Wonder whether the loss of jobs to “computerization” will balance out the loss of population. Worrisome for a consumer based economy. There’s plenty of money out there but its distribution isn’t optimal. Given that people won’t willingly get rid of their comforts, they can raise salaries and increase stability to make it comfortable to have and care for children.

Define “computerization” as you wish.

I hadn’t considered that, but it’s a great point. If we have more automation and less jobs available, perhaps we need to stop looking at populations in the lens of the past.

Automation seems to be outpacing drops in population (which due to lifespans lag drops in reproduction rates) by a good chunk.

My instinct has been that decline in birthrate is directly connected to the distribution of wealth, at least in the US.

Boomers could afford a house and 6 kids on one person’s salary.

Today both parents need to work just to afford the basics, let alone child care and food. That economic pressure has to have some affect on birthdate.

Salaries were probably equal to or better. Far, far less stuff to spend money on. Houses were (way) smaller and less featureful. Kids were self-amusing and out of the house in packs all day.

Price per sqft has risen 60% and median housing price has dramatically outpaced median income.

https://brilliantmaps.com/us-houses-prices-1950-2024/