Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

U.S. Hits Record-Low Birthrates in 2019 With Only 3.75 Million Babies

U.S. Hits Record-Low Birthrates in 2019 With Only 3.75 Million Babies

Statistician Brady Hamilton noted that the researchers noticed “am uptick in births among women in their 40s,” which makes them think “that some births are just being delayed.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_k-Y21CqKE

Stats from the CDC show that America witnessed only 3.75 million births in 2019, which is a new record.

From The Wall Street Journal:

About 3.75 million babies were born in the U.S. in 2019, down 1% from the prior year, provisional figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics showed. The general fertility rate fell 2% to 58.2 births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, its lowest level since the government began tracking the figure in 1909.

The data are the latest sign of how American childbearing, which began declining during the 2007-09 recession, never fully rebounded when the economy bounced back. Millennials have been slower to form families than previous generations, in part, economists say, because they are less financially secure than those before them.

“There are a lot of people out there who would like to have two children, a larger family, and there’s something going on out there that makes people feel like they can’t do that,” said Melanie Brasher, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Rhode Island, who studies fertility.

The numbers took a huge hit mainly from the Hispanic demographic because they “account for nearly a quarter of U.S. births.” They only had around 885,900 babies in 2019.

The teenager portion 5%, which is the most out of all demographics. The teenage birthrate peaked in 1991 but has dropped 73%.

Statistician Brady Hamilton noted that the researchers noticed “am uptick in births among women in their 40s,” which makes them think “that some births are just being delayed.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Katy L. Stamper | May 22, 2020 at 7:15 am

This is so disturbing.

So, foreigners account for 25% of our births? And why?

Because our politicians have subsized them, while taxing our own people to demographic death.

Give loans to young people so that colleges can indulge in spending frenzies of unnecessary administrators, pernicious professors, and lavish buildings…. And young people don’t appreciate how toxic loans are…… It reminds me of college sports. The young men are used, and the adults make the money. The immorality of it appalls me.

Then we import millions of foreigners because they work for cheap, and who OUR children have to compete against.

THEN we saddle our young people with income taxes, social security taxes, unemployment taxes, medicare taxes, worker’s compensation insurance, forms, bureaucracies, KenyanCare and ask then ask them to outperform the cheap foreigners at a lower price.

Can’t be done. We’re cruel to our own, generous to foreigners.

Victor Orban has seen the light and is reversing demography by recognizing that what you subsidize you get more of. They are successfully reversing the situation. We should have done it first. Honestly, the problems are so obvious.

But politicians buy votes by promising all these social programs. Then employers effectively veto them by hiring foreigners. The ying and yang of it disgusts me. Americans can’t see they’re being paid to disappear.

From a tweet:
Ready for some good news? The (much-ridiculed) ?? Hungarian family politics is showing results! in January 2020 9.4 % more births than last year, almost 100% more marriages, and children per woman from 1.4 to 1.6!

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/04/08/exclusive-hungarys-pro-family-policy-working-births-up-9-4-per-cent/

    tom_swift in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | May 22, 2020 at 8:44 am

    So, foreigners account for 25% of our births?

    Are “Hispanics” automatically foreigners?

    “”foreigners account for 25% of our births?””

    That’s not what the quoted part says, although I can’t tell if your comment might reflect something hidden behind the paywall.

    “”Then we import millions of foreigners because they work for cheap, and who OUR children have to compete against.””

    How much would they have to pay your child to pick blueberries all day in 90 degree heat?

Katy L. Stamper | May 22, 2020 at 7:24 am

Here is some of what Hungary is doing — & why? Because having more Hungarians is better than having more muslim immigrants.

Two of the most ambitious of the seven programmes, however, are directed at women. In one scheme, the government will give a loan of ten million Forints ($35,230) to every woman under 40 who marries for the first time.

One third of the loan’s repayment would be waived upon the birth of the first child, further concessions for the second, with the entire loan being written off after the birth of a third child.

The other programme would see women who have raised four or more children being exempt from paying income tax for life.

Other parts of the program:

–extending family housing benefits;
–extending child benefits for the third and subsequent child born to a family;
–introducing a car purchasing programme for large families;
–providing comprehensive daycare; and introducing child care allowance for grandparents who look after their grandchildren.

We could do these for AMERICANS, but Miss Lindsey informs us we have no choice but to import the foreigners that tell us constantly they despise us.

What Miss Lindsey and other politicians lack is love for Americans and any vision WHATSOEVER. They are think-in-the-smallest-box they can find people.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/11/we-need-hungarian-children-orban-tax-breaks-families/

    “”the government will give a loan of ten million Forints ($35,230) to every woman under 40 who marries for the first time.””

    A real “pay to play” scheme.

It’s no mystery. The self absorbed, narcissistic, overaged children we now call “adults” don’t want to be bothered by children of their own. They’re too “ate up” with themselves so they abort instead of get married and have a family. Yes, I know, not all of them are that way, but there are enough of them that it doesn’t bode well for the nation.

Aldous Huxley was a prophet. Unfortunately.
.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to DSHornet. | May 22, 2020 at 9:01 am

    And what contributed to this?

    Rather than criticize young people, I’d much rather find out why and correct it.

    When you offer young people, with no life’s experience, that they can go to college on borrowed money, is it really their fault they fall for it? It’s the obligation of older Americans to help them employ good judgment.

