Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Europe's troubles are due to their being a geriatric continent.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:28 AM
link   
I have been living in Europe for the last 5 years. I have noticed something, and to my surprise have had it proven by scholarly studies and statistics.

Europe is growing old. The birth rates in Europe have been in decline for many years. I know many will say that it is a good thing, but consider this, Europe cannot grow if its population of young people doesn't. You need people to replace the current ones working, producing, ect. They are having less kids than other countries and not even enough to keep their current infrastructure viable in the next couple decades.

I think it is a product of modern day socialism. People want to live life and enjoy themselves. Our grandparents generation of sacrifice and purpose centered around the family life has changed. The entitlement mentality has led to many people working, not to create security for their family they have no plans on making, but rather to travel and enjoy life. A little selfish IMO. They look to have kids in Europe after 40+ years of age. When they have had their fun. The result is in one child per couple. sometimes, their bodies are simply past the child bearing age.

Then you have to consider the need for immigration to offset the lack of labor. You then have a HUGE problem. Your countries change as the new influx of people come in to occupy jobs your kids will not because you will want them to get an education and have a cushy job. Sounds good right? Well yes, the problem is that there is then no one left to take the necessary manual labor jobs your kids are too good to work in.

Then the entitlement mentality sets in. If you can't find a job in your field of work, you go on unemployment until you find a job that fits into your skill set. So you get a financial crisis and all of a sudden everyone with a college education is out of work and collecting unemployment, expensive unemployment. You also have most immigrants working and making money.

What happens is social tensions as one group is producing and the other is eating itself up slowly over time.

In countries where birth rates have stayed the same you see relatively good recover. Nothing great, but they can hold their own. Ireland, France, ect. Have an average birth rate of 2.+ per female. In places where you see a birth rate of 1.2 /1.5 you see a major decline.


here is a great article I found, much to my surprise that correlates what I am saying.


What's Really Behind Europe's Decline? It's The Birth Rates, Stupid

The labor demonstrators, now an almost-daily occurrence in Madrid and other economically-devastated southern European cities lambast austerity and budget cuts as the primary cause for their current national crisis. But longer-term, the biggest threat to the European Union has less to do with government policy than what is–or is not–happening in the bedroom.

In particular, southern Europe’s economic disaster is both reflected — and is largely caused by — a demographic decline that, if not soon reversed, all but guarantees the continent’s continued slide. For decades, the wealthier countries of the northern countries — notably Germany — have offset very low fertility rates and declining domestic demand by attracting migrants from other countries, notably from eastern and southern Europe, and building highly productive export oriented economies.

In contrast, the so-called Club Med Countries– Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain–have not developed strong economies to compensate for their fading demographics outside pockets of relative prosperity such as Milan. Spain was once one of Europe’s star performers, buoyed largely by real estate speculation and growing integration with the rest of the EU. Six years ago the country was building upwards of 50% as many houses as the US while having 85% less population. Roughly six million immigrants came to work in the boom, even as roughly seven to eight percent of Spaniards preferred to remain unemployment.

www.forbes.com...

Another thing I have considered is the impact that the lack of new ideologies can have on a society. I see Europe as stagnant. Stuck in its ways that cannot adapt to the world changing around them. They are worshipers of tradition and "the way it is". They cannot adapt because most of them are well into their mid life and are more concerned with their mortality and their legacy. They have lost the vigor of life's challenge and want things to go the way they have been accustomed to.

The youth is also affected. They are not in their element. I see them as being aged willingly and prematurely. Their parents for the most part are too old to understand the nuances of youth culture and too tired to keep up.

Their parents are concerned with what Florida couples already retired are concerned with. Decorating the home, making appearances to their social circles, and just looking for ease and rest.

Their youth is very frustrated and out of touch with their elders. I see this as a huge problem for Europe. SO much so that I think it is too far gone. They will bitterly, stubbornly, and incorrectly hold onto power as the youth is increasingly divided from their elders. There is a total lack of communication amongst what little youth there is and their "parents world". They have a deep seeded problem in Europe of their base not being at all in accord with their respective heads.

They don't want to change, and still adore the entitlement mentality. They still look to live life and enjoy themselves, the consequences be damned and the responsibility be shifted to another sap.

I see big trouble for geriatric Europe.

They are tired and old.
Thoughts?

www.nytimes.com...

epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu...

www.indexmundi.com...

en.wikipedia.org...


Across Europe, birth rates are falling and family sizes are shrinking. The total fertility rate is now less than two children per woman in every member nation in the European Union (see Figure 1). As a result, European populations are either growing very slowly or beginning to decrease.

At the same time, low fertility is accelerating the ageing of European populations. As a region, Europe in 2000 had the highest percentage of people age 65 or older — 15 percent. According to data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, this percentage is expected to nearly double by 2050.[1]

These demographic trends portend difficult times ahead for European economies. For example, a shrinking workforce can reduce productivity. At the same time, the growing proportion of elderly individuals threatens the solvency of pension and social insurance systems. As household sizes decrease, the ability to care for the elderly diminishes. Meanwhile, elderly people face growing health care needs and costs. Taken together, these developments could pose significant barriers to achieving the European Union (EU) goals of full employment, economic growth, and social cohesion.

