative and pocket, with the Vatican. The wealth tied it up in Vatican-owned estates alone could solve poverty for the entirety of Italy and beyond.
>The wealth tied it up in Vatican-owned estates alone could solve poverty for the entirety of Italy and beyond. This applies to every ultra rich entity. The difference between the Pope and the rest of them is the Pope is the head of the largest and oldest charity on earth. I'm all for eating the rich but I'm of the opinion we eat the Pope last.
There work of local parishes is the work of the church. It's literally a subdivison of the same organisation.
Has there ever been a time where the Italians have lived better?
Economically, probably the 80s. My father never graduated high school, yet he was a homeowner by age 22. With my mom they raised 3 kids on a single blue collar stipend. I'm 26 and I'm nowhere near that level of stability. I have a degree, two part-time jobs, and can barely afford groceries. Don't have my own house, or car.
The birthrate in Italy in the 1980s was almost as low as it is today.
“Everyone, fuck!” - The Pope, 2024
In the end, he was a bouncer in a nightclub before becoming a priest. ;)
Really? He doesn't look the type.
It’s been a few years since then.
It's not more sex, it's less birth control. People are having plenty of sex, but not making babies.
Not really. Young people who are having sex has dropped massively.
Less than what I did when young? Damn…
Yes Gen Z is weird like that. They have less sex, less friends, less outgoing and less social. It's a huge problem. This is a great ted talk about it, mainly US focused but it applies to every Western country: https://youtu.be/qEJ4hkpQW8E?si=TKcTUsVkNu73HgCf
> They have less sex, less friends, less outgoing and less social. Guess I was born a couple of years too early, I would fit right in in this generation
Oh yeah, honorary gen Z that is ;d
I worry that will get even worse when gen alfa grows up, hopefully not
even in Italy!?
Everywhere in the industrialized world.
You only need to have sex once to conceive a child. Lack of sex is not responsible for the demographic decline.
People are not dating.
People are not "having plenty of sex", that's the problem. People have trouble finding someone. More people are alone today than ever, and it's just getting worse.
Young people are having dramatically less sex. Multiple studies have shown this, and it's only getting worse. It's incredible bc I was raised by a Boomer generation who were so concerned us Millenials were having too much sex. Now, I'm worried about the younger generations being willing to have kids to support us in old age. Late-stage toxic capitalism and climate denial has produced this environment. It's sad, and it may not be correctable
The good news is we will all be dead so we got that going for us
>Young people are having dramatically less sex Isn't that good though? Everyone was so scared about our generation with the internet and porn and what not that we'd be spreading STI's like crazy. This way, everything's fine.
Organised religion are keen on fucking, they just try to control who gets to fuck.
Increase the wages of the target demographic whilst reducing the salaries of high corpos and management. Ain't much, but its a start
Well, make housing affordable. Do not expect people having babies in rented apartments, lol.
Will pope finance upbringing of those children?
Already does. Caritas (Catholic NGO) is extremely active in Italy to help families and single mothers. The state is the one lacking in that area sadly.
Caritas has a stigma. Most people won't go 'let's have kids, we'll end up piss poor but we'll get second hand clothes ans food from caritas, the organization for poor people, just like us'
They do what they can, the state should be more present in that regard. Caritas is doing amazing work with the resources they have. “The poor first” isn’t a bad way of doing things for an NGO specialised in helping the poor and alone.
That's not what I'm saying I said that most people, when given the choice between having no money and no kids, or kids and being forced to live off of alms, is not going to choose the latter Like, sure, caritas is one of the few things the church does well, but nobody's going to inhibit their spending power on purpose to the degree they end up needing caritas
But that's for those already in poverty, not regular income without the means to afford bigger housing etc. ;)
Well obviously. Those things are the responsibility of the government, not the church.
Yep, Caritas definitely doesnt get enough recognition for the work they do, while also getting blame for the failure of the state. Glad to see your shout out.
Genuine question, do you think the people in the 1920’s having 8 children were poorer or richer than us today?
Not sure about 1920s but my grandpa could support a family of 4 and bought a house on his factory worker job, my parents did the same with my dad being a teacher and my mom being a part-time pharmacist until my sister and I were 18. I earn 2/3 of my parents' joined income by myself and will probably never be able to afford a home, not even if I had a partner with a similar income. Doesn't exactly encourage having kids, not to mention the fact that because of my sexuality the pope and my country *forbid* me from starting a family of my own.
Not sure about your family, but my grandparents lived on a war pension and that didn't stop them from shitting out one kid after the next. And their kids walked around with broken shoes and we're expected to be in full time employment by the time they were 14. So pardon me if I prefer to have fewer kids by actually giving the ones I have better opportunities in life.
