France leads the baby race

Here's another reason for France to cheer up. The country is enjoying its biggest baby boom for three decades.

In 2008, 800,000 babies were born in continental France, a figure not achieved since 1981, according to figures today from the National Statistical Institute. The fertility rate rose in 2008 from 1.97 to 2.02 children per woman, consolidating France's lead over the rest of Europe.

The Europeans have lately produced on average 1.5 children per woman. The EU's 2008 figures are not out yet, but Ireland was second behind France in 2007 and Slovakia was bottom at 1.25.

The rising birth figures are testimony to the success of France's long-standing effort, following long population decline, to encourage people to have children. I don't need to run through all the generous (expensive) state-provided child care benefits, the free nursery schools, travel subsidiess and the family allowances than can reach 500 euros a month.

The return to work last week of Rachida Dati, the Justice Minister, five days after giving birth, was an exception to the tradition of long, paid maternity leave. One of Dati's Cabinet colleagues has just suggested making the 16 weeks' paid leave compulsory for all working women.

If recent trends continue, France will overtake Germany as Europe's most populous nation around the middle of this century. The new year began with 64.3 million inhabitants, 366,500 more than in 2008. Germany has 82.4 million but has long suffered from a low fertility rate of below 1.4. Russia, with its big demographic problem, managed to get back to that level in 2007 from 1.2 in 2000.  The United Kingdom, with a population of just under 61 million, has been doing better lately with a 1.85 fertility rate and it could also overtake Germany.

France is approaching the fertility of the United States, which, with its influx of young immigrants, is usually held up as the model for ageing Europe. The expected US rate for 2008 is 2.1. The very healthy French birth rate is certainly helped by the fairly large and young part of the population of recent immigrant origin -- as in Britain and Germany. Public discussion of the role of immigrants in the population growth is still largely taboo in France, though this is changing.

The French figures are impressive because the population is ageing faster than that of the USA and other regions outside Europe. The number of women of child-bearing age -- mainly born in the 1970s and 80s -- has been shrinking by two percent a year for the past two years. The average age of motherhood has now risen to nearly 30. Another big change from the old days is that 52 percent of children were born to unmarried parents. The figure was only six percent in 1970.

That's a big load of statistics, but they tell a story. The good population news is an example of the intelligent long-term policies in which France has excelled in recent decades. It was echoed, in the economic domain this week in a Newsweek magazine column headlined: The Last Model Standing is France.
 

Comments

[Linca]

There have been studies about the relative fertilities of descendants of immigrants and non immigrants in France, and they show the fertility rates are similar... Note that Algeria itself has a fertility rate only slightly above 2 kids per family.

[Malik]

viva la mama!

[Griselda]

A 'healthy' fertility rate is not something which should be applauded, given the miserable state our planet is in at present. I certainly wouldn't want to bring children into this world, it's extremely selfish, even cruel.

[Michel R, London]

Before some racists start bantering about Eurabia, here's an excellent study on the alleged contribution of immigrants to France's formidable fertility rate:

http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_telechargement/12957/telechargement_fichier_fr_publi_pdf1_pop.et.soc.francais.432.pdf

[John]

Charles Bremner, concerning the population of Germany, it is not 82.4 million but 82.06 million as shown by the latest release of the German statistical office last week. 82.4 million was the peak of the German population in 2005. Since then, Germany has been losing inhabitants every year. In 2008 Germany lost 160,000 inhabitants, the largest population loss since WW2.

You can see the press release of the German statistical office here: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2009/01/PD09__005__12411,templateId=renderPrint.psml

[Malik]

Griselda

why so serious ?

[Fernandez]

1. Congratulations to France.

2. "One of Dati's Cabinet colleagues has just suggested making the 16 weeks' paid leave compulsory for all working women." I hope whatever dolt said this is also planning on making it compulsory for men. I thought this paid maternity leave was supposed to be a victory for womens' rights?! As for Dati, had she not shown up for work, she likely would have been discarded in this week's re-shuffle. Maternity/Paternity leave is a benefit for the employee class. Business owners and entrepreneurs (which politicians are - they are just selling themselves) can't afford the time off.

