Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

US fertility rates drop to historic low as young adults choose against having children

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Isabella Childs

Survey participants cited not finding the right partner, a desire to ‘focus on other things,’ ‘the environment,’ and ‘financial concerns’ among their reasons for deciding against having children.

A new Pew Research Center study found that the U.S. fertility rate reached a historic low in 2023, and fewer Americans are having children than ever before. According to the study, the number of childless American adults below the age of 50 who say they are unlikely to ever have children is now 47 percent (up 10 percentage points from the same demographic in 2018). 

Pew researchers surveyed 3,312 American adults ages 18 and older who are not parents, asking them whether or not they would like to have children and why. Interestingly, the answers from the adults aged 18-49 tended to be similar, while they differed from the responses given by the adults aged 50 and older, which also tended to be similar to each other. 

There was an exception to this pattern. Respondents in both age groups pointed to infertility, other medical issues, and a partner opposed to having children as reasons for childlessness. 

According to the study report, when the respondents were asked why they haven’t had children, “[t]he top reason cited by those ages 50 and older is that it just never happened,” while “[a]dults ages 18 to 49 are most likely to say they just don’t want to have children. These younger adults are also more likely than those in the older group to point to things like wanting to focus on other things, the state of the world or the environment, and financial concerns as major reasons they’re unlikely to have kids.” 

Fifty-seven percent of the childless young adults say they chose not to have children, while 31 percent of the childless adults aged 50 and older gave the same response. More women than men under the age of 50 said that they just don’t want children (64 percent versus 50 percent). 

The most common reason for not having children given by adults aged 50 and older was, “It just never happened” (39 percent), followed by, “Didn’t find the right partner” (33 percent), “Didn’t want to” (31 percent), “Wanted to focus on other things” (21 percent), and other reasons. 

Of the older adults surveyed, 38 percent say that there was a time when they wanted children, however, a shocking 32 percent said that they never wanted children, and 25 percent said they are unsure about whether or not they ever wanted children. 

The most common reason for not having children given by adults aged 49 and younger is “Don’t want to” (57 percent), followed by “Want to focus on other things” (44 percent), “Concerns about the state of the world” (38 percent), “Can’t afford to raise a child” (36 percent), and other reasons. 

Both young adults and older adults perceive lifestyle advantages as a product of childlessness; however, fewer older adults perceive benefits, while the majority of young adults perceive benefits. Among these perceived benefits include having time for hobbies and interests, affording things they want, being able to save for the future, being successful in their careers, and having an active social life – all things respondents say are possible because they don’t have children.  

The survey results show that childless adults aged 50 and older are concerned about their future welfare. According to the study, the majority of older childless Americans worry about having enough money, having someone to care for them, and being lonely, as they age. The American population is older than ever before, and that will pose significant challenges to society in the near future. 

Twenty-six percent (26 percent) of the childless Americans aged 49 and younger surveyed in the study cite “climate change” as the reason they are not having children. However, as Elon Musk pointed out last year when fertility rates in the U.S. reached a historic low, the waning population poses an imminent threat to humanity. 

Having children makes sense – for individuals, families, and the world at large. As Lila Rose and Dr. Pia de Solenni discussed in a recent podcast episode, all generations – particularly in the younger generations – must be shown that having children is worth it for them personally as well as for society in general. 

Reprinted with permission from Live Action

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

A Democracy That Can’t Take A Joke Won’t Tolerate Dissent

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Collin May

Targeting comedians is a sign of political insecurity

A democracy that fears its comedians is a democracy in trouble. That truth landed hard when Graham Linehan, the Irish writer behind Father Ted and The IT Crowd, stepped off a plane at Heathrow on Sept. 1, 2025, and was met by five London Metropolitan Police officers ready to arrest him for three posts on X.

Returning to the UK from Arizona, he was taken into custody on the charge of “suspicion of inciting violence”, an allegation levelled with increasing ease in an age wary of offence. His actual “crime” amounted to three posts, the most contentious being a joke about trans-identified men in exclusively female spaces and a suggestion that violated women respond with a swift blow to a very sensitive part of the male’s not-yet-physically-transitioned anatomy.

The reaction to Linehan’s arrest, from J.K. Rowling to a wide array of commentators, was unqualified condemnation. Many wondered whether free speech had become a museum piece in the UK. Asked about the incident, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer defended his country’s reputation for free expression but declined to address the arrest itself.

Canada has faced its own pressures on comedic expression. In 2022, comedian Mike Ward saw a 12-year legal saga end when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled five-to-four that the Quebec Human Rights Commission had no jurisdiction to hear a complaint about comments Ward made regarding a disabled Quebec boy. The ruling confirmed that human rights bodies cannot police artistic expression when no discrimination in services or employment has occurred. In that case, comic licence survived narrowly.

These cases reveal a broader trend. Governments and institutions increasingly frame comedy as a risk rather than a social pressure valve. In an environment fixated on avoiding perceived harm, humour becomes an easy and symbolic target. Linehan’s arrest underscores the fragility of free speech, especially in comedic form, in countries that claim to value democratic openness.

