Guest Post From Europa: Demographic Figures

Today’s post are some talks and demographic figures compiled by a European reader who wishes to remain anonymous. I haven’t watched the videos, so I can’t guarantee their content.

Remember, we are willing to accept guest posts as long as they are readable, on-topic, and provide some value.

UN figures 2010 European women 1.5
Greece 1.4,
Spain 1.4,
Portugal, 1.3,
Italy 1.3,
Germany 1.3
Ireland 2.1
Europeans over 65 up to 2030 up 40%
Nothing changes by 2040 2 workers per retiree

1900 25% World population in Europe
2050 7%
29 countries, including 12 EU countries Fertility Rate below Replacement Level
Germany 82m – 71m
By 2050 number of 16 – 64 year olds in Europe declined 20%
By 2050 EU Short of 35m workers
Same period South Asia workforce up 50%
Same period Central Africa workforce tripled.
At present there are more people over 65 than under 16 in the UK.
In the EU now 4 workers per pensioner.
By 2050 2 workers per pensioner.
In the US 10,000 Baby Boomers are retiring every day and Social Security has an $80 BILLION deficit.
Germany 80m today four generations 10m.
Scotland extinct within 5 generations.
In Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore the birth rate is falling towards 1.0 meaning a 50% population fall per generation. Not even the Black Death had such a catastrophic impact.
Germany 1.41 children per woman
USA 2.06,
Sweden 1.67,
Spain 1.48,
In the USA there will be more people by 2050 over 80 that under 15.
There are more pets, especially dogs, than children in Japan.
Lee Kwan Yew Singapore elder statesman, unless things change there will be no more original citizens.
Japan current trends Government estimates population 2012 121m today 48m 2112.
60 years of age +
Japan 42%
Germany 38%
These figures assume that Japan and Germany’s birth rate will increase.
Russian population decline.

143m today 2030 10% less

EU today & 2050 750m

Spain today 46m 2050 48m through immigration
Italy today 61m 2050 62m through immigration

Germany today 82m 2025 79m
Minus 0.02% Growth Rate
Half the population 44 or younger
1.4 children per woman
21% over 65
Contraceptive use 66%
Life Expectancy 80

Fertility has declined by 50% last 50 years.

Over 90 countries have sub-replacement fertility rates.

During the lifetime of today’s young people the World’s population will start to decline.

The US is the ONLY developed country with a healthy fertility rate.
UN Population office.
Latvia 1.3
Romania 1.3
Andorra 2.13
Spain 1.3
Lithuania 1.3,
Italy 1.3,
Hungary 1.3,
San Marino 2.13
Bosnia 1.3
Germany 1.3,
Russia 1.3,
Japan 1.3,
Armenia 1.3,
Croatia 1.3,
Singapore 1.4,
Estonia 1.4
Austria 1.4
Lichtenstein 1.4
Switzerland 1.4
Portugal 1.5
Georgia 1.5
Czech Republic 1.2
Slovakia 1.2
Slovenia 1.2
Republic of Korea 1.2
Moldova 1.2
Bulgaria 1.2
Belarus 1.2
Greece 1.3
Poland 1.3

In Russia 140 deaths for 100 births
Russia today 145M 2045 70M

Latvia more deaths than births 1989 – 2002 13% population decrease.

Within a generation this situation will unfold throughout Europe.

Since 1970 immigrants and their children have prevented decline in the US population. By 2040 the world population, according to one UN estimate, will start to decline.

World population around 2065 will peak and then start to decline.

The US workforce will remain stagnant over the next two decades.

The EU work force will decline after 2040 indefinitely, as far as demography can see.

The number of Europeans 30 – 40 will decline significantly, by 15% – 20% possibly, in the coming decades.

By 2050 every region of the World will have a significantly higher proportion of older people.

US 3 workers per retiree today by 2030 2 workers per retiree.

