EBT Freeloaders CRASH OUT After Getting Cut Off (minor excerpt of Michael Knowles on Birthrates)

5:45 nah, ppl have kids regardless of funds all the time. ppl don't breed, because people don't value families because society has destroyed the value of the family for more than 20 years.

can't just undo the damage of decades of propaganda in a few years because NOW you can't ignore the birthrates anymore. Thats not how it works & thats the only reason why people talk about it. You can’t pretend it doesn’t exist anymore.

• The money is a factor for the smarter people who think first but the fact is: If the sexes don't want to deal with each other in the first place, yer not getting kids.
• If the people together have more desires than values or principles, more wants than reciprocation? You're not getting families even if you get kids.

If 40-60% of people are opting out of dating, mankeeping, womankeeping, all these terms just to illustrate “frustrated”, if more men are retreating to fetishes, ai, addiction, online para-social crap like OF/Vtubers/Tier 3s, peter pan syndrome- anything and everything to replace women and men. And there's more and more puff piece articles ENCOURAGING IT? Enabling exploring this crap. 

You're not getting kids.

If the women are raised in feminized society that doesn't raise any men for them to choose from, and all they have are wannabe footslaves, boytoys, shrunken tinies, bottoms, and docile manchildren- a generation of weakness, self-loathing and incompetence.

you might get kids, MAYBE, but you're not getting stable families, let alone 40 yr + long marriages. It won't happen.

That time is long done, at best the flukes are the ones that do succeed. Success isn't the norm for westerners, because the norm is dysfunction, dysfunction is progressive.  Destigmatization is inclusive & tolerant.  Decline is the reward.

Japan has the exact same problem.

Why are any of us confused as to why birthrates decline in civilization that values dysfunction, hedonism, neutering masculinity because femininity is easier to control & manipulate, nerfing femininity by signaling to women that they have to emulate the masculine to compete with men instead of just changing how the competition works, & enabling disconnect more than pushing the family.

And you're actually surprised that your country got to this point? The real surprise is you didn't get here sooner.

This birthrate situation is not a complicated algorithm, and im so sick of the same 2-3 talking points being brought up as if that's all there is to it.

South Korea 2025 is somewhat fixing this issue by just changing the attitude of the overall culture AND providing monetary support, but it's more about the attitude of society.

And not just changing an outlook because it's a gut reaction to the numbers falling but a genuine admission that independence & Marxist abolition of the family for that ignorant sense of progression because your country THOUGHT you could afford to take traditional values for granted: was both a mistake and a lie.

Consequences.

"Women have to be less educated for the birth rate to increase in first world countries" - incorrect, It's not about the education, it's the time and the message. (response)

It's not about the education, it's the time invested into it is all.

Women do not have to be less educated, it's about time management, they choose to spend it elsewhere (does not mean educated women do not have kids ever, just later & fewer frequency, more priorities, a good thing). As do the men.

"My mother graduated college and went on to have 9 kids. Her best friend graduated from college and had 5. Another friends mother was a diploma nurse and had 14 kids. They were all born in the 1920s."
-ktp806

(The economy was mad different back then, so was the culture)

Furthermore, the men have to want to engage with women at all for the reproduction process for her begin in the first place, on average. (And that's assuming the men and women of said country are in a good place for that to be free of complications, which is a whole other situation)

That leads into the cultural attitude people possess towards the family unit as a whole, fact is when privilege world economy enjoys a state of normalcy, complacency sets in, with a hint of gynocentrism. Reinforcement & respect for the family unit tends to wane. Taken for granted, it happens.

the cultural attitude/ the relevance of the family unit's importance & whether or not it's revered or honored anymore has more weight in magnitude in the matter than a woman getting a bachelor's degree which doesn't take 6-11 years of her youth to get done.

But when culture doesn't value the family unit, most people emulate the same mindset & then don't seek it on mass, emulation.

If casual sex/hedonism/lessening the importance of familial stability & emphasizing secular conquests, achievement: If that is more of the predominant culture than building families, then that is what will likely be emulated. People aren't robots, but they do imprint on consensus, signals & subliminal messaging. Especially if it's through a digestible medium like music, movies, etc.

(while non-offensive in isolation & endorsing people focusing on themselves can add a different form of fulfilment in a persons life, when you promote that AND leave the importance of the family unit behind-- that's when problems start. Lack of balance.) that paradigm can span for decades unnoticed until suddenly you can't ignore it anymore because the collective leaned too hard in that direction. The culture has a responsibility as to what signals it's sending, if you're trivializing the family, then consequence will be as such.

Cultural Sociological Science is an underrepresented beast in this topic.

With the escalating economic demands, are programs being set to financially afford mothers/fathers/parents a more smooth parenting simulation. Is COMPETENT parenting being cultivated in the collective party?

