[BrainInAJar]

other than to ensure a cheap exploitable workforce, who cares? Why is it a bad thing?

[gettodachoppa]

If it was done as a desired choice rather than it being driven by economic fears, you're right, we shouldn't care. But for most people, they aren't having kids because they don't have a house, they don't have a stable partner (tangentially tied to economic needs), they just don't have money to raise kids.

With supply and demand, you'd expect a decline in workers would mean higher wages down the line. But the ruling class will always make sure there is endless immigration and free trade agreements to keep the average citizen broke and miserable.

[clipsy]

> If it was done as a desired choice rather than it being driven by economic fears, you're right, we shouldn't care. But for most people, they aren't having kids because they don't have a house, they don't have a stable partner (tangentially tied to economic needs), they just don't have money to raise kids.

Do you have data to back up this assertion? My understanding is that the poor still have the highest birth rate in the US.

[bigyikes]

The economy is predicated on future growth, so if growth slows due to lack of workforce, bad things may happen. Social programs become insolvent. It becomes difficult to take care of an aging population.

(Not sure what makes you say “cheap and exploitable”, are future generations somehow more exploitable than current or past generations?)

[thefz]

> The economy is predicated on future growth

Then change the economy to a more sustainable version of itself instead of predicating that people must multiply themselves to make another rich asshole even richer. Problem solved.

[knighthack]

Which goes back to the argument on constant growth. Why is there such a need for that?

[piva00]

The economical system we live under is predicated on future growth. The economy can have different forms, it's the exploitative way of economy that demands future growth, perhaps we should be looking into a different way to organise the economy that caters for the inevitable future where we won't have constant population growth to support the system.

[timeon]

> economy is predicated on future growth

But this is the problem. We already know with climate, that there is limit to the growth anyway.

[defrost]

Poor predicate in the long term. If earth based human population continues to grow bad things happen.

Basing success on always being able to find a fresh mark perhaps isn't sustainable.

[tuatoru]

This is a reasonable question[1] and does not deserve to be downvoted. Upvoted to compensate.

1. Assuming you didn't study economics or anthropology or sociology.