As of 2010 the working age population of all the rich countries combined has already started to shrink, see birth rates.
1.78 Norway,
1.74 Finland
1.74 Denmark,
1.68 Holland.

Since 1990 60% of US population growth has come from immigrants and their children. This figure is 80% in Europe.

Population Loss by 2050

Russia 57m 40%
Germany 32.5M 40%
Italy 26.5m 46%
Ukraine 22m 48%
Spain 21m 46%
Poland 18.5m 46%
UK 14m 25%
Czech Republic 5m 50%
Belarus 4.8m 50%
Austria 4m 41%
Serbia 3m 41%
Switzerland 2.9m 38%
Bosnia 2.3m 50%
Lithuania 1.8m 50%

Average 611 divide 14 = 44%

Mexico 6.8 children per woman 1970 and 2.3 today.


  1. Frankly I’m rather tired of natalism hysteria. The US for example has 40 million people who depend on the State to eat. That suggests 40 million people more than they social arrangement can support at the minimum.

    Even so the US does not have a healthy fertility rate. It has mass immigration and using adjusted figures, its little better off than the more fertile regions of Europe. More importantly, the caliber of most immigrants is quite low. They are generally Low IQ, Low impulse control persons with no cultural interest in education. US White death rates have exceeded birth rates for 3 years now.

    Its the same in both countries though at least for the US our immigrant flood though larger is mostly Christian, nominally.

    An example, just today I had to return some butter I as I found someone had pried up the lid, worked it open and licked the butter and than replaced it. This kind of vandalism is the norm around here in California and yes most it is done by immigrants and or the children of same do to child rearing customs which are basically no discipline till 13 or so …

    Its utterly incompatible with a complex high trust society and the seams are already showing.

    Also re: fertility rates. They are directly tied to youth unemployment and underemployment . Simply people can’t have children if they don’t have money. U6 (under and unemployment) is around 35% or so in much of Europe. This figure shows the trend from 2011 when the economy is better.

    This also does not show how many people have full time work but little prospect for a comfortable life and live hand to mouth or make an income so low that say housing in a safe decent area is sketchy. I’d guess that is a total of around 50% in most of the places, probably 75% in Greece.

    Its not that different here, around 35-45%$ and we have undischargable student loan debt too.

    Now people do want children, birth rates are sky high considering the economy but a lot of people are no longer willing to make more slaves for an elite that cares nothing for them anyway. Why should they?

    In the end its not a values issues, though better values would help but two other things, too many immigrants and too little money

    A heavily urbanized population of law abiding technically adroit citizens is expensive and people are only fertile at a limited number of years. If they don’t have steady work or the likelihood of it from the age of the 1st child (22-25) and another 18 years or so, they will have less children. Its not more complicated.

    So if you are ready to have a somewhat stable population, kick out most of the immigrants and fix the economy.

    And yes I said stable, the world is too crowded to support more people and with automation the labor demand isn’t there, Put a kiosk in a restaurant and you have one less baby. Every machine you install means one less citizen being born and every time you pander to Globalists and Neo-Liberals obsessed with money you has might as well shoot one Westerner and import two Muslims .

    The long and short of of it “Mo’ Money. Mo’ Homogeneity Mo’ kids” and if the social and economic models we have can’t support it, kiss modernity good by and enjoy Sharia Law and barbarism. Its no more complicated than that.

    And i know, not one person likes it but that stability is king, stable work means larger families.

    if after the hard work is done and the population is allowed to decline to a supportable level and populations are still falling, well then we can talk about a moral hectoring campaign.

    or if you want a catch phrase, Stop Complaining and Start Paying

  2. Publicizing this information widely is a good way to promote Reaction. People don’t generally like being the victims of genocide. More people need to be woken up.

    Anyhow population decline is good for us, because it marks the contraction of economies and usually political destabilization, making the political environment more favorable to Reactionary ideas. We won’t save all of Europe, that’s unrealistic, but we may yet rescue a large chunk of it.