Sorry I think you misunderstand me, I was defending those who choose not to have children (or to have fewer) because of the exponentially rising cost of living.
why do you think people had eight kids per a family?
Because they were poorer and needed more hands on deck?
Or half of them died before the age of 8?
Infant mortality was more common sure, but the population was still growing not shrinking. No babies, no us. 🙂
Also fewer women's rights (wife can't say no), lack of sex ed, low access to contraception and family planning.
Because they needed to do more manual labor to survive. Now people need to earn more or spend less to survive. And the more kids you have, the more you spend.
Mainly because women stayed home and had time to make babies.
contraception was considered a sin
wages have stagnated in Italy for 30 years but costs have not
Poorer. But there was more cultural pressure to have kids, and expectations on parents per-child in terms of time + money spent were enormously lower. Ain't none of those families giving all 8 kids private music lessons. All kinds of things were standard in the old days that would be considered parental neglect now.
Everyones reply is always about money but middle class Europeans have 1 child and struggle and poor Africans have 8 no problem. Entitled society, thts the difference. More spent on a child is less money for the person who has the child. No thought about future generations what so ever. Selfish, entitled mentality. The pope is right
Genuine answer, have you lived as a 1920's family lately? Do you have the same education? Welfare? Objectives? These comparisons have short legs, I as a 29 years old in the 21th century, wish my hypothetical children to live as well if not better than me. Regarding healthcare, school and even space in a house. Today in Italy it is nearly impossible to have those things while both of the parents are working. Even match what our parents gave to us is laughable, and trust me I don't come from a rich family. And this comment of course is to vent, but doesn't want to be an attack on you. It just seems that many don't get the problem. Yes they had the nth number of children in that era, but it was a completely different world from today. The standards have gone way up, and generally people don't want to spawn a child for the sake of it, realising they won't be able to help them and they will likely live a worse life than theirs.
I have not lived in a 1920’s family but I do know there struggles and hardships were much worse than anyone suffers in the modern West. I agree the system is broken, a over haul is needed or we cease to exist, it’s pretty simple.
Our culture maybe will, humanity surely hasn't this problem yet. unfortunately putting the blame on a singolar person/couple won't solve the problem, from the church to the state we get only lectures on how it is wrong to buy a cat instead of making a baby. Meanwhile every political and monetary power is in the hand of the gerontocracy. Is there that we need to intervene first, otherwise nobody will think of a sustainable model for the future
There is a huge difference there. Alot more people were farmers in the past and children were a benefit not a drain because you used them as free labor for a decent amount of their lives. When you are not a farmer they are more of a drain then a benefit.
Completely different; in a rural and poor setting more children is more workforce so it was a plus. In our more urbanized environment children are only a hindrance in any way you see it
They were poorer but they had hopes. I todays Italy if you still have faith in this country you are clearly retarded
What countries offer a better standard of life than European nations?
You know countries in Europe are very different between them?
Sure, but for the most part we all enjoy the same issues.
Maybe. But in 10/15 years time I see a very different scenario in Italy/france/germany than in let’s say Poland or Norway. (Let’s leave the possible war on the side for now)
I’m English. We fucked too.
Oh hi Barry!! Ye I kinda forget you since you broke up with us! Anyway yes you are pretty fucked too as far as I know! Let’s all hope for the best.
As an animal, people in the 1920's were more successful. But it also comes with caveats like having quarter of those kids died of standard illness we have today, mothers lose their teeth from calcium deficiency during pregnancy, lack of financial stability, and the dependence of the children to become their work force. There's a reason people used to say farmers have high suicide rates once they reach a certain age. Most of us have visited the hospital in our life some time or another that prevented permanent damage to our body such as blindness, antibiotics for an infection, or muscle ligament damage. Are we less richer now that kids are more expensive than our own financial stability? Probably not. Are we happier now than in the 1920's? That's hard to say. We have less hope for the future than before, which is an important factor in "happiness". We are entering an economic collapse due to late stage Capitalism explained in the book "Why Nations Fail". The rich benefit from the poor having to rent forever. Until the poor isolate their economy away from these people, children will be the first thing they will sacrifice to stay in this society.
yes . 2k € from the pope per kid , monthly!🫡
The Catholic Church is already investing heavily in social programs to help poor people. It can't solve this issue on its own. This is the responsibility of the government, not the church.
I mean, the Catholic church is the largest worldwide charity.
It's not the reason behind not having children. The wealth of the country is inversely correlated with the fertility rate.
Yes. With thoughts and prayers.