3. I don't know what the swipe at America was about, but I think you'll find (if France kept statistics) that France's fertility rate, like the rest of Europe, is consistently higher among it's immigrant class. At any rate, a healthy birthrate is good for France and America. The rest of Europe (and Russia and Japan) are faced with senescence.

[Don]

[CB: If recent trends continue, France will overtake Germany as Europe's most populous nation around the middle of this century.]

While this is strictly speaking true, it is worded in a way that could be misleading. Usually the word “overtake” implies an increase of some sort - in this case the French population over the German by mid-century. Actually, by that time, given existing trends, the French population will be ** smaller ** than it is today. It will only “overtake” Germany because Germany will have decreased faster than France’s population.

[Before some racists start bantering about Eurabia, here's an excellent study on the alleged contribution of immigrants to France's formidable fertility rate:
http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_telechargement/12957/telechargement_fichier - Michel R. London]

It is interesting to note that according to the above study, the fertility rate of les “Etrangères” is almost 85% greater than les “Françaises”. Anyone who is familiar with the effect of compounding interest rates over time will recognize that over two generations, (mid-century) the composition of France’s population will be very different than what it is today. If the French are happy with the way les “Etrangères” are integrating into regular French life, then that should be no problem.

[susan durst]

"One of Dati's cabinet colleagues has just suggested making the 16 weeks paid leave compulsory for all working women" (CB).

This isn't what I read, Charles. Valérie Pécresse, Minister for Higher Education, suggested that the legal 16 weeks maternity leave should also be applied to women politicians in elected positions. The parliamentary statutes, established long ago, were not written with women MP's in mind and need to be updated, according to Pécresse.

Sounds to me like another feel-good, politically-correct measure (to smooth some of the feathers Dati ruffled) which will not change much in reality. Exactly like Martine Aubry inflicting a compulsory 35 hour working week on France, while admitting that she herself worked 12 hours a day ... The bottom line is that high-achieving women in positions of responsibility (politics or otherwise) will not necessarily feel bound by such regulations. If they opt to take less than their legal due, that is their choice.

Egalité is all very well, but whatever happened to liberté ?

[david]

I find it difficult to imagine a single problem afflicting the modern world that does not have at least its roots in the simple fact of overpopulation.

David

Cahors

[Rick]

As you suggest, CHARLES, the French Model is something to welcomed, provided state interventionism plays fair with competitor countries... and pigs escape the laws of gravity.

Oh, and what are we hearing this morning about the chances of the present euro group of counties surviving 2009?

Expensive things, babies.

[Christopher Muir]

The pitter patter of little feet - I guess it's instinctive for politicians to wish for larger populations. But there are so many arguments against such policies that you can bet on an exchange of views when you raise the subject. A year or so ago a senior Australian politician told couples to have one (baby) for the wife, one for the husband and one for their country. Now there are prams everywhere.

[Linca]

Compound interests on a different "Etrangères" fertility rate don't apply as little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality. Note that the fertility rate of those immigrants who have acquired the French nationality is pretty much the same as the rest of French women.

[david]

Go on Charles - be brave and publish my comment re-overpopulation! Merely factual c'nest-ce pas?

[It was published three hours ago, at 09.54 London time CB]

David

[Ros]

Charles says: "The United Kingdom, with a population of just under 61 million, has been doing better lately with a 1.85 fertility rate and it could also overtake Germany." The key-word here is "lately" - the site connected with the following link http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=951 only gives the 2005 figure - rather a long time ago! So uk may already have "overtaken" Germany - anyhow, I entirely agree with DAVID'S last post & GRISELDA'S higher up - there is no need to bring extra children into this world we now live in & certainly no need to use the word "overtake" as if this was yet another competition!

[Flora]

just note that people from Africa, and Maghreb are responsible for these results. They have around 5 to 12 children per couple(sometimes more...) and as soon as they are born in France, they are french...

[LindaG]

Is it suprising? French taxes reduce significantly if you have three children and someone with a wife/husband not working and children pays the same social charges as a single person although they use vastly more healthcare services. A high earning friend was recently told by his accountant to get married and have three kids. Hopefully they will stay around to support the pensions of all the childless people who are subsidising them now :-)

[John]

Don wrote: "While this is strictly speaking true, it is worded in a way that could be misleading. Usually the word “overtake” implies an increase of some sort - in this case the French population over the German by mid-century. Actually, by that time, given existing trends, the French population will be ** smaller ** than it is today. It will only “overtake” Germany because Germany will have decreased faster than France’s population."

