Massive drop off in live births.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

I expect it will drop more because who would want to bring a child into the world now that they intend to micro chip everyone?

Klaus Schwab Explains the Timetable for Microchipping Everyone by 2026.

"At first we will implant them in our clothes... We will implant them in our brains or on our skin... In the end, maybe, there will be direct communication between our brain and the digital world."

Will you be happy to get chipped?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AndyMayhew

I expect it will drop more because who would want to bring a child into the world now that they intend to micro chip everyone?

Klaus Schwab Explains the Timetable for Microchipping Everyone by 2026.

"At first we will implant them in our clothes... We will implant them in our brains or on our skin... In the end, maybe, there will be direct communication between our brain and the digital world."

Will you be happy to get chipped?

I can think of plenty other reasons not to want to bring a child into this world right now! Not that I personally ever wanted to do so anyway.

But generally speaking, a declining birth rate is a sign of a settled, affluent, society. If we start seeing the birth rate increase, that's when we should start worrying and asking questions.

And yeah, I can see a time - maybe even before I am dead - when many, if not most people, especially in N America and Europe, have chips implanted in them (for a variety of reasons). We all carry monitoring and tracking devices with us - quite voluntarily - as it is. But being able to contact people, pay for goods or even access the internet without needing a phone (as well, of course, as being able to be more directly tracked)? Yeah, I can see that coming. And a lot of people will lap it up.

In today's MSM - Japan reporting population reduction of 800,000. Fewer births? lots of deaths in elderly? Under normal circumstances, both significant indicators. In the last couple of years, stats for recorded births refer only to live births and do not include info about miscarriage. I also think numbers of still births are not included in the headline figures. Too much info being obscured. Also, such a large population reduction now includes sudden deaths of otherwise healthy young people and children. All seems very unnatural to me, something out of context, something anti-life.

a reply to: teapot

If you can labor through all of this one, it tells you how the con is being pulled off, and if people got too close to the truth they seemed to die. The CDC made some mistakes, pulled the statements, and changed them, and then got the fact-checkers to back them up. The simple truth is if the research is done it becomes obvious but people just sit down at the end of the day and switch it on. The whole thing was to get the jab in the arms, and this tells you how it played out. Game set and match. www.bitchute.com...

a reply to: The2Billies

Today I stepped back to the archives to thank you for this post. I saw it yesterday but got interrupted.

I've been following this phenomenon since the last year or so of COVID. You're quite correct, the Dems/Leftists are a "Party of Death" and are thrilled to see a decline in population and they seek to offset that decline, at least temporarily, by maintaining the Open Borders policy.

There's some irony in this of course, the Dems are the "Party of the Immigrants" and they dish out freebies to them for years after their arrival, and do so whether or not they arrived legally. However, anecdotal evidence indicates that these "immigrants" (invaders), are not taught anything in the schools about Patriotism. At the same time there's been a precipitous decline in Patriotism which has declined to 38% of the population. So.....yea, you can buy political allegiance of the Immigrants, but can you keep them bought? How long before they become disillusioned and turn on you?

Found a great article here:www.leader-call.com...

This article ties declining birth rate and decline in patriotism.

American patriotism is in decline, according to a recent poll published by the Wall Street Journal. The WSJ-NORC poll makes grim reading. It shows a steep decline in the number of Americans who say that patriotism is very important to them, down from 70 percent in 1998 to 38 percent today.

There has also been a similar slide in the percentage of Americans who say that religion is very important to them. Perhaps most disturbing of all, only 23 percent of American adults under the age of 30 regard having children as very important.

To explain the fall in patriotism, the authors state:

America was founded on the principle that every American is created equal, and that each individual is in possession of inalienable rights. Of course, there were times when America failed to live up to those lofty ideals, but for the first two centuries of the republic’s existence, these principles were the essential ingredient of American cohesion.

Thanks to these founding principles, folk from different ancestral backgrounds in England, Poland or Italy, eastern Europe, west Africa or south Asia could all come together and see one another as fellow citizens of the same republic.

About 30 years ago, things started to change.

Rather than being taught to see themselves as individual citizens, young Americans were increasingly encouraged by left-wing educators to define themselves in terms of their racial background or gender or various other immutable characteristics. Many young Americans are invited to see their primary loyalty not to fellow citizens of the republic, but to whichever oppressed group it is that they supposedly belong to, in a hierarchy of victimhood.

Identity Politics is at least part of the problem, possibly the largest part of the reason for decline in Patriotism.

There there's this:

If you spend three decades trying to make Americans believe that their country is, as CNN might put it, a republic founded by slave-owners on stolen land, it is hardly surprising that patriotism declines.

If you tell a generation of young Americans that human civilization has messed up the planet and that looming eco-catastrophe means we are all doomed, you should not be surprised that they are less keen on having kids than their grandparents.

However, all of this notwhitstanding, while it's easy to blame Dem/Leftist policies and propaganda for the decline in birth rate, the Scientific American Article points to some "natural" causes for the collapse in human population which can't be overlooked.

