logo
US Birth Rates Are Falling—But It's Not Worrying Americans

US Birth Rates Are Falling—But It's Not Worrying Americans

Newsweek3 days ago
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
President Donald Trump and Congress have offered tax credits and proposed legislation to tackle declining birth rates in the U.S., but according to polling, Americans don't consider the issue to be a "major problem."
Fertility rates are projected to average 1.6 births per woman over the next three decades, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest forecast released this year.
This number is below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman required to maintain a stable population without immigration.
Despite those numbers, only three in 10 Americans say declining birth rates are a "major problem" in the United States, according to a recent survey by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
Just 12 percent of those surveyed said that encouraging families to have more children should be a "high priority" for the government, researchers found after they interviewed 1,158 U.S. adults between June 5 and June 9. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
Overall, 28 percent of Americans surveyed said declining birth rates were a "major problem" while 44 percent said it was a "minor problem" and 27 percent said it was "not a problem."
A newborn baby in the hospital.
A newborn baby in the hospital.
EyeEm'Americans Correctly See the Problem as Not Having the Support They Need'
Taking a closer look at the numbers, Americans seem to be concerned about the issues that they think may be the cause of birth rate declines.
Some 76 percent said the cost of child care is a major problem while 41 percent said the same about the cost of fertility treatments.
The risks of pregnancy and childbirth was also placed above birth rates with 39 percent saying they are a "major problem" and 43 percent saying they are a "minor problem."
"Americans correctly see the problem as not having the support they need to have the number of kids they want whether that's zero kids or five kids," said Beth Jarosz, a senior program director U.S. programs at the Population Reference Bureau.
"Americans understand that birth rates themselves are not a problem," she told Newsweek. "Birth rates only become challenging—whether they're high or low—when society doesn't plan ahead."
"A large number of babies without a plan means overcrowded schools, but you can plan ahead and build those schools," she continued. "The same is true for a smaller number—things like workforce training, automation, and family supportive workplace policies (like child care, consistent scheduling, and flexible leave) mean that we don't need to be afraid of low birth rates."
Declining Birth Rate Is Not Just an American Issue
Financial concerns are repeatedly cited as a reason for not having children.
Last month, the United Nations Population Fund warned of a global birth rate crisis, after finding that one in five had not had or did not expect to have the number of children they wanted. Some 39 percent said this was because of financial limitations.
But financial concerns do not appear to be the lone cause of declines with cultural shifts also playing a role in global birthrate.
For example, Norway is considered a global leader in parental leave offering parents 12 months of shared paid leave for birth and an additional year each afterward. It has also made kindergarten (similar to a U.S. day care) a statutory right for all children aged 1 or older in 2008.
And yet, Norway's fertility rate has dropped dramatically from 1.98 children per woman in 2009 to 1.44 children per woman in 2024, according to official figures.
Newsweek spoke to several experts about Norway specifically, who all cited recent culture changes.
For example, "young adults are more likely to live alone" and "young couples split up more frequently than before," Rannveig Kaldager Hart, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Centre for Fertility and Health said.
Recent Pew Research Center analysis showed that fewer Americans in their 20s and 30s are planning to have fewer children than a decade ago.
"Focusing on intentions rather than outcomes this study highlights the deeply complex and nuanced challenge of boosting birth rate," Theodore D. Cosco, a research fellow at the University of Oxford's Institute of Population Aging, told Newsweek.
"By flagging lower intentions as an upstream issue, we recognize that both immediate and long‐term factors must be tackled well before births occur," he continued. "If there is going to be meaningful change in birth rates, upstream and downstream factors will need to be addressed in a comprehensive and accessible manner."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

More On The Tips And Overtime Deductions In One Big Beautiful Bill
More On The Tips And Overtime Deductions In One Big Beautiful Bill