This is completely wrong. The French statistical office INSEE made several population forecasts with different variables. In their central scenario (the most likely), Metropolitan France (the European part of France) will have 69,960,726 inhabitants in 2050, up from 62.4 million in 2009. France as whole (incl. overseas France) will have 73.5 million, up from 65.1 million in 2009.

In comparison, the German statistical office also made some population projections. In their central scenario, Germany will have 68,743,000 inhabitants in 2050, i.e. 1.2 million less than Metropolitan France and 4.8 million less than the entire France.

Note that the central scenario of the French statistical office is already lagging behind reality. They predicted 61,996,275 inhabitants in Metropolitan France on Jan. 1, 2009, but the figures published yesterday show there were in fact 62,448,977 inhabitants on Jan. 1, 2009, i.e. 452,702 more than predicted.

With 62,448,997 inhabitants, Metropolitan France is above even the highest scenario imagined by INSEE. In the highest scenario, Metropolitan France would have had 62,352,920 inhabitants on Jan. 1, 2009, which is still 96,057 inh. short of reality. For the records, in the highest scenario, Metropolitan France would have 78.9 million inhabitants in 2050, but so far even this highest scenario is lagging behind reality (growth is higher in reality than in this highest scenario).

So I'm afraid Don needs to update his data. If things continue on current trends, Metropolitan France would have about 80 million inhabitants in 2050, and the entire France would have about 84 million inhabitants.

[Don]

Suburbs Are 'Social Bomb' in France

A news story on NPR (National Public Radio* Jan. 14, 2009) on minorities in France says the banlieues are a “Social Bomb”. That French society is “Frozen” and that anger and hostility is building in the minority community in France.

[Quote from news story: “Sabeg laments no improvements have been made — the impoverished population lives there in increasing segregation.
"This is very dangerous. It is not French tradition to have ghettos, and you have millions and millions of peoples, three generations of population in these suburbs. This is a social bomb," Sabeg says.”]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99298290

[Compound interests on a different "Etrangères" fertility rate don't apply as little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality. – Linca]

Linca – you have a very rosy picture of minority girls in France.. Why should I believe you instead of the quote from Sabeq in the news story above?

(*NPR - that largest radio network in the U.S. with over 850 stations nationwide.)

[John Gregory Flinn]

"...in the population growth is still largely taboo in France, though this is changing."

"Before some racists start bantering about Eurabia,.."

MICHEL R - I would imagine the former permits a mature debate including negative comment, without being labelled as your post.

As long as immigrants are (eventually) 'assimilated' into the nation's gene pool then this follows the pattern of migration over centuries.
"Integrating" is not quite the same, and, for example, fosters multiculturism in the UK and elsewhere.

However there are groups who have no intention of participating; and proceed to import their wives, husbands, relatives, customs, language etc., into western european life often at taxpayer expense. Further, they often agitate and expect concessions to be made that effectively embeds their status as OK.

My understanding of French republican values indicate that this latter group's expectations clash, or will clash here.

On the baby numbers - Bravo!

[Ros]

LINCA: "Compound interests on a different "Etrangères" fertility rate don't apply as little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality." I just can't imagine where you got this idea from and from pure curiosity should like to know?

[gaetano]

Native french to work and to pay taxes and immigrants to breed.
You can understand who are new slaves.

[Lily]

Don:

"There is still "big resistance," he says, to the notion that the government and French society should give more to those who need more — especially if those in need are black or Arab." (Sabeg)

Nice to see you quote Sabeg.

I'm not sure though whether he really wants France to follow the American example.

[Lily]

Don:

"given existing trends, the French population will be ** smaller ** than it is today. It will only “overtake” Germany because Germany will have decreased faster than France’s population."

The nice thing is: We're all Europeans! And, in Europe, there will be many French and many German citizens. So what?

I have little doubt that you can understand the reasoning. I heard the US is also going to grow unequally, putting US citizens of Hispanic descent numberwise in favour of the current majority.