As a paleontologist, I take the long view. Mammal species tend to come and go rather rapidly, appearing, flourishing and disappearing in a million years or so. The fossil record indicates that Homo sapiens has been around for 315,000 years or so, but for most of that time, the species was rare—so rare, in fact, that it came close to extinction, perhaps more than once. Thus were sown the seeds of humanity’s doom: the current population has grown, very rapidly, from something much smaller. The result is that, as a species, H. sapiens is extraordinarily samey. There is more genetic variation in a few troupes of wild chimpanzees than in the entire human population. Lack of genetic variation is never good for species survival.

Simply put: things do not look good for the future of humanity OR the US for that matter.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

Well, let's have a look on what a New Zealand doctor and midwife are actually seeing on the ground in New Zealand. Like a jump in observed miscarriages from six a year to over thirty-seven. So these people are all liars looking for clicks . www.bitchute.com...

The problem with 'anonymous' media is that we have no way of verifying that the people involved have the qualifications they allege.

Definitely, the 'doctor' in this video has been stripped of their practicing certificate based upon complaints raised by several their patients and at least two other doctors that worked in the same medical center.

a reply to: chr0naut

That's where you have to use common sense. Along with a dose of gut instinct.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

That's where you have to use common sense. Along with a dose of gut instinct.

What is sensible about it? I am sure that the most deluded believe they have good 'gut instincts' and common sense.

Instead, it would be wiser to have to have a skeptical approach, disregarding appeals to emotion and relying instead on those things which you can verify as credible.

a reply to: chr0naut

" Like safe and effective" With sales science to back it up?

originally posted by: teapot
In today's MSM - Japan reporting population reduction of 800,000. Fewer births? lots of deaths in elderly? Under normal circumstances, both significant indicators. In the last couple of years, stats for recorded births refer only to live births and do not include info about miscarriage. I also think numbers of still births are not included in the headline figures. Too much info being obscured. Also, such a large population reduction now includes sudden deaths of otherwise healthy young people and children. All seems very unnatural to me, something out of context, something anti-life.

if japan is following Britain (island nations) then the elderly excess deaths will have settled back to average and the excess excess deaths moved to the 30-45 age range, this would be the age looking to settle down and have kids so double whammy, its also the age range needed to train up the new workers so not just losing skills, the young but also future generations.

Oh look!

Finland witnesses record-low birthrate

But then if we read the actual article we find:

Over the past 12 months, the total fertility rate dropped to 1.28, down from 1.87 in 2010 and 1.35 in 2019

Finland's fertility rate was on a long, steady decline until the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021 when there was a slight increase in births, but then the decline resumed last year.

No sudden decline post Covid at all. Just a continuation of the long term trend.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Byrd

A declining birthrate is probably a good thing if it is organic. Less pressure on resources etc. But it seems to have fallen off a cliff, and very few people seemed to have noticed this fundamental fact.

In fact, it hasn't. The global birth rate has been steadily declining since 1950 As I've said, Dowd seems to be unaware of this.

The population of the US today is roughly double that of the "golden era", the 1950's

Fewer people means more of the "small town" experience that conservatives seem to treasure. It also means more resources for everyone (and more resources for wild things and wild recreation areas for hunting and fishing). It means less pollution.

The world's already overcrowded - so my serious question to you is "why would you want the birth rate to INCREASE?"

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

" Like safe and effective" With sales science to back it up?

Sales science? LOL.

Also, The COVID vaccines in New Zealand are part of a fully funded government health initiative. There's no end-user charge here for getting a shot. You don't even pay for the appointment.

And as far as effectiveness, the case fatality ratio among those fully vaccinated is significantly less than among the unvaccinated. That was the initial and most marked indicator of the effectiveness of the vaccines.

EPIDEMIOLOGY: How to Compare COVID Deaths for Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People - Scientific American

Also, with 13.48 billion doses delivered and adverse events to it so far totaling only 2,183,192 (and serious adverse events only being about 100th of that) this statistic shows that the vaccines are very safe, with only 0.0168% of shots causing any notable adverse events at all, and only 0.0002% being serious events.

a reply to: Kenny2xx

Yes.

We have a social security problem, it is running out of money.
One way to solve that is to allow in illegal immigrants, not keep track of them on purpose. Let them use fake and dead people's SS#'s to get jobs. They pay into social security, thus keeping it solvent so the Dems can claim they saved Social Security.

Then when the illegal immigrants get sick, injured, old, they can't get any benefits. They have worked hard to make SS solvent for the Dems and get nothing in return except a boot to the tush.

This is a genius plan actually. As one Democratic Congressperson said "we need them to mow our lawns and clean our houses."

And yes, it does steal young healthy workers from poor countries. Decreasing the number of young healthy workers by the what is estimated at about a million since Biden took office. What will happen to those nations as they grow older and older, their economies will get worse and worse as few young people are left to support the elderly. What a pyramid scheme that will crash and burn the poor nations of the world.