Concern over these trends has sparked intense debate over the most effective policies to reverse them or mitigate their impact. The policy debate has focused on three approaches: (1) promoting increased immigration of working-age people; (2) encouraging more childbearing, especially among younger couples; and (3) reforming social policy to manage the negative consequences of these trends — including measures that could raise the retirement age or encourage more women to join the workforce. To date, this debate has produced more heat than light, and solid research-based evidence to inform the debate remains sketchy. Many aspects of the relationship between national policies and demographic trends are either disputed or not well understood, and it remains difficult to disentangle the effects of specific policy initiatives from the effects of broader social, political, and economic conditions.

www.rand.org...




edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Personally I see an aging society as a good thing. It means that people are living longer, and not having children just to survive.

What would you suggest, that Europeans simply embrace American-style consumerism?



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
the problems in the EU are no different than any where else, you have been raped by the elite and you continue to think they care about you. they steal your lives and in the same sentence tell you how well things are going or that you need to contribute more.

i'm unsure why people cannot see the writing on the wall, i guess it's from being lied to for so long, no one can see the truth any longer.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by lampsalot
 


I would suggest that they not have a huge problem when everyone wants to retire at the same time.

I am saying that they are already seeing the problems of this life style. A failed experiment where they NEED immigration. A problem of their not being able to pay everyone the benefits socialism has promised because no one is producing enough to keep the system afloat.

That is not even touching on the social problems of their average population being out of touch with the modern world and immersed in tradition and so becoming stagnant.



To each his own, but plan ahead, Europe is screwed if it doesn't have more kids. Unless you like seeing most of your businesses and cities being bought up by larger populations from abroad.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


true, but the situation Europe is in doesn't exactly help when there is no one left to challenge the threat. Everyone is just trying to enjoy their last years and not rock the boat.

old men do not make war.

EDIT:
Well they do, but they don't fight it.
Kind of pointless when there is not enough people to send.

They can't risk a large social upheaval. There is no one left with the will or the fight to challenge anyone. Mortality is foremost on their minds right now. Not the future they will not see.
edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by manykapao
 




What you call "geriatric" could be described as a society that is moving - willy nilly - beyond the Darwinian concept of life, so cherished by Fascists of all colours, as solely a biological process, with procreation being the paramount objective.

Every individual must find the meaning and purpose of his or her life by themselves. To do so, takes a lifetime. But very few - certainly of those I know, including myself - would see the continuation of the species as one possible meaning.

Such "soul-searching", an intensified search for meaning, is something that has been enabled by the unprecedented amount of leisure that the peoples of Europe have carved for themselves in the past decades and centuries. And that's a good thing - unless one insists in viewing humans as mere reproduction machines.

Does this create economic problems?
Of course. Which only means the entire economic and social infrastructure has to be redesigned and adapted accordingly. (And it is being done so.)
After all, they exist for the sake of the people, not vice versa.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Vanitas
 


what you call soul searching is what mankind has been doing since its inception. Having more leisure and being disconnected from life is counterproductive when you search for wisdom. Once you find it you rest. You do not find it in repose.

and yes. Male and female sexes are here to make babies, not enjoy leisure.

if everyone before you thought only about their comfort, you would not be here.
edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by manykapao
 
This sounds like an advertisement for Agenda 21 . What happens when you get old and it is happening every day you are moving towards that End of Life Soylent Green ending .Old Henry Kissinger made a bold statement that the Elderly were usless eaters . He is 90 now ! Ooops !



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Yeah, it's just become way too expensive to have children now days.

And it's true what you're saying - people wanna enjoy themselves first. But I think it isn't just about enjoyment it's about the idols people have in the media.

Having kids and struggling to make ends meat every month isn't as attractive as living like celebrity and having endless amounts of sex.

Simple answer is that, in the west, kids just aren't as attractive in say more conservative communities where it was once seen as your duty to get married and have children once you leave school.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by DariusHames
 


my thoughts exactly.

nice avatar.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


I guess he isn't a big fan of Europe...lol

actually agenda 21 wants to reduce world populations. Europe is right on track.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by manykapao
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


true, but the situation Europe is in doesn't exactly help when there is no one left to challenge the threat. Everyone is just trying to enjoy their last years and not rock the boat.

old men do not make war.

EDIT:
Well they do, but they don't fight it.
Kind of pointless when there is not enough people to send.