[Edward Johns]

I suppose that the reason for politicians wanting population increases is that old age pensions will have to be funded by someone! Sadly, for the UK to have a similarly sized population to that of France whilst having a land area two and a half times smaller means that the UK is already overcrowded with transport and other important infrastructural areas strained to the limit.

[Blendi Progri]

From where I am standing, the Children of France look like the future of France.

:)

[Malik]

"Native french to work and to pay taxes and immigrants to breed.
You can understand who are new slaves."

gaetano you're a stupid racist.

[Francois D]

To understand and explain the demographic particularities is complex.

I suspect several components:

- For very young girls, mainly from poor families, it's probably a way to be independant. They may got a salary (allocation de parents isolé). But the young mother must absolutly live alone for having this allocation. If she wants to live with the father and if there is a Social Services Inspection, the young father must hide during the visit. It is annoying for child's health because they lock themselves and do not have the systematic visit of the child nurse (puericultrice de la protection maternelle infantile) for advices (and check the child health)

- About the 70 and 80 generation, that receives the economic crisis in full face, I admire them because they are optimistic and full of energy. Watch this clip.

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=kOru9ITtVIg

"Toi+moi" means: whe want to live in couple. "Entrez dans la dance" means "we want to enter in the active society"

I think this clip should be shown to students in sociolgy. It shows young couples, pregnant girls, probably not all married at church, but confident. I should call this generation: the "anti bling bling generation".

- 30 to 40 years women want child safety during pregnancy, birth and after. Emphasis should be done about the high proportion of assisted reproduction for this age range. But what incitates these women to procreate is the certainty to return to their jobs, and to have a child care system, nurseries, and certified childminders (with very flexible hours) because they work hard.

PS Rachida Dati breastfeeds her baby.

[gaetano]

Malik I am not racist, I dont belive I am better than you, but is racist who refuses to recognise my identity and works to wipe out natives from ancestral fatherland.

[Linca]

@Ros :

All children born in France who grow up in the country can ask the French nationality when they reach 16, and most do. It used to be automatic. Note that the number of foreigners in France is constant.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_en_France#Naturalisation_des_.C3.A9trangers

@Don

Nothing that I said contradicts what Sabeg said - he doesn't talk about demographics much... He paints an exaggeratedly dark picture of the situation mostly because he wants to get into politics as "representative of the minorities" whom he doesn't represent.

[Don]

[John wrote: This is completely wrong. The French statistical office INSEE made several population forecasts with different variables. In their central scenario (the most likely), Metropolitan France (the European part of France) will have 69,960,726 inhabitants in 2050,

AND (following):

So I'm afraid Don needs to update his data. If things continue on current trends, Metropolitan France would have about 80 million inhabitants in 2050, and the entire France would have about 84 million inhabitants.]

I wish you had supplied a URL for your figures as I did.

If you look at this INSEE study from March 2007 it says:

(http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_telechargement/12957/telechargement_fichier_fr_publi_pdf1_pop.et.soc.francais.432.pdf )

“la France est proche du seuil de remplacement des generations”. [France is on the threshold of being able to replace its population] which implies it is not quite at that point yet.

CB wrote: “The fertility rate rose in 2008 from 1.97 to 2.02 children per woman”.

It is generally assumed that a fertility rate of 2.1 per woman is required to keep a population from declining. It is over 2 children per woman due to children dying before child bearing age, homosexuality, sterility etc. Based on present fertility rates, the population of France will decrease.

So, your figures, if correct, suggest that (a) the fertility rate is going to go up in France or (b) there is going to be more immigration to France or both. What is the rationale for either (a) or (b)? Sarkozy ran on a platform of being much more selective in letting immigrants in and the type of immigrant he favors has a higher education than formerly and consequently less children (I quoted a World Bank study showing that education and fertility rates are inversely correlated in a previous posting on this subject). I suspect the 1100 cars that were torched last Dec. 31 could only have increased the feeling in France that Sarkozy’s view should be supported. Many other countries in Europe have tightened their immigration rules.

Even if the INSEE study you quote is correct, the highest scenario they project for the population of France in 2050 (41 years from now) is still less than the CURRENT population of Germany ! That means France has to steadily increase and Germany has to steadily decrease for the next 40 years. So, my main point that France will “overtake” Germany still requires, not only that the population of France increases, but that Germany decreases. A most unlikely scenario unless the Germans go to sleep for 40 years.