Also it is estimated that many of those illegal immigrants are children who will keep our SS solvent with their fake SS#'s into the future and further decimate the working populations of poor nations.

What a plan, the Democrats know exactly what they are doing.

a reply to: Byrd

I doubt that Dowd is unaware of anything relevant to future investments. Neither is Warren Buffet or all the main players.If you plan on Government figures you will be the sucker that never gets an even break.

originally posted by: The2Billies
a reply to: Kenny2xx

Yes.

We have a social security problem, it is running out of money.
One way to solve that is to allow in illegal immigrants, not keep track of them on purpose. Let them use fake and dead people's SS#'s to get jobs. They pay into social security, thus keeping it solvent so the Dems can claim they saved Social Security.

I don't think anyone believes this is a good solution (speaking as a Democrat, mind you.) A better solution would be for our government to repay the 1.7 trillion dollars it borrowed from Social Security

Then when the illegal immigrants get sick, injured, old, they can't get any benefits. They have worked hard to make SS solvent for the Dems and get nothing in return except a boot to the tush.

This is a genius plan actually. As one Democratic Congressperson said "we need them to mow our lawns and clean our houses."

Sigh. You've got a PhD. PhD's are research degrees.

Yet you chose to offer a scenario without doing any research on it -- like simply looking up What the social security reforms are that the Democrats are proposing

Or even using this easily locate-able page about what each president did with Social Security (it mentions Biden's future plans)

No primary sources (from the exact wording of laws to long transcripts of speeches from major Democrat politicians) - just a free form rant that doesn't match any of the easily found talking points and legal agendas out there.

I'm all in favor of polite discourse, arguments, debates... but backed up with primary sources. The ATS motto is "Deny Ignorance," and an out-of-touch hypothetical scenario is not really denying ignorance.





(and for those of you who think I'm being snarky, I also have a PhD and believe me, it was hammered into my lil' head about using primary sources in discourse. A primary source is a direct quote from a person or a law or a publication (tape also counts here) and would include enough material before and after to make sure that the quote isn't taken out of context. So Trump saying "Democrats want open borders" is a primary source for Trump's opinion...but until you have someone like Nancy Pelosi saying "the US will do better once we have open borders" then you don't have proof of Democrats wanting "open borders" - you only have proof that Donald Trump says that about Democrats and "open borders" and that it's not supported by anything else.)

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

" Like safe and effective" With sales science to back it up?

Sales science? LOL.

Also, The COVID vaccines in New Zealand are part of a fully funded government health initiative. There's no end-user charge here for getting a shot. You don't even pay for the appointment.

And as far as effectiveness, the case fatality ratio among those fully vaccinated is significantly less than among the unvaccinated. That was the initial and most marked indicator of the effectiveness of the vaccines.

EPIDEMIOLOGY: How to Compare COVID Deaths for Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People - Scientific American

Also, with 13.48 billion doses delivered and adverse events to it so far totaling only 2,183,192 (and serious adverse events only being about 100th of that) this statistic shows that the vaccines are very safe, with only 0.0168% of shots causing any notable adverse events at all, and only 0.0002% being serious events.

Your link takes me to the post you replied to.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
You would think the result of lockdown would be an increase in births.

This is what I said when this garbage started. Just like when there’s blackouts, people gonna bunny rabbit.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

" Like safe and effective" With sales science to back it up?

Sales science? LOL.

Also, The COVID vaccines in New Zealand are part of a fully funded government health initiative. There's no end-user charge here for getting a shot. You don't even pay for the appointment.

And as far as effectiveness, the case fatality ratio among those fully vaccinated is significantly less than among the unvaccinated. That was the initial and most marked indicator of the effectiveness of the vaccines.

EPIDEMIOLOGY: How to Compare COVID Deaths for Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People - Scientific American

Also, with 13.48 billion doses delivered and adverse events to it so far totaling only 2,183,192 (and serious adverse events only being about 100th of that) this statistic shows that the vaccines are very safe, with only 0.0168% of shots causing any notable adverse events at all, and only 0.0002% being serious events.

Your link takes me to the post you replied to.

D'oh! And now it's past the 4 hour edit limit.

The link should have been: EPIDEMIOLOGY: How to Compare COVID Deaths for Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People - Scientific American

Apologies to all.

a reply to: chr0naut

It is a pure information war, with the fact-checkers ready to read a counterargument from their sheet, the moment they feel the need to try and neutralize an argument. This alone must tell us that something fishy is going down.

Take this for instance, as soon as they supposedly got the gene sequence from China, within three hours, they were able to send the recipe for the vaccine to the manufacturers, That's Astra Zenaka BS for a start. Then the guy asks the firm why the manufacture date on the vial for current distribution is labeled 2018. Just stupid simple mistakes that were bound to show up if there was a deception going on.www.bitchute.com...