Forbes

time31 minutes ago

  • Forbes

More On The Tips And Overtime Deductions In One Big Beautiful Bill

Earlier this week I noted a subtle difference in the limitations on the tips and overtime deductions included in the Big Beautiful Bill which can create either a marriage penalty or a marriage bonus. I was so taken by the apparent anomaly that I devoted a whole post to it. Now I am getting back to a fuller discussion. When President Trump first came out with "no tax on tips", I studied the proposals that were floating in Congress and had some concerns. Most notable was the harmful effect one of the proposals would have on Earned Income Tax Credit recipients. And then there was all sorts of commentary on how the provision might be gamed. What ultimately emerged addressed many of the issues. What we have in the final language about tips and overtime illustrates Reilly's Third Law of Tax Planning - "Any clever idea that pops into your head probably has (or will have) a corresponding rule that makes it not work". If you had an idea about how to game the "No tax on tips" of "No tax on overtime", let's see if Congress has already knocked it out even before any regulations have been issued. Deductions Subject To Limitations And Phase Outs First of all, the benefits are only about income tax, not Social Security and Medicare as the "no tax" monikers might imply. Further, the final bill puts limits and phaseouts in place. And the benefits are structured as deductions. It you want to know more about what that means, read the next paragraph, but feel free to skip it. It is worth looking at Form 1040 to understand where the deduction fits in. If you clicked on the link, you will see that your total income is on Line 9. Then on LIne 10, there are adjustments to income. There are a lot of those so they are totaled up on Part II of Schedule 1. Subtracting Line from Line 11 gives you your adjusted gross income (AGI). This is an important number because many thresholds and limitations are keyed to AGI including those of the tips and overtime deductions. Next on line 12 you get either your standard deduction or the total of certain itemized deductions from Schedule A. The tips and overtime will not be among them, so you don't need to be an itemizer. On Line 13 you will see the qualified business income deduction which will be added to the amount on line 12 to arrive at line 14 which is subtracted from AGI to arrive at taxable income. That's where the tips and overtime deductions will go along with the automobile interest deduction included in the bill. I don't know if they will add more lines to the form or give us another schedule. If it is another schedule I hope that they call it Schedule A PLUS. Do you remember all the talk about a postcard tax return in 2017? Still not happening. UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 14: Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., holds up a postcard tax return ... More form during the press conference following the House Republican Conference meeting in the Capitol on Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2017. Ryan is flanked from left by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., and Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va. (Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)Both the tip deduction and the overtime deduction require that married taxpayers file joint returns to claim the deduction. There are dollar limitations. The limitation is $25,000 for the tip deduction and $12,500 for the overtime deduction on a single return and $25,000 for the overtime deduction on a joint return. The phaseout is the same - $100 for every $1,000 that modified adjusted gross income exceeds $150,000 on a single return or $300,000 on a joint return. The modification to adjusted gross income is an add back of income excluded because it was earned while living abroad or in Puerto Rico on one of the U.S. possessions. I have to wonder if the $150,000 threshold is an echo of the proposal to totally eliminate income taxes on those earning less than $150,000. Qualified Tips Unlike earlier proposals, "qualified tips" are not just tips received by employees. The deduction also applies to tips received in the course of a trade or business. The thing that comes to mind there is food delivery people or Uber drivers who are considered independent contractors. I also recall that adult entertainers can be independent contractors. The deduction will be allowed only to the extent that the gross income from the business exceeds the allocable deductions. This could present some planning issue for how capital assets might be written off. The tip deduction will reduce the amount of income counted as qualified business income for that deduction. What exactly are the "tips" that are the subject of the deduction? First of all, they have to be received by an individual in an occupation which "customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024". There is a call for a list to be created. Next the amount involved has to be paid voluntarily, without consequence in the event of nonpayment, not the subject of negotiation and determined by the payor. So that amount that large parties have to pay in a restaurant seems to not qualify. There are excluded fields of business- health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, brokerage services, or any trade or business where the principal asset of such trade or business is the reputation or skill of 1 or more of its employees. I have to wonder if the "performing arts" exclusion knocks out the adult entertainers. There is some litigation in the sales tax area that might help them. Overtime For the definition of "qualified overtime compensation" you really need to look at the bill's language and meditate for a while. Here it is "... the term 'qualified overtime compensation' means overtime compensation paid to an individual required under section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 that is in excess of the regular rate (as used in such section) at which such individual is employed". That language triggered some back and forth in the twitterverse, about whether they mean the total amount paid for overtime or just the premium. If you search for what the median hourly wage for Americans is, there are a variety of answers but they seem to be between $20 and $30 per hour, so let's use $25 for illustrative purposes. With that as the base hourly wage you get $1,000 per week for 40 hours, $52,000 per year. At time and half for overtime the $37.50 premium rate would max out the $12,500 limit at 6.5 hours a week. That is how I think of overtime and how I initially read, probably misread, the statute. The consensus seems to be that the deduction is only for the premium. Tom Gorczynski EA pointed out something from the White House website that supports that interpretation. I found that quite persuasive. Kelly Erb also writes that it is just the premium, which seals the deal for me. It still bugs me though. So if it is just the premium it takes 1,000 hours to max out the benefit if you are single in my example. Call it a 60 hours work week. If you are married and your spouse does not work overtime it would be 2,000 hours. At $50 per hour you will hit the maximum at 500 hours of overtime if you are single or 1,000 hours if you are married with a spouse that does not get overtime. Absent a lot else going on, you won't be having to deal with the phaseout. I won't comment on the equity or sense behind this particular deduction other than to remark that back when I used to work more than forty hours a week mostly without overtime pay, I found it a lot harder when I was doing that by working two jobs rather than longish hours on one job. So I am puzzled as to what makes an overtime premium worthy of special tax treatment. Gaming The Overtime Deduction I don't know much about the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is the key to the deduction. It is clear however that whether people are exempt employees not subject to the overtime premium requirement can be debatable. Employers will generally prefer to not have that requirement. I don't think this deduction will change that, but I can't resist coming up with a way to game it. Here is the idea. I have a bunch of salaried employees and I want to help them out. So what I do is cut everybody's pay to below $684 per week so that I have to pay them time and a half over forty hours. Then I guarantee them overtime hours which will include overtime hours when they are "on-call". That will bring them up to whatever their previous salary was. And a third of that amount will be deductible. This is actually a terrible idea when it comes to actually executing it, but I felt I had to come up with something if I could. I haven't thought of a way to game the tips deduction, but I am sure they will be coming.