But, you should know that there are so many variables affecting population statistics that projections going out 40 years consist of one half science and one half pure guesswork. Who can know, for instance, what the true immigration rate to France will be in 5 years if there are other riots in France or if economic conditions change radically? No one can predict these things with any certainty. All that is known for sure is that:

(1) the current fertility rate in France still means a declining population (Mar. 2007 INSEE report above)

(2) the fertility rate of les “Etrangeres” is going up 4 times faster than for les “Francaises” (Mar 2007 INSEE report).

My other main point was that the French population will change by a lot in the next two generations, given present trends. If you accept the figures in the INSEE report from March 2007, the fertility rate of les “Estrangeres” increased by 17% but that of les “Francaises” increased by only 4%. If this trend holds, it is strongly indicative of a very different French population than currently exists. This is not a problem if you accept, as Linca does, that “Compound interests on a different "Etrangères" fertility rate don't apply as little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality”. Or you can believe Sabeg (quoted in a news story that came out about the French banlieues on the largest radio network in the United States on Jan. 14, 2009) who says that the

banlieues are a “social bomb”.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99298290

Don

[Ros]

LINKA: I thought that the child had to be BORN in France and not just "grow up" which doesn't really mean anything - look at this link http://vosdroits.service-public.fr/F334.xhtml. Sorry to be stubborn, but I still don't get what you mean when you say "as little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality."

[Lily]

"There is still "big resistance," he says, to the notion that the government and French society should give more to those who need more — especially if those in need are black or Arab." (Sabeg)

Don:

So do you believe the French government shold GIVE MORE TO THOSE WHO NEED MORE?

That's what Sabeg postulates.

I don't have the time to get into the situation of the poor in the US.

Maybe others are simply better at keeping the discontent quiet or blame them for their own misfortune.

"That means France has to steadily increase and Germany has to steadily decrease for the next 40 years. So, my main point that France will “overtake” Germany still requires,..." (you)

Who cares?

[Linca]

Again, the fact that the number of foreigners has been constant in France for the last 30 years (source : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9mographie_de_la_France#.C3.89volution_du_nombre_des_immigr.C3.A9s_et_des_.C3.A9trangers_depuis_1968 ) shows that compound interest doesn't apply. People born in France, and indeed immigrants, almost always become French.

This doesn't contradicts the problems that are currently happening in the projects, but which have little to do with immigration : as many cars are burning around Lille and the rest of Northern France, where the people have white skin, being of French ancestry or descendants of Polish immigrants, as are burning in the rest of France ; the projects certainly weren't a nice place to live either 50 years ago, when there wasn't African immigration...

[Linca]

@Ros : When I say that little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality, I mean exactly that : girls born in France of Foreign parents nearly always get the French nationality ; indeed, all kids of foreign parents who are born and then grow up in France can ask and get French nationality. Which means nearly all those kids born of foreign parents will be French, and indeed will have France-level fertility rates.

Most kids who immigrate (with their family...) when they are young kids and grow up in France also end up getting naturalized, and also have France-level fertility rates, though ; getting the nationality isn't automatic, but is usually granted.

[Ranokivio]

Don,

I was just looking at this blog again and I see that this topic is still one of your favorite!
For other bloggers, see our last discussion here:
http://timescorrespondents.typepad.com/charles_bremner/2008/11/happiness-start.html#comments

So I will just remind you my main points here as you seem ready for another discussion on the subject!

*Recent immigrants have always a higher fecundity rate, in France and elsewhere. However, studies show that the fecundity of people born in a country (france, US, elsewhere...) is not linked to the origin of their parents (immigrants or not)

*It is unfair to compare black population in the US and in France as black/arab population is from recent immigration in France while it has been there for more than a century in the US.