They can't risk a large social upheaval. There is no one left with the will or the fight to challenge anyone. Mortality is foremost on their minds right now. Not the future they will not see.
edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)


well in my ancestors society and your as well, elders were revered for there experience and wisdom, they taught us how to avoid bad things. perhaps not as many are listening any longer.

the elders are the very beginning point of challenging the threat, because they have seen it before.

you know like the band, the Who says, "lets hope we don't get fooled again." listen to the elders and perhaps you won't.

just more symptoms of an ever degrading society my friend, the structure of which is all wrong.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I think this is proof that our lifestyles are unsustainable . This effect of society that the OP mentions could be one of many from a self destructing society



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


again true. Unless those elders lived a life of leisure and rest and so skipped over the sacrifice of a hard life with many lessons. What I see is a whole range of socialites that talk about THEIR parents or grandparents hardships as if they were their own.

You don't get to be wise from osmosis. You need to live it. Both couples working, raising kids, living life. Challenging themselves and appreciating the little things. These people can't stand going out and things not being perfect.

Like the Buddha. If he stayed the pampered prince he would not be the Buddha, just another nameless prince who lived a meaningless life of ease.

The elderly I speak of, lived in the boom of post WW2, were raised with all sorts of benefits and aid, and with all the comforts they could want. They took vacations when they wanted them, rested when they were tired, and gave up things that were too hard and so interfered with their "life style".

What can I learn from them? How to eat out in style, criticize people´s fashion? How to be an "elegant socialite"?

That brings up something else.

The ones who did suffer life are seen as the filth of society. They are not appreciated for their story. No. You need to be a son of someone, or wife of someone, ect. The rags to riches is seen as an intrusion in Europe. TOO MUCH OLD MONEY.


edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by manykapao
 




what you call soul searching is what mankind has been doing since its inception. Having more leisure and being disconnected from life is counterproductive when you search for wisdom. Once you find it you rest. You do not find it in repose.


It may appear this was being done since time immemorial. And it may have been done - by individuals (of whom, rather interestingly, we know nothing), not on such a mass scale.
Among those whose thoughts we do know practically none were other than men (and some women) of leisure.
Plato never worked (physically) a day in his life.
All philosophers in ancient times were, practically without exception, men of leisure. Wealthy men (and, again, some women). Not slaves. Not craftsmen or tradesmen.

(N.B. I called it "soul searching". Not quite the same thing.
)




and yes. Male and female sexes are here to make babies, not enjoy leisure. if everyone before you thought only about their comfort, you would not be here.


That is your opinion.
Which is perfectly all right - as long as you don't forget that that's what it is: YOUR opinion.

My exploration of life has led me to very different conclusions.




edit on 4-11-2012 by Vanitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Vanitas
 


agree to disagree.

I look at the great philosophers and thinkers, movers and shakers, as opposed to their innumerable contemporary colleagues of their age and they are the only ones who spoke of truth in truth. They all had lives of suffering and plagued with misfortune.

Everyone else, just parroted what they said.

You ever learn about what some duke or prince thought of life? No. You wouldn't be taught dribble.

When you suffer, you grow. When you are in leisure, you shrivel.

again, agree to disagree

edit on 4-11-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
The UK is in Europe, and while I agree the life expectancy of the population is on the rise, everywhere I look kids as young as 14 are spitting out babies left, right and centre......kids with kids, it's shocking to be honest.

(By the way, "geriatric incontinent" would have been a much funnier title
)
edit on 4/11/12 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I'd love to know which thinkers you're thinking about when you're saying "[they] had lives of suffering and plagued with misfortune because as Vanitas said, the vast majority of them spent their life among wealthy figures and didn't have to do anything except teaching rich kids the ways of philosophy or writing.




I think it is a product of modern day socialism. People want to live life and enjoy themselves.


I think you're mixing up things, in every country and every family, people want to live life and enjoy themselves. Last time I checked, the USA and Japan were the world leaders in terms of entertainment yet they are far from being socialists.
Enjoying yourself doesn't mean you won't be able to support your family, I truly don't understand that part to be honest, it doesn't seem to be anything else that personal beliefs.

And last time I checked, immigration covered the birth rate problem.


Then it's a bunch of stories and tales :

Immigrants making money while the natives can't find jobs, worshipers of tradition (I'd love to have an exemple), youngs and adults are divided (what a surprise, it's a 2000 years old news).
People don't want to change, they just want to enjoy themselves (because socialists are lazy I guess, eh ?)

Plus the fact that you're talking about Europe as a whole althrough there are major differences in culture, politics, economy, etc.

At first it looked promising and interesting, too bad you chose that approach.

edit on 4-11-2012 by BobbyTarass because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by manykapao
 


Certainly "leisure" or wealth are by no means a safeguard against misery and suffering - quite the opposite, actually.
Even today, but much more so during my grandparents' and great-grandparents' generations, "you have too much time on your hands" was the most common reply to expressions of personal woe.
(Which is understandable; but it is, ultimately, a cul-de-sac in terms of psychological and spiritual evolution.)

However, I have no problem with agreeing to disagree.







edit on 4-11-2012 by Vanitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
There will be trouble with pensions, so we will have to move the retirement age further and cut the benefits. But otherwise, I dont see the issue with decreasing population. Absolute number of people is not really important for anything. Living standards per capita are.





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join