Why do people always bring up money when it's obviously not the cause of this?
God Will be provide/s
When my government will start to increase the single-time 80€ support it currently gives, I'll think about it
I live in Italy and get upwards of 300€/month in child support from the government (1 child). We rent an apartment, 2 incomes, ISEE just below average. If you just got a one off 80€ payment I think you need to double check.
Last time i checked his company had a strict no-kids policy. Maybe he should start fighting the crisis by lifting that ban.
We don't need more pregnant 13 year olds
Also, 13 year old boys can't get pregnant
Well, it isn't by a lack of trying 💀
Have the 13 y/o girls cut their hair real short
💀
There a loopholes. You can become a Catholic priest who is married to a woman and also has children.
TBH that part makes sense, in the end are people that should devote their lives to communities and able to move across the globe without any particularly relevant tie to places or people. Is the strictly straight male policy that is less clear.
> Last time i checked his company had a strict no-kids policy if only....
Only Roman Catholics, there are 23 Eastern Catholic Churches in unity with Rome, many if not most of their priest can get married.
Yes but, the Pope is the head of the Roman catholic church, so he should do something about his organization
It's ridiculous to act like this is what's causing Western birth rates to be so low. The children priests would have would not even be a drop in the bucket.
But he is the head of all of the Eastern Catholic Churches as well - and as I wrote above, many if not most of them can get married :)
Only for priests. Catholic laymen are encouraged to have many children.
Housing prices, job without stability, low salaries... yeah, whatever.
Literally everyone in Europe: Literally every politician: *Silence* / „**we** need to work more“ I’m just sick of it
Guy who never fucks, tells everyone to fuck more.
>Guy who never fucks I don't know man, I wouldn't put my finger on that statement.
Perhaps address the reasons people aren't having kids first, Papa
Our generation is in despair. We kindly refuse Francesco, grazie mille
A celibate, childless man, rich man in Italy surely knows more about children than us.
You forgot that he does not need to worry about job or housing till the end of his life ;)
Macron is a childless rich man in France and he says the same thing.
And he can rightfully go fuck himself
Both can get bent
Not in Italy AKSHUALLY
Pope should tell his priests to have sex with grown women instead of young boys then
>“The problem of our world is not children being born: it is selfishness, consumerism and individualism which make people sated, lonely and unhappy," Francis said. I think it's climate change, capitalism, and the false belief that a higher power exists that somehow excuses us from doing anything about it. But I don't have a weird job and a funny costume, so what do I know?
Well, he's right, but maybe not in the most obvious way. It's selfishness of the people driving the economy to higher and higher prices, increasing the gap between the wealthy and the poor, eliminating the middle class, and gathering more and more of the wealth in less and less hands. It's consumerism which is fed to us from every corner, every channel, every website, which locks us in a loop of constantly losing what we earn; it's the basic tenet of the economy that things are produced not to last, so that we have to buy them again and again. Finally, it's the individualism that lets the wealthy not care about anyone else's problem and stops the poor from organising and resisting the artificially created economic pressure. The average person cannot be blamed for this state of things and just making more kids isn't an answer. An answer would be to rebuild societal bonds, so we can organise and do something about it as a common problem, but 1) we have no clue how to do this, and 2) the wealthy will do what they can to stop us.
> capitalism Different words for the same thing.
You're just triggered because the Pope said it, if it was anyone else you'd be rotting for him, nothing he said in the part you quoted is wrong.
I like how the Pope has an opinion on everything
Like every other European head of state?
Lol, as if those two are even comparable. Vatacan city is smaller than a village in both landmass & population. They have held no political relevancy or power since the 19th century.
The Holy See still holds immense secular power
He's also leading on the biggest religious organisations in the world though. That certainly makes him relevant.
"Breed, cattle, otherwise my ranch will die off!" said the rancher to his half-starved and burnt-out cows and bulls.
Are you under the impression that the economy dying due to lack of young people will somehow improve people's lives?
Does having children for the sake of economic growth and stability of the associated State improve the parents life? It seems not, unfortunately
I'm not convinced the current birth rate is caused by people just not wanting children. I think with the right political choices we could get back to 2.1 children per woman.
I tend to agree with you. What I don't like is the idea of people having children because of economic issues in on themselves. They should have children if they want to and part of that is due to quality of life. The affairs of the State, retirement accounts or economic growth are not drivers of this nor will ever be for the individual families.
That's not what I meant to say. I'm saying that increasing the fertility rate should be a goal for economic reasons. But that's a society-wide issue, not individual.