*So integration of black/arab population in France has rather to be compared to integration of hispanics in the US. And hispanics don't seem to be more integrated in the US than blacks/arabs in France (most of them still speak spanish)

*Here is the fecundity rate and the population predictions for the US:
Total fertility rate: 2.1 children born/woman (2008 est.)
- Hispanics: 3.0
- African Americans: 2.2
- White Americans: 2.0
- Asian and Pacific Islanders: 1.9
Population projections 2008 2050
Non-Hispanic whites 68% 46%
Hispanic 15 % 30%
African Americans 12% 15%
Asian American 5% 9%
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
So the US population will also change by a lot in the next 2 generation (as it has changed during the last century and as it will change in France and in other country with high immigration) and I don't think it is a big problem as immigrants will get old and their children will eventually be integrated (as blacks/arabs in France) so sorry, I don't see any social bomb anywhere.

*The fecundity of french people without the immigrants is still the highest in europe as immigrants count for less than 0.1 on the fecundity rate:
(2005):
Fecundity rate in France:1.92
Fecundity rate without immigrants: 1.82
(2006):
Fecundity rate in France:1.98
Fecundity rate without immigrants: 1.9

See the other post for corresponding links.

* Concerning your last point above, I guess you will be interested by this link (sorry, only in French)
http://www.insee.fr/fr/themes/document.asp?ref_id=ip1089&reg_id=0#inter1

[Rick]

France spent 37 billion Euros on various forms of family support in 2008 and deserves everyone’s respect for doing so. The country doesn’t fall into the trap of regarding the birth-rate as an insignificant trifle. No, it’s as much an indicator of national health as ‘la dette publique’... er,

But as I was saying, there’s nothing quite as ‘réjouissant’ as that (oh-so-encouraging!) patter of tiny feet. Time to open the champagne! Just look at those poor Brits: according to someone called Bob Chester, they don’t even have a family policy!

Still, they’re not an un-mixed blessing, kids. Didn’t a bunch of them frighten the living bejaysus out of out of those ticket-collectors, or was it bus-drivers? And didn’t they, in turn, shut down a main-line station..., or was it a city? And wasn’t the government as frightened of the ‘cheminots’ as they, in turn, were of the kids?... er...

Be that as it may, children are the future. You can’t say fairer than that. As for Mr David Cerny’s so-called sculpture of France; now, that wasn’t fair at all – an empty space with ‘GREVE’ written across it! Strikes, what strikes! Talk about hitting a nation when their catenaries are down! It was sabotage, not strikes at all. It’s just not funny...

And there won’t be much of a future for certain little places in the east, like Czecho- or was it Slovakia?... not until they learn a bit of respect for their elders and betters, more polite and more, er, ‘productive’ colleagues!

Matthew Parris just isn’t funny, either, with his completely and utterly, and totally unfounded, insinuations about Tintin. These are baseless. Just like the ones about Asterminx! Yes, today he’s suggesting that the little lad’s not the only one... you know what I mean: ‘[w]hich comic-strip character would dare come out, if that's the way the continentals take the news?’

How dare he even think such a thing? The man’s obviously stark, staring bonkers! Hasn’t he heard we’re European baby-making champions? He’ll have to eat his words. Mind you, what with their so-called “cuisine”...

[Ros]

LINCA: "When I say that little girls born in France have a tendency to get the French nationality, I mean exactly that : girls born in France of Foreign parents nearly always get the French nationality " -I understand perfectly BUT how do you know that girls get it more than boys?

[Pete Murphy]

It's astounding that there are still people like this writer, so detached from the challenges presented by overpopulation - unemployment, poverty, environmental degradation and resource depletion - that they would celebrate a baby boom in a nation like France, three times as densely populated as the United States.

Pete Murphy
Author, "Five Short Blasts"

[Lex Stevens]

One of the favorite topics of my grand parent's and great grand parent's generations was Roman Catholics. My family are all Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, which was the dominant ethnic group in the US for many generations. Of course, they would say, as everyone knows, Catholics breed like rabbits, worship idols, are beholden to a foreign potentate, and are lazy. The predictions came true: one eventually became President, they have taken over certain areas of the US government, and eventually they will dominate the US. Look what has happened to the Netherlands: Catholic majority, then large welfare state, and whoring and drug taking in the streets, in front of God and everybody!

Various 'social bombs' in past western history have been the poor, the working classes, and the peasants. (Jews, of course, being more savvy and better organized, attacked society from the top, and therefore do not apply here.)