Ex-CIA Insider Points to Overlooked U.S. Resource as Possible Gamechanger in Trump's Economic Agenda
Ex-CIA Insider Points to Overlooked U.S. Resource as Possible Gamechanger in Trump's Economic Agenda

Business Upturn

time32 minutes ago

  • Business Upturn

Ex-CIA Insider Points to Overlooked U.S. Resource as Possible Gamechanger in Trump's Economic Agenda

Washington, D.C., July 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — A presentation from former CIA advisor and White House insider Jim Rickards is raising new questions about the role long-ignored federal resources could play in supporting President Trump's agenda. Could this be a big part of Trump's upcoming economic proposal—widely referred to as the 'Big Beautiful Bill?' The case Rickards lays out is simple: the U.S. may already own the resources it needs to support major development—without borrowing, printing, or taxing. The Mineral Wealth America Forgot In the presentation, Rickards draws attention to a vast inventory of minerals buried beneath U.S. federal land—lithium, uranium, copper, and rare earths. '$516 billion is here in the Salton Sea area of California… $3.1 trillion is held in Nome, Alaska. And $7.35 trillion is here, in Midland, Texas…' Rickards writes. According to him, these assets have remained untouched 'because politicians haven't been able to raid it… which has allowed it to grow… for decades'. 'We're Going to Open Them Up' President Trump recently signaled an impending shift in resource policy: 'There are certain areas where we have great, raw earth… and we're not allowed to use it because of the environment. I'm going to open them up'. Rickards sees this as a potential inflection point. 'Trump is re-opening our mineral-rich Federal Lands. And fast-tracking companies that could recover trillions of dollars' worth of resources, right here in America' . This shift may quietly complement larger efforts to reinvigorate American manufacturing, supply chains, and self-reliance. Long-Stalled Projects May Be Back in Play According to Rickards, some of the most promising sites have been gridlocked for decades: 'Resolution Copper Mine… 29 years. Pebble Mine… since 1990. Thacker Pass Lithium Mine… since 1978' . 'We know exactly where these minerals are. We know they're worth trillions of dollars. And now—for the first time in half a century—we can go get them' . Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same. Ahmedabad Plane Crash

Trump defends Bondi amid backlash over Epstein files
Trump defends Bondi amid backlash over Epstein files

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump defends Bondi amid backlash over Epstein files

(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump defended Attorney General Pam Bondi on Saturday amid backlash against her from some of Trump's supporters over how the Justice Department handled the investigation into the death of accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged clientele. Trump said "nobody cares about" Epstein, and that more time or energy must not be wasted on his case, as he tried to unite his base of supporters in a nearly 400-word post on Truth Social. "What's going on with my "boys" and, in some cases, "gals?" They're all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We're on one Team, MAGA, and I don't like what's happening," Trump said. In a joint memo released on Monday, the FBI and Justice Department said there was no evidence to support a number of long-held conspiracy theories about Epstein's death in federal custody in 2019 and his alleged clientele. Conservative influencers from Laura Loomer to Elon Musk have criticized Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel for their findings, which came months after Bondi pledged to reveal major revelations about Epstein, including "a lot of names" and "a lot of flight logs." U.S. media, including Fox News and NBC News, have reported that FBI deputy director Dan Bongino has clashed with Bondi over the issue and is considering stepping down. Patel and Bongino, a former conservative podcaster, both previously made statements before working at the FBI about a so-called client list and often suggested that the government was hiding information about Epstein from the American public. Monday's memo on Epstein concluded that after reviewing more than 300 gigabytes of data, there was "no incriminating client list" nor was there any evidence that Epstein may have blackmailed prominent people. The memo also confirmed prior findings by the FBI which concluded that Epstein died by suicide in his jail cell while awaiting trial, and not as a result of a criminal act such as murder. Epstein's death while imprisoned in New York's Metropolitan Correctional Center has ignited controversy for years. Expectations for key revelations in his case grew when, in February, Fox News asked Bondi whether the Justice Department would be releasing Epstein's client list, and she said, "It's sitting on my desk right now to review." On Tuesday at the White House, Bondi walked that comment back, telling reporters that she was referring to the entire Epstein "file" along with other files pertaining to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. "That's what I meant by that," she said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store