Comedy has long occupied an unusual place in public life. One of its earliest literary appearances is in Homer’s Iliad. A common soldier, Thersites, is ugly, sharp-tongued and irreverent. He speaks with a freedom others will not risk, mocking Agamemnon and voicing the frustrations of rank-and-file soldiers. He represents the instinct to puncture pretension. In this sense, comedy and philosophy share a willingness to speak uncomfortable truths that power prefers to avoid.

Aristotle, in his Poetics, noted that tragedy imitates noble actions and depicts people who are to be taken seriously. Comedy, by contrast, imitates those who appear inferior. Yet this lowly status is precisely what gives comedy its political usefulness. It allows performers to say what respectable voices cannot, revealing hypocrisies that formal discourse leaves untouched.

In the Iliad, Thersites does not escape punishment. Odysseus, striving to restore order, strikes him with Agamemnon’s staff, and the soldiers laugh as Thersites is silenced. The scene captures a familiar dynamic. Comedy can expose authority’s flaws, but authority often responds by asserting its dominance. The details shift across history, but the pattern endures.

Modern democracies are showing similar impatience. Comedy provides a way to question conventions without inviting formal conflict. When governments treat jokes as misconduct, they are not protecting the public from harm. They are signalling discomfort with scrutiny. Confident systems do not fear irreverence; insecure ones do.

The growing targeting of comedians matters because it reflects a shift toward institutions that view dissent, even in comedic form, as a liability. Such an approach narrows the space for open dialogue and misunderstands comedy’s role in democratic life. A society confident in itself tolerates mockery because it trusts its citizens to distinguish humour from harm.

In October, the British Crown Prosecution Service announced it would not pursue charges against Linehan. The London Metropolitan Police Service also said it would stop recording “non-crime hate incidents”, a controversial category used to document allegations of hateful behaviour even when no law has been broken. These reversals are welcome, but they do not erase the deeper unease that allowed the arrest to happen.

Comedy survives, but its environment is shifting. In an era where leaders are quick to adopt moral language while avoiding meaningful accountability, humour becomes more necessary, not less. It remains one of the few public tools capable of exposing the distance between political rhetoric and reality.

The danger is that in places where Agamemnon’s folly, leadership driven by pride and insecurity, takes root, those who speak uncomfortable truths may find themselves facing not symbolic correction but formal sanctions. A democracy that begins by targeting its jesters rarely stops there.

Collin May is a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a lawyer, and Adjunct Lecturer in Community Health Sciences at the University of Calgary, with degrees in law (Dalhousie University), a Masters in Theological Studies (Harvard) and a Diplome d’etudes approfondies (Ecole des hautes etudes, Paris).

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Tech Mogul Gives $6 Billion To 25 Million Kids To Boost Trump Investment Accounts

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Melissa O’Rourke

Billionaire Michael Dell and his wife, Susan, announced Monday that they will give 25 million American children a $250 deposit as an initial boost to President Donald Trump’s new investment program for children.

The Dells’ pledge totals $6.25 billion and will be routed through the Treasury Department. The goal, they say, is to extend access to the federal Invest America program — referred to as “Trump accounts” — established by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by the president in July.

The federal program guarantees a $1,000 federally funded account for every child born from 2025 through 2028, but the Dells’ money will instead cover children 10 years old and younger in ZIP codes where the median household income is under $150,000, according to Bloomberg.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

“What inspired us most was the chance to expand this opportunity to even more children,” the Dells wrote in the press release. “We believe this effort will expand opportunity, strengthen communities, and help more children take ownership of their future.” (RELATED: Trump Media Company To Create Investment Funds With Only ‘America First’ Companies)

 

Dell, founder and CEO of Dell Technologies with a net worth of about $148 billion, has been one of the most visible corporate leaders championing the Trump accounts. In June, he joined Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, and others at a White House roundtable promoting the initiative.

In addition to the new $6.25 billion pledge, Dell Technologies committed to matching the government’s $1,000 contribution for the children of its employees. Other companies, such as Charter Communications, Uber, and Goldman Sachs, have said they are willing to match the government’s contributions when the accounts launch.

“This is not just about what one couple or one foundation or one company can do,” the couple wrote. “It is about what becomes possible when families, employers, philanthropists, and communities all join together to create something transformative.”

Starting July 4, 2026, parents will be able to open one of the accounts and contribute up to $5,000 a year. Employers can put in $2,500 annually without it counting as taxable income.

The money must be invested in low-cost, diversified index funds, and withdrawals are restricted until the child turns 18, when the funds can be used for college, a home down payment, or starting a business. Investment gains inside the account grow tax-free, and taxes are owed only when the money is eventually withdrawn.

The accounts will “afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning,” according to the Trump administration.

The broader effort was originally spearheaded in 2023 by venture capitalist Brad Gerstner, who launched the nonprofit behind the Invest America concept.

“Starting 2026 & forevermore, every child will directly share in the upside of America! Huge gratitude to Michael & Susan for showing us all what is possible when we come together!” Gerstner wrote on X.

Continue Reading

Trending

X