There will always be some young woman who thinks that all her problems will be solved by having a baby, and there will be some young man to help her along in her endeavor. I think that the baby is not so much the problem as is the fact that the girl is stupid (or badly educated) and she can't do the math, and understand that she is condemning herself and her child to poverty. She will continue to make bad choices and will learn very slowly, if ever.

I think that the statistics also show that as levels and quality of education rise the birth rate falls. That has always been one of the core issues in fighting poverty.

If one accepts the premise that excessive immigration has a longterm, adverse effect on a society, then I think that it makes more sense to study why so many people want to immigrate. (I don't buy the argument that they risk life and limb just to get on the dole. Some probably do, but it makes no sense to make policy based on the exception.) Immigrating is not easy, even under the best of circumstances, and those who go to all the trouble are motivated and determined. If they immigrate because of repressive governments, then we should not be supporting repressive governments. If they immigrate because of lack of economic opportunity at home, then we should support economic development in their countries. If they immigrate because of lack of education, then we should foster education, etc.

[Linca]

@Ros : I never said anything about boys getting or not getting the French nationality ; as far as I know, they do it as much, if not more, than the girls ; but for contradicting the point that foreign womens' higher fertility rate has compound interest, naturalization of girls was more relevant.

[Don]

[Lilly wrote:
Don:
"given existing trends, the French population will be ** smaller ** than it is today. It will only “overtake” Germany because Germany will have decreased faster than France’s population."
The nice thing is: We're all Europeans! And, in Europe, there will be many French and many German citizens. So what?]

Here’s “so what”. The article that CB wrote – and to which I was responding – is entitled: “France leads the baby race”. A “race” implies a competition. You are saying there is no competition. Complain to CB about the title.

I beg to differ about your opinion there is no competition. I have seen over the years (this is NOT the first year the French have won the fertility sweepstakes) that the French media is treating this as a de facto race. And in fact, it is. [See title of French article from 2005 below]. Countries understand that their influence in the world (and what country is more conscious of its influence in the world – or lack thereof – than France?) is closely tied to size – though clearly there are many other factors as well. But, if you have a declining population, your influence is almost certainly going to decline. That is instinctively understood by almost every country in the world. France is no exception.

It is nice you feel so “European”.
I assure you, there are precious few Europeans who do. Just look at the lack of coordination of economic policies in the EU in the face of the current financial crisis – quite possibly the worst since the 1930’s. Germany [Europe’s largest economy] couldn’t run fast enough from Sarkozy’s interventionist plans, as one example of lack of that feeling of European-ness that you speak of.

Another example:: given all the talk about the formation of a European military force since the collapse of the Soviet Union, can you tell me - 18 years after the collapse of the USSR – how many divisions this European force has? Where is it located? [How convenient the idea of a European force was advanced ( by France primarily- the Germans went along to be polite) after the main adversary of Europe – the Soviet Union with its SS-20 missiles in Eastern Europe – was defeated by the U.S. – but that is another story for another time.).

One more example:: Germany just did a survey of German feelings about the Euro (on its tenth anniversary of its introduction) and there was a huge percentage (I’ve forgotten the exact percentage) that think it was a mistake because prices have gone up (in their minds, at least).

So embrace your European-ness if it makes you feel good. Maybe someday everyone will feel this European-ness that you speak of - but, for sure - it is not around the corner anytime soon. The Western Europeans have lived under the U.S. military protection since WW II. That is about to end for many reasons. Then you will get to test how European you really feel. The European reaction to the current financial crisis is a foretaste. Good luck!

Title of one article from 2005 when France was celebrating its relatively high birth rate.
“Les Françaises font plus de bébés -
La France est le pays d’Europe où il naît le plus grand nombre d’enfants chaque année.”

[Don]

[@Don

Nothing that I said contradicts what Sabeg said - he doesn't talk about demographics much... He paints an exaggeratedly dark picture of the situation mostly because he wants to get into politics as "representative of the minorities" whom he doesn't represent.

Posted by: Linca ]

Ah ... so that's it. Everything is fine. Sabeq exaggerates because he wants to be a representative of the minorities. I could believe that (politicians around the world are self serving) but there are many other French people I could quote that say the same thing (e.g. Bernard-Henri Levy].

Were the 1100 cars that were torched two weeks ago just a media exaggeration also?

