Vatican Economist: Recession Caused by Low Birth Rate

[muriel_volestrangler]

Bankers are not the cause of the global economic crisis, according to the president of the Institute for the Works of Religion. Rather, the cause is ordinary people who do not "believe in the future" and have few or no children.

"The true cause of the crisis is the decline in the birth rate,” Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, said in an interview on Vatican Television's "Octava Dies."

He noted the Western world's population growth rate is at 0% -- that is, two children per couple -- and this, he said, has led to a profound change in the structure of society.

"Instead of stimulating families and society to again believe in the future and have children <…> we have stopped having children and have created a situation, a negative economic context decrease," Gotti Tedeschi observed. "And decrease means greater austerity."

http://www.zenit.org/article-28289?l=english

Is there some kind of economist's licence that can be taken away for such stupidity?

[JackintheGreen]

1. Dare I say it?

Maybe it's because your fucking priests are having sex with the wrong people!

[GodlessBiker]

2. So, those extra people would automatically have jobs or something?

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. Bizarrely, he also blames youth unemployment

"Young people who do not have jobs upset the cycle of accumulation of savings that has gone on for years; families are not formed; often families are not formed that have a certain number of commitments to children and so savings are liquidated," he explained.

Which reinforces my belief he's been told "go out there and blame the recession on something the Vatican is opposed to; it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not".

[Warpy]

3. Yeah, right, we're having a recession because so many jobs

are going unfilled because there are too few people to fill them.

What an ivory tower wanker!

[rrneck]

4. If the finance industry

had half the transparency of that pile of bullshit apologetics we wouldn't have these problems either.

[The_Commonist]

5. He does have a point...

The world is so fucked up, why would anyone want to bring children into it?
Of course, then he goes off into crazy-land.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Wouldn't that be more like "recession causes low birth rate"?

Which would be more believable, though it'd be good to have some evidence for it.

[darkstar3]

8. OK, I have to break the mold here and say it SORT OF makes sense from an economic standpoint.

Don't get me wrong, he's a loon, but if you think about it, there's something here.

In the agrarian days of our society, not all that long ago in fact, families had large numbers of children. People like the Duggars (with 18 kids and counting) were not unheard of. It was caused by two main factors: A lack of birth control, and a desire to have many hands for the farmwork.

Now, in a world where child labor, even within families, is either illegal or looked down upon, and birth control is readily available, the birth rate is much lower.
(I must pause here and shout the fact that I think this is a GOOD THING.)

When the generation of goods-makers (factory workers and others) is larger by far than the generation of mass consumers (let's face it, teenagers and early 20-somethings), the demand for product drops.

With the birth rate per family already having decreased rapidly, we're looking at an economic downturn where suppliers, or creators of product, lose business because there is simply not as much demand for their product as there used to be. This is to be expected, but it is a temporary situation. (It is also one of the many pitfalls of pure capitalism.)

[damyank913]

16. The only economics that makes sense here...

is that the more catholics that there are in the world the better the church's economic outlook.

[darkstar3]

22. Well, that's true for any nominally exclusive group...

But I was trying to abstract it a bit from Catholicism and just talk economics in general. Good point, though...

[Ozymanithrax]

9. Then maybe priests should be allowed to marry nuns so they can...

repopulate the earth.

[Laura902]

10. what a moranic

response to the fact that population growth is down so the number catholics wont increase exponentially, do they think were that stupid?!

[DeSwiss]

11. So here's the gist of this moronic thesis:

NEGATIVE ECONOMIC CONTEXT DECREASE

Also from the article:

He noted the Western world's population growth rate is at 0% -- that is, two children per couple -- and this, he said, has led to a profound change in the structure of society.

"Instead of stimulating families and society to again believe in the future and have children <…> we have stopped having children and have created a situation, a negative economic context decrease," Gotti Tedeschi observed. "And decrease means greater austerity."

What Friar Coin Counter fails to account for is: That if context creates a decrease in economic austerity, it follows that everything else decreases along with it. That would include the expenses of having more children, the operating expenses of raising them, and long-term liabilities like college, those living in basements, etc. Thus any "loss" of an economic context decrease (boy what a bullshit term) is accordingly offset with it's counterpart.