  3. The US for example has 40 million people who depend on the State to eat. That suggests 40 million people more than they social arrangement can support at the minimum.

    That is terrible reasoning on so many levels. Clearly, our economy can support them (otherwise, there would be absolutely no way for them to be fed at all). Furthermore, if we reformed our entitlement programs and laws to better incentivize productive family life, then these 40 million people would actively contribute to the economy instead of passively leach off of it. The fact that we can afford to let 40 million people be utterly dependent on the state for the most basic necessities is a sign of incredible health and resilience in the face of what should forebode imminent doom. No matter how healthy we are, though, we cannot survive that forever, as even the most healthy body will eventually succumb to unchecked disease.

    Also re: fertility rates. They are directly tied to youth unemployment and underemployment . Simply people can’t have children if they don’t have money. U6 (under and unemployment) is around 35% or so in much of Europe. This figure shows the trend from 2011 when the economy is better.

    This, however, is a very important point, and one that shows the need to strengthen the family as a cultural ideal. The reason this is the case is because often these young people voluntarily forgo better financial options because they want to live the single life they see on sitcoms like How I Met Your Mother and other such cultural rot that actively perverts our morals and ideals.

    Most young people have parents who are wealthy enough to support them, at least to some degree. Staying at home is often viewed as a last resort, but I think young people would be far better off if they stayed at home and saved up their money until marriage. I see no reason for that not to be a general course of action, barring good reason (for instance, no economic opportunities where your parents live). This both helps the family as a center for economic opportunity and activity, it creates generational wealth by allowing people to have large seed monies from staying home and saving 50%+ of their income over the course of a few years.

    And yes I said stable, the world is too crowded to support more people and with automation the labor demand isn’t there, Put a kiosk in a restaurant and you have one less baby.

    Baloney. We can still feed the poor people of Africa and Asia. There is a lot of land left to be claimed in the name of agriculture and human civilization. An acre can support a whole family if you plant the right crops on it and have a dairy cow, and we have 7+ billion acres of arable land on planet earth, not to mention our engineering capabilities mean we can claim more and more over time, and we wouldn’t even have to start spreading ourselves into genuine natural wonders for a long, long time to come. One thing we would have to do, though, is stop having false guilt for living and subduing the earth, which the leftists feed us from youth. Also, recolonize Africa so some law and order can get some of the most fertile and resource rich land in the world out of the hands of dictators and petty warlords who do absolutely nothing constructive with it.

  4. nathanjevans, welfare reform won’t help without heavy economic controls. Wages in the US have been arbitraged down by 50% of the relative GDP since 1974 by open trade and automation.

    Those controls would have to exist to prevent externalizing wage costs to China or Africa and so that a single income earner could support a family . In the end though they would only be partially useful .

    Its getting easier and easier to replace every form of labor with a machine. If robots make goods, robots load good , robots move goods, robots drive the truck and take them to a store where robots ( cameras with analytic software really) watch the customers who check out at a kiosk, who is going to buy the goods?

    Yes a few guys will be needed here and there but if you do a little research, the number of people in the workforce is at an all time low and while it has some ability to go up with trade control, its never going to be 40 hours for every guy and some women and part time for kids and retirees ever again.

    This means 30 hour work weeks at high wages and you still have high unemployment. I can promise you no business will go along with that except with high coercion.

  5. Apologies to my host but this is a two part reply for reading clarity.

    Re: saving money till marriage, agreed but 100% of very little is very little and if it takes too long (past 25 or so) to accumulate the necessary resources, you’ll have much smaller families. Run the numbers, if a women wants many children she must be married and stable at a younger age. Fertility bricks after 30 or so as does a woman’s desirability in marriage.

    Also the West is highly secular, its always been , most people want to enjoy the wealth they earned on themselves, its natural and healthy as we are not slaves of the church or the state. As such people are going to spend some money and wages and incomes must take that into account.

