The coming Population Collapse

Just wondered how aware everyone is that this is coming. With immigration being such a hot topic in numerous countries, it surprises me that this doesn’t get more air time — but it feels like one of the biggest shifts on the horizon:
We’re not facing a population explosion anymore. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. We’re heading into a global population slowdown — and in many places, an outright collapse.

Most developed countries are now well below the “replacement level” of 2.1 children per woman (what you need to keep a population stable). Here are some current examples:

South Korea: 0.72 (that’s not a typo — their population is projected to halve)

Japan: 1.3 (shrinking for over a decade now)

Italy: 1.2

UK: around 1.5
Even places like India have now dropped to replacement level — and are expected to fall further.


Why does it matter?

Because fewer births today means fewer workers tomorrow — and more older people to support.
We’re looking at a future of:

Labour shortages in key sectors

More strain on pensions and healthcare

Slower economic growth

Possibly even falling property prices and “ghost towns” in some regions


A lot of countries have kept things balanced through immigration — bringing in younger workers to support ageing populations. But even that may not be enough soon, as birth rates fall everywhere. In the not-too-distant future, we could see countries fighting to attract immigrants, not keep them out.

I’m not making a pitch here for any particular solution — just genuinely interested if this is something others have been thinking about. It’s not a crisis in the loud, news-headline sense, but it’s a quiet shift that could change everything: economies, politics, even culture.

 

This has been happening for a long time. On top of that we have people living longer, with very little quality of life. My twice weekly visits to my Dad's care home testify to this. I love my Dad to bits, but seeing the indignity of his demise is heartbreaking.

Add the loss of funding for nurses to get trained up, and you have ample grounds for anti immigration rhetoric that fills the tabloids. Sad the same people have no real solution. Sadly have to add Starmer to that list now.

 

Part of the A Level Geography curriculum for 20 years…but who listens to Geography teachers?

 

What percentage of people have take A level Georgaphy in the last 20 years.

 

People haven't stopped having children because they don't want them, they've stopped having them because they can't afford them.

Housing costs are the biggest factor, the days when a single salary could support a family are long gone. With both parents having to work you're then looking at nursery fees.

People say UBI is inevitable, but I think it would be a hard sell. Universal Basic Housing would be a better approach, guaranteeing everybody a home at low cost or even free. The private market would still exist for those who don't want to live in a government home, but obviously rents and house prices would fall. By removing the biggest pressure on people's finances they'd be more likely to have children. Even if we don't go to UBH route, the best thing the government could do is build millions more houses and flood the market to stop prices rising further, though you'd upset people if their property values fell, or the rent they could charge for their buy to let dropped.

 

Well, it's obvious what we all need to do. But let's bear in mind the average age profile of posters on here!

 

That’s more or less the position in Scandinavia, along with subsidised/free childcare, but I believe they still have the same low birth rates.

If looking for why there are many possibilities, each of which you could try to tweak to avoid the current path:

• People not meeting
• People not having enough sex
• People not having enough sex without birth control
• People using the morning after pill or abortions as birth control
• People having reduced fertility despite having enough sex without birth control
• People lacking the security of relationships to risk a baby
• People lacking the security of housing to risk a baby
• People lacking the job/economic security to risk a baby
• People lacking the physical space to accommodate a baby
• People wanting no children for environmental reasons
• People wanting no children for societal reasons
• People wanting no children for career reasons
• People wanting no children for lifestyle reasons
• People wanting less than 2.1 children for any of the above

For me the most plausible are the failure to meet, widespread use of birth control, and lack of housing/financial independence.

Cheaper homes/less competition for them would help. However, as above, it’s not the complete answer.

 

I alluded to this in the assisted dying thread - give it 20 years and we'll be in a right pickle. The irony given current political rhetoric is that we'll be fighting other countries to attract immigrants to wipe arses and prop up the huge pension liability (if the state pension still exists).

 

Assisted dying

 

Delayed Parenthood: People are having children later due to education, career focus, or financial reasons.

Changing Role of Women: More women are pursuing higher education and careers, leading to later or fewer births.

Decline of Traditional Family Structures: Marriage rates are falling, and more people are choosing not to have children at all.

Urbanisation: In cities, space is limited and the cost of living is higher, both of which discourage larger families.

Cost of Raising Children: Housing, childcare, education, and general living expenses make having children feel unaffordable.

Job Insecurity: In many countries, especially among younger generations, unstable employment makes long-term planning difficult.

Lack of Family Support Policies: In some places, limited parental leave or child support policies deter people from starting families.

Higher Education Levels: Especially among women, education tends to correlate with fewer children.

Sex Education and Contraception: Better access to contraception and reproductive healthcare enables more control over family size.

Individualism: More people prioritise personal freedom, travel, or careers over parenthood.

Environmental Concerns: Some avoid having children due to fears about overpopulation or climate change.

Mental Health Awareness: Greater recognition of the emotional and psychological demands of parenthood has made some think twice.

Demographic Transition: As societies become wealthier and more developed, they typically go through a shift from high to low birth and death rates.

Digital Connectivity: Online lives and digital companionship may partly reduce the perceived need for traditional family life.

 

Good list that. The world is screwed. I don't know why anyone would want to bring someone in to this world on purpose.

 

Only saving grace is that with AI and technology improving there will be less demand for workers. Heavy labour intensive countries need higher birth rates but less labour intensive ones don't and that seems to be the way the world is moving.

 

AI might be our best hope of adapting. It can fill labour gaps, boost productivity, support elderly care, and even help us make smarter policy decisions. In some areas, it could mean doing more with fewer people.

But AI won’t solve why people are having fewer children. That’s tied to cost of living, job security, housing, and societal values. We still need major social reform — AI can only support, not replace, that shift.

 

That's true but does it fully need to replace the shift? The world is largely over populated and we are killing the planet because so many people need too many resources that is unsustainable so is there really a need to reverse the trend and try to keep the population as it is if the technology is there so that it isn't needed?

 

The pension/healthcare model will have to change before the reduced birth rates start to bite. If AI truly is the end of non-manual (and some manual) jobs then we’ll be moving to a ‘no-work’ society quicker than we think.

The question I can’t get my head around is who is going to pay for AI?

 

Yeah, I get what you're saying — loads of people do think the world’s overpopulated and that having fewer people would ease the pressure on the planet. But it’s a bit more complicated than that.

The planet can support more people — it’s just that we’re not managing things well. It’s not really about the number of people, but about how we live and how unevenly we use resources. The top 10% of the world cause most of the emissions, while loads of people barely use anything and are still hit hardest by climate change.

So it’s not just a case of “less people = better.” It’s more about fixing the systems — how we produce, consume, and waste stuff. AI might help with that by making things more efficient, but it won’t magically fix the deeper issues on its own.

 

Whilst being well above the average age profile on here, I've done my bit population wise and my kids are busy contributing too. However the elephant in the room in all the various discussions on the future of the planet is the fact that there are already too many people on it, hence also the number of wars over land and resources.
Let the current downward trend continue, I'll take my chance on the level of care I might get, and if they hurry up with the assisted dying legislation I'll do my bit again if I need to.

 

I don't know enough about it at all but the only question I have is if we can make things more efficient so that we don't need such a high population then why do we necessarily want such a high population just because if we made better use of our resources we could theoretically sustainably support it?

 

While the global population trending down might not be a bad thing, the truth is we’re not actually overpopulated. Wars over resources have been happening for centuries — even when there were far fewer people around.

The real issue isn’t numbers, it’s that we still struggle to work together beyond our own tribes and national borders. That’s what keeps causing problems, not just how many of us there are.