Depopulation panic: Russia to give $16,000 to women who have 10 children
The flip side of longevity: collapsing birth rates. And some governments are starting to freak out.
(Photo credit: Janko Ferlic on Unsplash)
I’ve written before about the “de-population bomb” — the collapse in birth rates that threatens to create absolute decreases in the populations of certain countries. It’s a serious problem, particularly as it affects pensions and other government benefits: if you have fewer younger workers contributing tax dollars at the same time as the aging of the rest of the population creates ever-increasing pension, health care and benefit demands, it’s a recipe for financial disaster.
Some of my past posts have covered government reports expressed high anxiety, most notably from the national bank in China. But for sheer drama it’s hard to top the latest move announced by Russia.
As reported widely, including here: “The Russian government announced it is reviving the Soviet-era honorary title “Mother Heroine” for women who have 10 or more children, as it confronts a population decline that has accelerated since its invasion of Ukraine.
According to a decree signed this week by President Vladimir Putin, the title will be awarded to those who “birth and raise” 10 Russian citizens, with a lump sum of 1 million Russian rubles ($16,645) received when the 10th child turns one.”
There are a few kickers.
All 10 children must be alive, unless they died during “military, official or civil service, or in a terrorist attack.”
The children must have been given the “appropriate level of care for health, education, physical, spiritual and moral development.” Criteria for judging this are not specified.
The medal, “Mother Heroine,” goes all the way back to 1944. The Soviet government, which often had little or no money for awards like this, routinely used medals and “Hero” titles to recognize and reward people.
In addition to the cash, “Mother Heroine” recipients will receive a medal of a five-pointed star. We’ll see if it works.
Ten kids seems a lot to ask, but the demographic challenge in no joke. The article cites an analysis from the Economist, estimating that by 2050, the overall Russian population will be 8.4% less than it was in 1995. This year alone, it has fallen by a record 86,000 people per month, shattering the previous record of 57,000 people a month in 2002.
Russia’s problems are mirrored in many other countries, as this article by Joel Kotkin reports:
UN projections call for the global population to drop from a projected 8.8 to 9.0 billion in 2050, down to 8.2 to 8.7 billion by 2100
Meanwhile, the planet will continue to age: “In 1970, the median world age was 21.5 years. By 2020, it had increased to 30.9 years, and the UN projects that it will be 41.9 years in 2100.”
Europe’s population shrank by 1.4 million last year, “the largest fall on any continent since records began in 1950.” By 2050, Germany is projected to lose 5% of its current population and Italy, 10 percent. By the end of the century, Europe will lose 30 million people.
European fertility rates have dropped steadily and last year the birth rate dropped to a 60-year low of 4 million births. That translates to about 9 births per 1,000 people, compared to 16 births per 1,000 in 1970.
Fertility has also dropped drastically in China, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Japan. “South Korea’s birth rates have fallen for so long that the country plans to reduce its armed services to about half their current size within 20 years.”
The same trends have appeared in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The US population growth in 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year) was 0.5%, lowest since 1900.
The money quote:
“As the employment base shrinks and the demands of the elderly rise, countries like Germany are raising taxes on the existing labor force to pay for the swelling ranks of retirees. For the OECD as a whole, “the dependence ratio of older people (i.e., those aged 65 and over as a proportion of those aged 20–64) will rise from the current figure of 22 percent to 46 percent in 2050.” Given the higher costs of housing, the current generation will not be able to count on pensions to maintain their post-retirement living standards, even in well-managed countries like Singapore.
“For its part, the United States already faces a massive public pension crisis and security reserve funds are expected to be depleted by 2035. As in other countries, this stems largely from the reduction of new entrants into the labor force due to low birth rates. US population growth between ages 16 and 64 has dropped from 20 percent in the 1980s to less than five percent in the past decade. In 1970, there were 19.1 persons aged 65 and older for each 100 aged 20 to 64. By 2020, this had increased to 28.4 and is projected by the UN to increase to 40.4 by 2050 and 54.1 by 2100.”
Where does all this lead? Kotkin sees a coming generational conflict: “Compared with their parents, young people today are more likely to have a future with no substantial assets or property. A Deloitte study projects that millennials (born 1981–1996) in the United States will hold barely 16 percent of the nation’s wealth in 2030, when they will be by far the largest adult generation. By then, the preceding generation (Gen X) born between 1965 and 1980 will hold 31 percent, while boomers, entering their 80s and 90s, will still control 45 percent.”
All true — but what if the “reinvention of aging,” which is my overarching theme here, provides at least some of the solution? What if the oldsters continue to work (it’s already happening) and, just as importantly, continue to be active contributors to society, rather than passive and needy and fading fast?
In real life — there’s no point sugar-coating this — many will still age the way their parents or grandparents did. But significant numbers will not. They’ll have 25 or 30 years left when they hit 65, and they will spend those years earning and paying taxes and maintaining leadership roles in business and government. There will be massive contributions — financial, political, social — coming from generations that in the past would have been written off as having nothing left to do but fade away.
To me, that’s a vision worth celebrating. The fact that it will be desperately needed adds even more meaning.
I for one am an oldster who is continuing to work to keep the economy -- and my brain! -- strong and healthy. Thanks for the scary insights into the Russian government. If only they offered peace as an incentive to raising children.
Excellent post, David, particularly this: "...continue to be active contributors to society, rather than passive and needy and fading fast." My mission as well.