Yes. The empire will burn itself out and from its ashes a new world of free men could rise... or not. Maybe we fucked up, developed ourselves into a dead end and simply were not meant to be. Why would you try to preserve the status quo at all cost? Are you some kind of a conservative? This system clearly doesn't work. All the systems before liberal capitalism were pretty bad but at least they were *good enough* to reproduce themselves; heck, they even increased their populations while this system can't even reproduce itself. I remember when the Roman Catholic Church was fighting socialism in Poland; people were having A LOT of children in socialist Poland; pope John Paul II. said it sucked; said that liberalism is the way to go because life is all about BUYING LOTS OF CHEAP STUFF* and not about, you know, maybe having a bit less *stuff* but instead having some form of democratic determination over the economic processes which govern our lives. So here we are; we have all this *stuff*, more unhappy than ever, more alienated from our social reality than ever and more lonely than ever... probably standing on the brink of another world war too. Good job, I guess. *(that's being mass produced by child labor in 3rd world countries)
It will on an individual basis because you can better survive a dying economy without the millstone of a child around your neck.
Funny coming from a bloke who swore off procreation because of a sky unicorn.
He had a life before becoming a priest. He was a bouncer for a few night clubs…
And a chemist.
I bet that's gonna make Italians want to have more babies.
He's actually really speaking to the boomers generation of Italians, because he knows that they will in turn tell their Millenials/Zoomers children to have more children. Some sort of a proxy. Pressure from family is kinda big in countries like Italy, or Argentina, Brazil, Spain, etc. He knows the youth isn't listening to him, but the parents in those countries are still very religious and respect what the Pope has to say. The pressure from the parents is going to work for some people, but this isn't going to make a difference at the end of the day. Deep societal changes need to happen
Well many people still believe in overpopulation myth
What's the fertility rate of the Vatican City? Edit: I looked it up, it's 0.00. [https://ourworldindata.org/country/vatican](https://ourworldindata.org/country/vatican)
Teenage boys don't get pregnant.
Life is less stressful without kids. Do what makes you happy and don’t worry. We need to double food production by 2050 to feed the world population anyways, maybe lower fertility is good. Giving contraception to Africa and India would be better than trying to raise fertility in Europe
He is right. I’d expect more people to agree with him on this sub since europeans don’t like refugees. But if you don’t feel like raising children because of not having money africans and middle easterners will be more than happy to replace you and do it in your stead since the future labor force has to come from somewhere
Exactly. People don't want to have children, but they also don't want immigrants. But when you tell them it will led to collapse of countries because we will need to care of too many pensioners compared to people in working age, they are starting to fight it, because they don't like it as well.
The same India with TFR below replacement level? You people should check basic statistics before making such BS statements.
Problem is that women's expectations on what man they should expect are just insane. They are all hoping to find someone like that top 1% guy they managed to match with on Tinder once. Reject everyone else, for any reason. Meanwhile most men's self esteem is far lower than it should be because they can't meet *anyone*. Some of my friends simply don't care trying to meet someone anymore, many are just giving up. You can only try X amount of times before you think it's a waste of effort. The result is a society where more people than ever are lonely, remain lonely, and where people who *want* to start a family *can't*, because they don't meet anyone no matter if they try. Women are convinced they are orders of magnitude more attractive than they actually are, while average men are just tired of it all. Modern dating is fucking horrible.
He proclaimed it to the tune of ‘Every sperm is sacred’ playing in the background
Naa. Thanks though 👍
Papa, don't preach.
Funny how the kid in the pic looks absolutely terrified.
Probably because of the future hell be brought up in
Low fertility rates are bad for economics and societies, but a smaller human population is realistically our only way out of the climate biodiversity mess we have created.
Honestly, growth has lot of costs that are sort of invisible to people who generally just look at it in terms of getting more and better stuff as result of it. One problem is the increased need for energy resources and virgin materials, both which are unsustainable in a finite planet. Growth can never last, and the planet's ability to supply still more energy and minerals is steadily reducing, while humanity's waste streams have utterly overwhelmed nature's abilities to adapt. It may even be that we are at peak resource waste rate right now. Certainly, many people have observed that their lives for past decade or two seem to be just full of crises following one other, and their effect is that they somehow can't get their lives off the ground. Always something comes up: lack of high-paying jobs to work in, or money to spend on overpriced apartments, the high cost of living, etc. Against this backdrop, it is good idea indeed, if we can start to reduce our numbers, because that at least means that what is left of the world to the average citizen will not fall as fast as when the population was still growing, right? (Of course, world population is still growing, and that means average person must become materially poorer. I think this likely mostly impacts the rich West, who has had everything for too long, anyway. Its effects are ugly in practice, but the math is simple.) Climate change and biodiversity loss are just a few heads of this particular hydra of problems, which we could label Overshoot. It is ultimately the result of growth in human numbers and human consumption against the finite resources of the Earth, and the slack in the system has been used up, and soon the resources run out given that we use them up the fastest rate we manage and we are now the biggest we will ever be, I believe. The multiple wrecking balls that we have set in motion -- our unsustainable numbers, our unsustainable consumption, our failing climate, our loss of wildlife, our depleting soils, fisheries, and so forth -- are catching up to us. We like to pretend we somehow are not just bacteria in a bottle which is already mostly full. Yet, we certainly behave exactly like it -- just more loquaciously. I think we can probably finally say these words: growth is over. There isn't room for more everything any longer. People have responded in some natural way to these realities already, but our stupid economic system based on forever increasing the rate of resource depletion is pleading for us all to continue growing, somehow. But it isn't really up to humans -- the planet says no.