You can have time to parent & have nothing to teach or offer, while afford having a child- are the parents being trained to TRAIN their kids and not just raise them-

A generation of people child-less calling it "child-free" is rationalization. It's really not about convincing people to have children, it's whether people were giving the impression that children or the family mattered in the first place: Culture.

• You can't teach girls "single ladies" ministry 90% of their young lives, make men irrelevant to their experience, then switch the formula at 30 (because society all of a sudden needs people/ NOT FAMI(LIES but "bodies") Meaning the culture learned nothing, it's just needy now.
• Then tell them they're selfish when you taught them to be selfish to prioritize the self. They didn't come out the womb saying #FutureisFemale, THAT came from the collective.
• Groomed to be independent of men to the point of politicization & isolating themselves when they didn't need to, to be bachelorette's, CEO's, not wives, not mothers, not humble, not desirable seldom by ANY other crop of men on the planet, nor competent partners. A lot are suffering a generational accountability deficit.

many may feel they're not even worth fighting for, The real tragedy.

Cultural consequences.

We need to stop deferring to "women's education" or "education" being the #1 why or "the" reason or the fault so quickly every time this is brought up like it takes women 10 years to get a degree or every other educated woman is aiming to be an astronaut or a Licensed practicing Medical Doctor. This is bunk, that's not the average nor reality. (Women's education is a factor, not one of "the" reasons vs What was the society's priority in terms of pop culture or overarching overtone BEFORE this couldn't be ignored anymore,) that needs to be looked into more.

Were women & men painted in a good light, in a good place? Brought together or pitted against the other in pop culture? Politicization spreading the joy.

If the family was always supported and this decline still happened, then we can go from there.

Otherwise, the chronological math doesn't add up, this is a situation spanning back to the 70s, women's education would non-debatably cause a shift & delay but a dramatic tank like we're seeing now? Is way beyond women going to school or a slight shift in societal "norms" ( More like abolishment)

This is concerning both men & women, talking about birthrates & excluding where the headspace of men is & their own multiverse of complications, again and expect progress in the matter is asinine. That neglect in fact is part of the problem.

This isn't on women, this isn't on men. This is a culture skill issue.

The data analysts are just repeating affirmed/safe talking points, that's all that is, psychologist do the same thing. And the common denominator is they tend to overlook other factors in the matter that really have more pull in what's actually going on.

All in all it's not worth immediate panic, there's ways countries could get around this, but as a collective.

And unfortunately the system "adapting" to new state of society vs forcefully rising the numbers is not a solution in either case, it's moving the goalpost. It's desperate patchwork, not a fix.

If it took 30-50yrs to get here, then it's going to take some serious asspull to get things fixed. But that requires admitting maybe how western culture propagandized women & men politically and how the two sides were made to see each other was a blatantly dire mistake.

There's a big difference between the societal party: "Needing people" vs "society needing strong families units back", if you don't hear some variation of the latter, then the society hasn't learned. It's just meeting a cold statistical demand, the problem remains.

If you completely overhaul the system to adapt to the decline and you neglect to fix the cultural issue that sabotaged that last one, what caused the previous decline (ill-prep, neglect, and politically driven division etc.) will just follow you into the new system.

If you cram immigrants into a country to supplant tanked birthrates because your society's men & women on mass don't desire each other for family building. You're patchworking a very VERY deep rooted problem, not a solution. The change needs to be in what caused the problem, culture, how the people think, what the collective values as relevant and worth honoring..

How is society supposed to change when the change isn't in the people? How's the collective's attitude toward the family supposed to change when the attitude in the people is the exact same, 30+ years worth of trivialization, destabilization.

People & Gov. are too focused on numbers & not the sociology,, *this is the power of propaganda.* People of a country are looking at graphs (because that’s tangible, easier evidence to observe, *more importantly:* it’s something easier to blame)  and don't even know half of what actually happened to them. Propaganda.

You can give someone a new body because of an airbourne virus that killed the old one. Yes, you have a new body to start fresh with, but the virus is still there in the atmosphere so you just made a change without changing anything, without addressing the looming problem. Patchwork and no solution.

Changing the system without changing the culture is applying the right change in the wrong direction.

"The traditional family should be encouraged and strengthened", No. Decline is better.

"The traditional family should be encouraged and strengthened", No. Decline is better. you need more people & you need an Empire to make a comeback from decline Push LGBT/Alternates or the traditional family unit that made the country in the first place Not a hard decision.

 Keep pushing everything except the one orientation system that actually matters to an economy that wants to survive to see another century or at the most, 50 years (**good luck Japan)

Keep men and women disconnected Keep up the good work. Successful formula.