- On the other hand, I don't know why anyone would listen to Vatican economist anyway since their only job is to count the money coming in from the rubes.....

[EvolveOrConvolve]

17. Now now, there's no reason to bring logic into the equation

We know that the vatican can't be having any of that.

[DeSwiss]

19. You're right.

- I often forget that these are the people who make it up as they go.......

[Book Lover]

12. Those who take vows of poverty yet are guaranteed to have their bills paid forever

should be silent and listen to those who have an educated opinion when it comes to the global economy.

[Angry Dragon]

13. He is just doing god's work

so I do not see anything wrong with his statements.

The only true god sponsored church on this earth can never be wrong.


:-)

[DeSwiss]

14. Here....

...you forgot this:

:sarcasm:

[Angry Dragon]

15. I did put a smile in at the end.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

18. There are a lot of sarcasm-challenged posters on DU

Especially in R/T.

But I got it. :hi:

[DeSwiss]

20. I SAW that!

- But in R/T, you can never be sure.....

[uberllama42]

21. Fail on many, many levels

Zero population growth is not the same as a fertility rate of two children per female. Zero growth happens when positive growth factors (births and immigration numbers) balance with negative growth factors (emigration numbers and deaths.) To imply that two children per mother and zero growth are the same is an abject oversimplification.

Given a constant rate of consumption per person, a lower birth rate won't cause an economic crisis. As a long-term trend, it will depress consumption (and therefore growth) across the business cycle. Europeans didn't all drop from five kids per couple to two at the end of 2007. Their birth rate has been in gradual decline for decades. There is no reason why markets would not accommodate changes in birth rates as they happened. Surely the lifestyle of the average Western family is different than it was in 1960, but I don't think people spending less on raising children is the salient change here.

Furthermore, people tend to bear fewer children as their income goes up. But they tend to spend more on the children they do have because--stay with me, because this may be too obvious to grasp--they have more money to spend. I don't have the figures in front of me, but I have no doubt that spending per household is higher in every single Western country than it was fifty years ago.

None of the above really matters, though. This is obviously more Vatican baby-mongering. Even if they thought people were having too many kids and wrecking the economy that way, they would just say that having more little children suffering in poverty was bringing more souls closer to Christ. They say that all the time.

[DeSwiss]

23. Exactly.

But then as you pointed out, Benedict's been cryin' these particular lines of blues for a while now. He believes that Europeans must have children to avoid "dangerous individualism."

Pope: Europe Losing Faith in Its Future

Huffington Post FRANCES D'EMILIO | March 24, 2007 02:58 PM EST | AP

VATICAN CITY — Europe appears to be losing faith in its own future, Pope Benedict XVI said Saturday, warning against "dangerous individualism" on a continent where many people are having fewer children.

"One must unfortunately note that Europe seems to be going down a road which could lead it to take its leave from history," the pontiff told bishops in Rome for ceremonies to mark the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, a major step toward the creation of today's European Union.

Benedict said he was concerned about Europe's "demographic profile" {i.e. - too many browns - DeSwiss} _ though he did not describe the trends that have alarmed the continent for decades. In countries like Italy, where many married couples have one or no children, the population is expected to shrink dramatically in a generation or two unless fertility rates quickly increase.

Benedict expressed concern that Europe's population trends, "besides putting economic growth at risk, can also cause enormous difficulties for social cohesion, and, above all, favor dangerous individualism, careless about the consequences for the future." "You could almost think that the European continent is in fact losing faith in its own future," Benedict said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070324/vatican-pope-europe/">MORE

Having smaller families is hardly dangerous, and certainly not careless. That's what we had before when people didn't take control of their lives and did what any religious nutcase told them to do. And another thing about the Popey's lameass cryin' act: It is woefully apparent that he has never considered the possibility that maybe Europeans are seeing a different future than he is? As in, one that doesn't include supporting his ass? One clear sign he may have overlooked, is the fact that so many people don't bother to come to his churches anymore. Unh...huh.

What is really at stake here and what's REALLY got the Popemeister so hot and bothered, is the fact that he hates to see all those "potential" new church members literally being washed down the drain. Why, who'll take care of them and support their "celibate, poverty-stricken lifestyles" in the future????

- Why, why, they might have to get..... REAL JOBSSSSSSSS