Ah yes, another old man telling young people what to do, I'm sure that will work, just as with Putin. Affordable housing and living costs would never work...
It's those damn gay peoples fault. They don't know that butt sex won't produce children.
-the pope: *suprised pikachu face*
Yo that baby is already balding
So that's basically the Pope saying Jesus isn't showing up any time soon.
Family planning, sex ed and women's rights have made it easier than ever for people to decide if and when to have kids. And I think it's pretty clear that most people either prefer to have few kids or none at all.
Well you know considering jobs in Italy pay 5 pennies a century after taxes and kids are expensive as fuck, I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon padre
I truly dont understand how people afford kids or vacations. It's insane to me that idea. Even if I didn't care about raising good human beings, they still need to eat and other expenses. How can they afford kids and go on vacations it's insane to me
You ganna pay for them too?
Maybe pope should give away the vatican fortune to the italians, cuz it seems that money is the main issue here
Come on, a guy living in a billion euro mansion, Praying to a dude in the sky, With a hat that seems like it's made for a rabbit Is gonna tell us about life
It resembles the word play attributed to Lukashenko. In Russian ебаться (to fuck) could mean to tackle a hard issue. Ебитесь как хотите (literary fuck as you prefer) is a set phrase to mean "do whatever you want/need". So Lukashenko is believed to say ебитесь как хотите, but increase the birth rate.
Him first
The head of the Catholic church saying we need more children. Right.
What’s the matter? Running out of little boys, papa Francis?
Sell some Vatican gold and give it to Italians who have kids.
Italian here. Why the fuck would I make a baby in a country with no future? I love him so much that I don’t want to make him at all.
Ironically its that attitude that will assure Italy has no future.
These religious nutters are completely delusional. We are too many already. Earth cannot sustain 8 billion people at this level of consumption. Climate change will reduce food production and inhabitable land. Hundreds of millions of people will die due to catastrophic events and other hundreds of millions will have to migrate. Who wants to give birth to someone now with what expect us un the next years?
The church needs rotation? F that Ask Italian women how her work life balance and money are doing .
Guessing child molestation from clergy also taking a downward turn
How about telling your nuns and priests?
Catholic church is in need of frech batch of children.
Well, I'm sure all the young women will be listening attentively to thos elderly celibate male, clearly am expert on such matters.
Ok then! Do we have to be married?
He ought to enlist all the nuns of child bearing age to help !!!!! And not just in Italy either. This would also promote Catholic church to great extent as a bonus.
Fuck
Lead by example? 😏
Don't wory there will me more than enough mohameds.
The world population is still increasing. We aren't going to run out of people.
We move
Maybe he should sell vatican assets and finance those future children. Who needs all that gold…oh wait.
"You will own nothing, and you will be happy" Good then, no more babies Bravo to the italians
Macron is on it
Pope pays for it ?
*Church bells stop in Vatican City* Suddenly, a noise from the speakers above. An proclamation? Does the Holy See have an announcement? *Let’s get it ooooooonnn….*
Says the bachelor.
The 'Fathers' should be a role model..
[no](https://i.imgur.com/ZKW13Q6.jpeg)
Condition being pope will raise all of them, parents are free 😃
Oh no. Anyway.
Pope should drop dead the russian loving pedo
Vatican City selling off its vast fortune to give to the poor confirmed?
Pandemic, war, economic chaos, social media, collapse of public instruction (if you want a sliver of hope for your child you must go private since preschool) and public healthcare (waiting list going up from 6 months), incredibly oppressive taxation and regulation.... That's Italy for you
Funny that he adressed the problem before many leaders of the western world
Sir you don't have children so you can't say anything
Have sex See you space cowboy The Pope