Ministers are fretting about Britain’s falling birthrate. Here’s why it could be a good thing | Larry Elliott
forAck in the early seventies of the twentieth century when he was a major singer, a few of his fans expected Road Stewart to be connected to Maggie May to Glastonbury after more than half a century. A long time ago, the days in which rock stars were hoping to die before they were old. Instead, 80 -year -old rock stars symbolize the fact that Britain and other advanced economies have a number of population. Women have later children in life and have fewer than them.
Politicians began to worry that the number of people of work age has a decrease in a growing number of retirees. Only this week, the Minister of Education, Bridget Philipson, said that the expanded fall was “worrying repercussions” and that. She was hoping for that Be able to facilitate women have children.
This may seem a source of curious concern, given that the population of the UK has increased from less than 60 million at the beginning of the millennium to 67.2 million by 2022, and it is expected to rise by 5 million others by 2032. However, the fertility rate in England and Wales – the number of live births for each woman – is less than 1.44 years, which is the lowest record since 1938 and if this trend continues and a clear decrease Deportation, the number of people in the UK will eventually start declining.
Many are clear. Less pronounced is what policy makers, if anything, do fertility rates. The answer may not be a good thing. The decrease in the population is not a disaster. It may even be a good thing.
Certainly, the Prime Minister in Hungary, Victor Urban, does not agree to this conclusion. Thus was the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, and the Italian Prime Minister, Georgia Meloni. Italy has a tax exempt from taxes-aChild rewardFor women to have children. Macron has a plan for France Demographic armament. In 2019, Hungary offered women a A loan of 30,000 euros (26,000 pounds) This will be not subject to the case if there are three or more children. The chances of the United Kingdom matching this level of generosity, given the strains of public financial affairs, unlimited.
However, the evidence from the countries that already struck the panic button due to the low population is not encouraging. Fertility rates in Italy, France and Hungary are still much lower than 2.1 despite the financial induction. This is because the factors that persuade women to delay the birth of children-or not to have children at all-are stronger than government tax exemptions or benefits-free loans.
Do not make mistakes, these are welcome changes. Women are educated better than they were ever. More of them go to university, so they have the ability to secure interesting jobs and good payment. It is not surprising that the job progress for many of them is precedence over birth in the twenties. The days when families were finally dependent on one male bread – and something good as well.
It is also difficult for women who want to start a family at a younger age. House prices have increased to home ownership rates between children between the ages of 25 and 34 A decrease from 59 % to 39 % Since 2000, rents have increased sharply.
Looking at all this, it is difficult to see a lot of the future of Pronatalist policies in the United Kingdom. The fact is that Britain’s demographic makeup will change in the coming decades as people live longer and that fertility rates are still much lower than 2.1. If net immigration is less than recent years, the budget responsibility office believes The population can be less than 1.2 million In 2072 it was in 2022.
Is this really a big problem? This economist David Miles – one of OBR’s economic and financial expectations – says no. In a modern paper, he argues that the disaster about the shrinking of the population is “”BANKUM“.
This is partly, because the world’s population is expected to continue to grow for upcoming decades, which increases the pressure on the environment and the speed of climate collapse. It is not logical to adopt policies designed to increase fertility rates when the UK is a crowded island in a densely populated world.
But this is also the case that combining the population of aging and falling gently may lead to high levels of living. The elderly tends to save more and this means that the capital rate for the worker will increase. In other words, there will be fewer workers but they can be more productive.
GDP is measured, the economy will be smaller, but the gross domestic product of each head – a much better luxury measure – will increase. There will be less congestion on the roads, less pressure on public services and less housing competition. Japan already has aging and shrinking the population and it seems that it adapts to fine.
Certainly, political changes in Britain are still needed. If there are fewer young people, this is bad for the economy in addition to a waste of individual capabilities for them not to work. To this extent, the motive behind the government’s failed government reforms is logical. The child’s care should be more affordable and changes to retirement age may be needed to extend the work life of those who are able to do so.
But it is not imperative that the decrease in the population is bad for the economy. It will definitely be useful for the planet.