    Its not possible for everyone to save all the time anyway, without spending there is no demand for labor. Its called the problem of surplus production and Marx or not its a real problem. Its why Japan can’t grow. They make too much for people to buy and can’t stop making it and have people eat . The rational approach is exactly what they doing, lower birth rate, keep immigration controlled until the population declines enough to meet the expected work . Its what we should do in the West too if we can’t find another solution.

    Re: Africa and land . Who is this we kemosabe? There is no White Man’s or Christian man’s burden and we don’t need the trouble. Nigeria right now has about as many young people as the entire EU anyway and they have the Maxim Gun (well AK’s same dif) unlike last time.

    We could control our border access with troops and boats and cut off aid but that is the limit we can do and it won’t stop China from meddling. They have costs they want to externalize too.

    Also Asia is having population reduction too and still outnumbers us vastly. Some places have nukes.

    Lastly re: poverty, Its relative to the society in which you live.

    let me ask you this, if you were sent to a cell in a maximum security prison with three meals a day, a small window out, clothes, one hour human contact on a screen a bible and one book would you see yourself as rich?

    Technically compared to many poor homeless people you have everything provided yet you are a prisoner and utterly impoverished.

    Poverty is relative and a society that creates billionaires means that they guy with an apartment and no car or prospects is poor. Its a higher bar but more overall wealth means larger wealth is still poverty . Having a TV is not enough when TV’s are dirt cheap,

    For low impulse control types not much can be done for them but many of the new poor are really former working or middle class who with stable families (something I agree needs to be fixed pronto) would be far more productive. However outsourcing and machines mean they are superfluous.

    we must fix that and just providing the basics is failure and using people as conscripts so they breed is at best disgusting . Its evil simply. Now I’m not opposed to a civilian conservation core doing useful work but its not shovel and pick work. We have bulldozers and backhoes and those machines mean we need less labor,

    No matter what is done we will have to pay for a middle class, maybe limit the uppers and fix the marriage system to help the poor.

    One alternative would be Distributism, G.K. Chesterton was a proponent of this approach. Basically it tweaks the incentives to distribute wealth not hoard it and not give it to the State. Its a third way we haven’t tried and a network of nations under these systems that traded mostly with each other might work well. It won’t be perfect but it might fix the issues at hand.

    If it doesn’t the smart play is to pull a Japan, forbid even reverse immigration and allow the population to shrink for a few decades. I suspect assuming we keep thing in decent repair after 3 or 4 decades and actual population decline it will stabilize in a more conservative sound national approach with cheaper land and easier conditions to raise families,

    It almost certainly won’t stay 1.5 forever and as long as nations are homogeneous, its not going to be any real issue.

  6. Machines will be able to do a lot of stuff for us for sure, but there is an end to that. At some point it would no longer be economically viable because there would be no one to buy stuff if every job is taken over by a machine. Furthermore, keeping wages low for certain jobs will keep robotic competition out. Fast food restaurants won’t be entirely automated for some time at least because it’s cheaper to pay someone minimum wage than get a machine to do it. In any case, this the fifth mechanization the Western Economy has been through in the past 1,000 years (there were two agricultural revolutions, and two industrial revolutions): We will adjust just like we did in the other four.

    Unlike the other four, though, our social milieu is utterly terrible. I see no economic reason why we should be utterly unable to meet the demand for jobs, so social and policy factors must be the issues then. These lie at the root of the problem regarding readjustment to new economic conditions. Our society has pretty much become suicidal as a group. It has lost the will to live, which I think is obviously due to the societal abandonment of orthodox religion. If we had the will, I do not think we’d be facing anywhere near the amount of problems we do.

