What we now know is that, yes, there is a world population crisis, but it is quite the opposite to the one which the contraception-sterilisation-abortion lobby, the media and so many politicians have been talking about, often hysterically, since World War II; and in large measure it is precisely agencies such as UNFPA and IPPF who are responsible for this new and terrifying crisis, the real crisis, which threatens our world. That crisis is the threat of demographic implosion.
To achieve ‘zero growth’, that is, a static population that is neither growing nor declining, every woman should produce 2.1 children. In the Third World (e.g., Mali, where 1 child in 5 dies under 5 years) the replacement rate has to be higher.
Today, in developed countries the situation can be described as catastrophic. In Italy in 1998 the female fertility rate was a mere 1.19. The Wall Street Journal called the Italian crisis ‘apocalyptic’1. In Spain, the situation is even worse: the average is 1.18 children per woman. In the United Kingdom and France the rate is around 1.75. Not too bad? Better than Spain and Italy (not to mention Greece and Germany). Nonetheless the next generation will be 20 per cent down on the present one. Spain and Italy will be 40 per cent down2. But does ‘less worse’ mean ‘all right’?
The European Union as a whole has a 1.4 child/woman rate. Do we really think that the EU has a bright future?
Now look beyond Europe. Canada’s rate is 1.6 (Quebec’s much worse). Even the US has only 2.0 and this largely because of Hispanic immigration. And on the other side of the Pacific is Japan, ‘desperate for a baby-boom’, and China, where the law restricts each family to one child per woman - with enforced abortion and sterilisation and female infanticide resulting in a society which has some 120 boys for every 100 girls3. So much for women’s liberation. And what will this lead to - polyandry (women having several husbands), sex wars? [....snip] LifeIssues.net
One of the immediate effects of this "population implosion" is that when people entering the labor force today are ready to retire and draw on their Social Security Benefits, there will be none. Social Security is essentially a "pay as you go system." 40 years from now, there will be far fewer people entering the job market and paying into Social Security for their parents and grandparents. Social Security taxes might have to exceed the income tax rate, with no deductions.One practical method of raising funds for the future would be to tax abortions, prescription contraceptives and condoms. Put the money in a special fund to pretend that it is the contribution of those that never had the opportunity to contribute to the social security system.