[John Gregory Flinn]

"and as soon as they are born in France, they are french..."

FLORA - it used to be the case in the Republic of Ireland that Irish citizenship was automatic by birth there. But it was felt this law was being exploited because large numbers of foreign women were arriving at Dublin and Shannon airports from Africa and Asia, and in late stages of pregnancy. After giving birth their babies were automatically Irish so the mothers got to stay as well - then the fathers, and so on.
So they had a referendum and prohibited that automatic entitlement.
However the change has had unexpected side effects, ref Google, or:
http://sarahcarey.blogspot.com/2005/05/this-weeks-st.html

LEX STEVENS - I'm not sure catholics can be blamed for the welfare dependency culture as you describe, but I can agree with your point about "social bombs", and education etc.

Western governments (and their agencies) are political. For example; despite the fact that emigration of nurses and doctors from Ghana impoverishes that poor country even further, this is often encouraged and sanctioned.
Because the government want to get re-elected, and they will not allow such (notional) staffing problems in their health service to become a reason for their political demise.

[Rick]

I’ve got news for you. PETE MURRAY. France is just about the least, repeat least populated country in Europe. With a population density of 110 per km², she occupies an uncharacteristically humble spot near the bottom of the list.

But not for long, though. As Mr Bremner shows, France is making gallant efforts –in every conceivable sense – rapidly to remedy the situation. Monsieur Frenchman has his own ways of making his own version of ‘Five Short Blasts’ or so it seems. Jean-Pierre’s not called a world-class bedroom athlete for nothing, you know.

[Daniel Strohl]

The above discussions about statistics are interesting. However, nobody seems to have noticed the link to NEWSWEEK made by CHARLES at the end of his article.

I took the time to read the NEWSWEEK article. It is interesting and its general tone does not align with the usual condescending tone of the comments of some AS regulars of this blog convinced (at least up to a few months ago :) of the unarguable supremacy of their economic model and even of their civilisation model. Furthermore, the author seems to be (US)American or German - not French, i.e he can't be accused to have made "un playdoyer pro domo" :).

LEX STEVENS,

Re : first paragraph of your post dated 15 JAN 14:39

Lex, are you trying to detonate a new religion war in Europe ? :).

More seriously : “Catholic majority, then large welfare state, and whoring and drug taking in the streets”. This is, mildly put, an oversimplification. There is “whoring and drug taking in the streets” in many states, including in the US if one relies on criminality statistics. However, the dominant i.e ruling class over there is still WASP and their ability to enforce and in many cases to follow moral rules (for instance in financial matters :) is arguable at the least ...

PS : I am a protestant – therefore, no “playdoyer pro-domo”
either :).

[Lily]

"It is nice you feel so “European”.
I assure you, there are precious few Europeans who do."

Don:

Wow, you're passionate about the topic!

As an insider, I can assure you that everyone I know, both in Germany and France, is de facto pro-European. It may be a challenge to overcome political differences and suss out the details of our way together, but it will eventually be done.

Citizens in a democracy tend to be critical of their leaders (which is a good thing) or of how the EU works today. Still, a majority WANT A UNITED EUROPE.

If the French are proud of their birth rate, why shouldn't they? They are exemplary in helping families raise their kids. Germany and other European countries admire France for that and try to model their own family politics on France.

That's the nice thing about our union/society at large. Not all have the same talents but we aim and shall aim at sharing our talents and learn from one another, and competition is also part of it. It allows us to grow.

[Lily]

"there are many other French people I could quote that say the same thing" (Don addressing Linca)

Don:

There are other French people who will say the same thing because there are self-critical French people, sensitive French people. Some call them "whiners" when they name their problems. I would say that it's a positive trait to not look away and learn from mistakes, try to address the problem of social inequality or marginalization.

Do you think it's better to arm society at large as happens in other societies?

[Gilles]

Michel R. London'comment say [Before some racists start bantering about Eurabia, here's an excellent study on the alleged contribution of immigrants to France's formidable fertility rate:
http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_telechargement/12957/telechargement_fichier - Michel R. London]

The study is in French but it is also avalaible in English :

http://www.ined.fr/en/resources_documentation/publications/pop_soc/bdd/publication/1242/

[James]

More bad news then!