    For instance, freeing all those low end jobs for machines does also free up a labor pool for conscription into massive public works projects. For instance, we could help the California water crisis by conscripting all those unemployed and start blasting away at the Cascade Mountains until there is an aqueduct all the way down the West Coast. Seriously, we should cut the food stamps and tell them we’ll give them the same money if they’re willing to go do that. Machines won’t be able to do that kind of work for the foreseeable future. Notably, these kinds of massive public works are what governments endeavored back in the first and second industrial revolutions with their massively displaced working male populations. This is one reason modern liberal democracy is so terrible as a form of government: There can’t be political capital for this as long as idiots think they can get something for nothing by voting for the right person.

    Also, the simpler these machines get, the more we can afford to have low intelligence folks watch them, which means we can build more factories to produce more things because we won’t need as many engineers to do the same jobs. This process can happen while the low intelligence workers are off building the Great Pacific Aqueduct or some other such great project.

    Run the numbers, if a women wants many children she must be married and stable at a younger age. Fertility bricks after 30 or so as does a woman’s desirability in marriage.

    That’s why males must be the primary drivers. Women can’t afford to spend too long preparing for life: They should start family life young.

  7. @ If robots make goods, robots load good , robots move goods, robots drive the truck and take them to a store where robots ( cameras with analytic software really) watch the customers who check out at a kiosk, who is going to buy the goods?


  8. Exfernal, taking that article at face value, 34% unemployment is incredibly destructive to social well being. There is no reason that 34% should have any loyalty to the existing system and plenty they should shack up with a batter offer. Radical Islam as the Communists did would be happy to fill the gaps and that is an awful awful thought,

    Even so I think its a good chunk bunk, look at middle class birth rates, they are in the dumper since to get into the middle class requires a huge capital investment in education. Its approaching in some areas the cost of a house, paid in full.

    Also a lot of middle class jobs are on the block too. jobs like tax preparation and travel planning and a lot of other things can be done better, faster and cheaper by computers or sometimes outsourced.

    So even if the optimistic figures in that article are true, we are screwed unless we have stable work.

    This may mean a medieval style economy full of guilds, cartels, regulation, licensing and heavy enforcement of inefficiency. Its not appealing but if the option is an end to society anyway , better half a loaf than none.

  9. Demographic constriction is not a catastrophe in itself. It becomes it only if accompanied by large-scale immigration. I bet that Japan will endure despite becoming smaller demographically.

    I look forward to advances in male birth control. That plus stopping subsidizing kids for welfare recipients would keep the lid on upcoming changes.

  10. Exfernal, I agree with you 100% on it not being a catastrophe and for the same reasons.

    It took me a while to figure it out but a good part of the reason for the lunatic idea of mass immigration is of course the “Enlightenment” and “Globalism” stupidity that plagues our societies, its our real underlying religion and when you throw in the lust for growth and the need to externalize costs (wages and ecology for business and the Economic Liberals and the actual cost of good governance leading to election for Leftist parties) it explains the absolute lunacy of mass immigration. No sane society would do that however if you take the nut-ball religious ideologies of universalism and the externalization, mass immigration is actually logical. Well for crazy people anyway.

    However re: Male Birth Control, basically yes however the net result will probably be even more immigration since doubling down on stupidity is the only thing the elite know, once the out of wedlock babies stop and populations starts to crash the only thing left is more natal immigrants who don’t use birth control.

    This will be interesting since the only groups left are Africans and many are virulent Muslims so you may end up importing Boko Haram and ISIS in a vein attempt to keep the system afloat. They’ll start with African Christians though this may not occur if the economy keeps going the way it is, anti mass immigration parties and candidates start winning or in the US if there is a civil war in between

  11. The demographic decline is disturbing to traditionalists because it violates the norms of a historically healthy society. Also, childless people we know tend to be selfish and vile. We are in a unique position in history however, where the planet is actually pretty full. There are those that argue against this but continued population expansion means a planet of favelas and garbage dumps supplied by factory farming. The trick will be defending our soil until the decline hits Africa (if it ever does).
    Neoreaction should be giving much more thought to the impending crisis of joblessness from automation. We should be thinking more about why government assistance has been so socially corrosive and about ways to improve it.

Leave a Reply