    Same with dating, marrying, etc. We let the Gloria Steinem’s of the world poison our pool. We need to clean it.

    Gloria Steinem had issues from her childhood. Why did we let a damaged woman and others damaged like her, so greatly influence our culture. It was a massive mistake.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to DSHornet. | May 22, 2020 at 11:20 am

    Or, they can’t afford them. They are taxed so heavily to support welfare brood mates and the anchor babies of wet-backs and birth tourists that children aren’t an option.

It’s a multi-faceted problem. I’m sure economic concerns are included, but until the Kung Flu hysteria, the economy was on the uptick. I’m sure the narcissistic nature of our youth has played a role but I can see other factors that are involved too.

A lot of these factors are amplified by the leftist leanings of our educational system; from K all the way through Doctoral degrees, students are indoctrinated into leftist groupthink including the feminist contention that women don’t need men.

Women are encouraged to go to college, invest in their career, establish themselves financially and then think about starting a family if they are so inclined. Unfortunately, by the time they get around to that, they are past their prime childbearing years and many find it difficult if not impossible to carry a child to term.

Abortion is pushed relentlessly…not only as a permissible form of birth control, but as an admirable act.

The elimination of social repercussions toward female promiscuity relieves young men of the need to form long term relationships. No long term relationships means no families. Men are still often treated unfairly by the legal system when long term relationships end, (which is the norm now rather than the exception); why should young men risk their future financial well-being on a long term relationship when there is plenty of short term companionship available?

I’m sure there are more things that aren’t occurring to me right now, but the bottom line is that pretty much every premise of leftist culture discourages traditional family life which discourages childbearing. Considering that entire generations of Americans have been steeped in this culture relentlessly through government education, popular entertainment and academia, is this result really any surprise?

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to Sailorcurt. | May 22, 2020 at 9:05 am

    Outstanding points, Sailor.

    Young ladies need to reintroduce the social pact wherein they decline to provide sexual intimacy in order to make men marry to obtain it.

    It would repair so many problems.

    And in Georgia, it would be beneficial to mandate that in any custody battle between parents, married or unmarried, that the father and mother will have joint legal custody as well as EQUAL physical custody time with the children.

    I’ve seen these women use the children as a battering ram. Anyone that says the world would be better if women ran it, hasn’t seen any paternity cases in progress.

“that some births are just being delayed.”

What a strange rationalization. Births which are “just delayed” are still births which didn’t happen. If women once had children when aged 20, but later have them at 40, we don’t say it’s no big deal because the births are merely delayed, we say the population will soon be reduced by something close to half.

With everybody homebound I would guess there will be a lot of babies in about nine months….the Woohan Baby Boomer Generation.

The real birth rate is the birth rate of the fastest reproducing minority, not the average population. The fastest rate dominates the birth rate curve in the future.

MattLauersNob | May 22, 2020 at 9:43 am

Cue cheap labor big business demanding open borders.

I wish you wouldn’t use stories that are hidden behind a paywall.

Katy L. Stamper | May 22, 2020 at 12:01 pm

We need politicians who love Americans as though they were their own family. Who see a need or a burden and work to alleviate it.

Not increase and increase it and increase it, until Americans fall from exhaustion and foreigners enjoy a living standard they’ve never known, all while drinking from Americans’ bounty.

If only the left were “for” IVF the way they are “for” abortion.

buckeyeminuteman | May 22, 2020 at 1:06 pm

We had our 3 kids in a 4 year period which ended in 2018. Sorry, but no more for us.

    you did your part by exceeding the quota

      buckeyeminuteman in reply to buck61. | May 22, 2020 at 6:03 pm

      I figured two conservative, moral working people have to make more than two people (hopefully conservative, moral and working as well). Otherwise it’s a downward trend. Maybe we ought to have one more though…

‘Replacement’ TFR is 2.10, though above 2.0 is fine.

The TFR of the United States dropped from 3.65 in 1960 to 2.01 in 1972.

Starting in 1973, for the next 15 years TFR in the United States was under 2.0. The lowest year was 1.74.

From 1989 to 2009 TFR was above 2.0, except for a 3 year period when it was 1.97 to 1.98.

The TFR in 2007 was 2.12. The was the highest TFR since 1971, nearly 40 years before.

From 2010 to present the TFR has been under 2.0. The lowest year is 1.71.

Data helps. Trends help. This story will be used by big business and the left to push immigration. It will be used by the right to denounce modern youth. Perhaps the latter commenters can explain why individuals born between 1950 and 1960 tended to show the same aversion to parenting.

After the social destruction of the 1960s caused a huge TFR drop, most following variations in TFR are likely due to economic conditions. Which will have lags even after the economy improves.

Many young men of today do not have decently paying nor stable jobs. Housing costs are high. Gig work and multiple careers are praised. Mobility and constantly switching communities in search of work is praised. These men are not attractive mates for marriage, and probably don’t find the thought of marriage attractive.

The solution of course is to blame young men. The solution is to bring in even more workers, which will put more downward pressure on wages, more employment insecurity, and increase housing costs.

That snowflakes and delicate beings not replicate is a good thing.

Just wait until about 7 months from now. The flood of Coronial births should give us a nice bump.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend