There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Putin is urging women to have as many as 8 children after so many Russians died in his war with Ukraine 


<span style="color:#323232;">Russian President Vladimir Putin is urging Russians to have more children. 
</span><span style="color:#323232;">"Large families must become the norm," Putin said in a speech Tuesday. 
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Russian birth rates are falling amid war in Ukraine and a deepening economic crisis. 
</span>

Russian President Vladimir Putin is urging women to have as many as eight children as the number of dead Russian soldiers continues to rise in his war with Ukraine, worsening the country’s population crisis.

Addressing the World Russian People’s Council in Moscow on Tuesday, Putin said the country must return to a time when large families were the norm.

“Many of our grandmothers and great-grandmothers, had seven, eight, or even more children,” Putin said.

Immersive_Matthew ,

If this is true, this has to be the ultimate way of not really dealing with the population crisis upon us. Not saying any government is doing a great job here as they are all beating around the bush and not addressing root causes, but this one from Putin has to be the most delusional of them all.

Tinidril ,

There is no population crisis, unless you mean there are too many people. Most of the work we do is entirely unnecessary and only exists to help billionaires become trillionaires. At least that’s the case in countries that don’t need meat to throw in front of bullets.

Necessary jobs are mostly farming, mining, manufacturing, and customer service. The first two have already been automated to need only a tiny percentage of the workforce they once require. Manufacturing is mostly there as well, and is getting closer all the time. Customer service still employs a lot of humans, but even those jobs are being replaced or augmented with physical or logical bots.

Raxiel ,

Necessary jobs are mostly farming, mining, manufacturing, and customer service.

And elder care, which is set to be a real growth industry

Tinidril ,

That’s fair, but even in that there is a whole lot that automation can do to address the ratio of elderly to caregivers. Japan is ahead of the curve on population decline, and they are not exactly fond of immigrants. That has been a huge driver behind the development of technologies for elder care.

kofe ,

That and healthcare are counted as services iirc, which can contribute to some confusion when you look at 70% ish of the economy being made up of that. But most jobs being created now are like the top commenter said, minimum wage service jobs that don’t meet the needs of employees and aren’t great for customers, either

Immersive_Matthew ,

The crisis is that without enough babies, there will not be enough young people to support the older people. It is why places like Canada have such high immigration as it offsets the lack of births from Canadian citizens. Now, it is a crisis from a planet health perspective. No. It is the best thing that could happen right now as we really could use less people and their associated carbon emissions, but it will still impact the economy hard especially since it is becoming a steep birth rate decline in so many countries. Feels like a free fall right now and to address is going to take as much change as it will take to fix the climate emergency. Might even have some of the same solutions.

Tinidril ,

The crisis is that without enough babies, there will not be enough young people to support the older people.

So you didn’t read a word I said beyond the first sentence. Got it.

Immersive_Matthew ,

I do not understand your comment as my comment was building upon yours as you went down the billion support path and I just added the old age pension path.

RBWells ,

I say this as someone who had lots of kids - you cannot build an economy on a continuous explosion of population. That is ridiculous. There are enough people - the population of the earth has more than doubled in my lifetime. I’d much rather work till I die, than tell someone else they must reproduce. Let people who want kids have them, let people who don’t want kids not have any, it’s working out and population growth has slowed and hopefully population will decrease. That’s fine, yes many of us will be old at once, that’s not the fault of the non-reproducing people. There wouldn’t be fewer old people even if everyone had kids, it has to happen before things settle back out.

Immersive_Matthew ,

Very much agree. Besides, it is looking like we really are entering an era of significant human life extension if you believe all the longevity breakthroughs.

Socsa ,

Don’t care, I’ll be dead.

Immersive_Matthew ,

Maybe. There is serious breakthroughs with longevity tech with aging and diseases perhaps being a thing of the past in the decades to come. Maybe.

Meowoem ,

Lucky we have automation and AI making everyone jobless, will be plenty of people and machines to look after the older generations

Immersive_Matthew ,

That is a real crisis on the horizon as the evidence so far is that there is no support for those who get displaced. I am counting down the days till my career is replaced. I am Imagineering a VR Theme Park and am certain that in the years to come you will be able to ask AI to make you one via a prompt and it will customize it to your tastes. When that happens I need to find a new career. Unsure what but I am hopeful that new careers will open up that we cannot foresee today. That or we will all be in a hellscape of which I have positioned myself to weather.

Meowoem ,

I think if we don’t change the system then we’re going to have a world of hurt for pretty much everyone, if we do change the system into something that facilitate an existence where people can survive periods without work or with minimal work then it could become a golden age.

A lot of the big problems with that comes from legacy obsessions which persist even when technical solutions have displaced the need or reason behind them. Building sites are already nothing like they used to be, the cost of construction has fallen dramatically especially in labour time but house prices rise because they’re not tied to construction cost but availability, which is often kept purposely low so rich people who run government can have big numbers in their balance s sheets. At some point this stress point will fracture.

Subtle automation already makes things like surveying and designing incredibly easy, we’re not far from the point where ai assisted architecture tools are as easy to use as the Sims and will produce plans which can be automatically passed or rejected for the technical side of planning. Not only will more visible forms of automation like concrete shuttering and pouring become more widely adopted this again reducing the time and cost of construction but they’ll have sensor driven analysis which can be uploaded to local authorities for instant inspection and verification. Likewise for cable routing, pipework, insulation, plastering, brickwork, roofing, decorating…

When a house can be demolished and rebuilt in weeks for the cost of machine rental and materials then the housing crisis will fade away, especially when industrial areas shrink due to efficiency of automation, office space gets repurposed, and transport infrastructure gains efficiency - areas like where I live in the UK with absurd property prices are almost certainly going to see automated construction tools take a lot of industry and transport underground - shooting cargo down small underground networks could replace a huge amount of road and rail usage which would be a huge positive for people and free up space for housing.

I got off track but what I’m getting at is we can use these things to solve major problems in our society, but we need to make sure people can lose their job and go through peeiods of adjustment without it ruining their life.

Immersive_Matthew ,

I agree, but as you pointed out, we already have many tools to solve most of our global issues, but instead we carry on like we like in a scarcity world. I am concerned about the AI disruption as I am not seeing evidence of us really caring for those impacted let alone the millions impacted daily by how the global economy is run. We can fix so many things, but don’t. Heck, even getting rid of day light savings is a cause too far it seems despite overwhelming support.

Meowoem ,

That is depressingly true, though I do think there’s hope. I’m in a lot of open source dev and design communities, they’re flourishing and growing steadily because they’re able to build on all the prior developments. Every day people are writing code to improve design tools, and writing code to improve programming languages and development environments so that it’s easier to make better design tools … and the better the design tools get the easier it is to make better designs on them, easier to build on prior open source designs and improve or customise them.

I already use AI coding tools in my open source project, they’re awkward and not always useful but for certain tasks they can save hours - for example I got it to divide a circle into an arbitrary amount of sections and return the quadrant coordinates, I could have worked it out and coded it myself but not doing things like that allows me to make much more progress. The easier it gets to code the more time I’ll be focused on making it do useful things which will result in a far better product.

Likewise the complexity and quality of stuff I see on 3d printing model sites continues to improve, printers continue to improve… We can’t be far away from ai assisted pick&place enabling complex electronics to be built into designs - there will be a cheap open source printer that can make everything except the magnets in the motors. A lot of companies are going to find the their entire product line is completing against items that can be made better and cheaper in any tech guys garage.

It wasn’t eBay that took down Tandy and Maplins it was the people with any garage space buying the same bulk orders of components but selling them without the overheads. The same will happen to Hotpoint and Logitech, people who have bootstrapped high quality fabrication labs in the garage selling things made from open source designs.

They won’t be able to stop it, they might slow it for a while but progress is as a river in that you can only hold it back so long.

Immersive_Matthew ,

This is encouraging for the open source movement. youtu.be/vaMxTSm53UU?si=EGygL-AZBkfsDr-q

Meowoem ,

Yeah it really is, I think we’re going to see a lot more FlOSH starting to take niches in the market

crackajack , (edited )

There is no population crisis, unless you mean there are too many people.

Barring climate change or World War 3 doesn’t get us first, if things are going the way it does now, we’re expecting global population decline or it could plateau. Countries across the world is experiencing increase in standards of living so we can expect decline in birth rates too in proportion.

Tripp1976 ,

That is a GOOD thing. So not a crisis.

Auzymundius ,

What makes that a bad thing?

Socsa ,

This is fantastic. Humans are shit.

chaosppe ,
@chaosppe@lemmy.world avatar

Good luck solving the fertility problem. I don’t think any country has managed to figure it out yet.

voidMainVoid ,

It isn’t a problem. There are already too many people on the Earth.

espinosaav ,

There are enough resources, they’re just not distributed correctly.

INHALE_VEGETABLES ,

And they never will be, which is why there is too many people.

DeepGradientAscent , (edited )
@DeepGradientAscent@programming.dev avatar

For some, it’s never about having enough or even a lot. It’s about making sure everyone else has less than them.

Tinidril ,

Nonsense. Sure, we are getting what we need out of the planet, but we are destroying it in the process. Modern agriculture absolutely cannot continue producing what it is now indefinitely. Fertilizer alone is massive issue, never mind the destruction of old growth forest for farmland, or the contributions to climate change.

qyron ,

Nonsense.

Close to one third of total agricultural production is wasted yearly, with almost half of that never even leaving the fields.

Fertilizers are another scarecrow but there is a never ending source of nitrogen and phosphor right at hand going to waste in many countries with no second thought: waste water treatment muds.

And there are more fields laying fallow today than there were 50 years ago in many countries.

More forest is cut down to be replaced by palm tree for oil than for conventional agriculture and the clearing for cattle is just bad manegement of lands.

Tinidril ,

Reducing our agricultural output by 1/3 wouldn’t come close to making it sustainable, though it would certainly be an improvement. Fertilizer costs have been a big problem worldwide, so if using waste products were practical we would be doing it already. Shifting weather patterns from climate change are why a lot of those fields are fallow, and that’s only going to get worse.

Countries that use less than average resources are working far harder to use more resources than rich countries are working to use less, and I don’t see a plan to make that change. As individual choices go, no choice a person can make will reduce their impact more than having one less child than they otherwise would. We just don’t need 10 billion people on this planet.

qyron , (edited )

Adoption of new alternatives is not easy nor fast.

Try and give a call to your local waste water treatment plant and ask for a tour. Tell them you want to understand better what they are doing and how, what destination they give to muds, etc. You’ll be surprised to know most countries sent those nutrient rich by-products to landfills for decades and only very recently the muds started to be valued.

And are you sure about that? Because I’d quicker point to population exodus from rural to city areas.

The discussion about cutting back on agricultural production is just starting. Too much goes to waste, when too many go without. The point is that by reducing production, resource management will be a forced point of action. Debateable but it is as valid as any other idea.

But like it or not, the human population will peak and stabilize at the 10 billion and we can sustain ourselves without burning the house down.

Tinidril ,

Name one society that has ever managed significant decreases in production of anything to help the environment. We’ve found ways to lower the impact of increasing production, and we’ve even found ways to reduce the impact of current production. I can’t think of a single instance of a society broadly adopting a reduction of goods and services for the environment.

The fact is that, while there are many improvements to be made, every one of those improvements would work better with a lower population. There are also no realistic projections of humanity reaching a reasonable level of long term sustainability. We also have a long history of badly failing to reach projected sustainability targets. Ignoring a multiplicative factor that impacts sustainability in every area is just foolish.

Yeah, we are projected to peak around 10b. 9b would be better though, or even 9.9b. 1b would have been fantastic, though probably still too high. But what happens when you get all the lifestyle and efficiency increases you dream of? How do you know that population trends won’t shift? It doesn’t take much. Just a +/-0.2 difference in children per family can have a profound impact in one direction or the other. You are gambling everything on an assumption that trends won’t change. Trends always change.

qyron ,

It never existed because it was never a problem.

And the problem here is not to reduce for the sake of environment but for the sake of not wasting resources for production: energy, water, machinery, etc. Things that cost money that can not be recouped. Environmental impact is a very welcome off shoot.

There are at least three possible scenarios to counter your position:

  1. nothing changes and current trend of population shrinking maintains
  2. everything gets better, standards of life improve and number of offspring decreases for increase of parental investment per child
  3. everything gets worse and either we kill ourselves or the planet does

Numbers, statistics, projections, whatever argument we put on the table, boiled down, comes to these.

Tinidril ,

You are both oversimplifying the reality and overcomplicating it at the same time. There are thousands of different aspects to sustainability, including many that we simply haven’t identified yet. Modern farming methods that provide us such great yields are simultaneously robbing us of important nutrients that aren’t being replenished in the soil. This has a knock on effect to meat and dairy as well. We are running out of fresh water for farming, residential, and industrial use. Forever chemicals are building up in the oceans, aquafers, soil, and air. Oceans and rivers are running out of fish. Noise pollution, light pollution, heat pollution, and just ordinary misplaced trash don’t seem likely to abate any time soon. Good luck getting cooperation on any of these issues, when we can’t even get people to wear masks in the middle of a plague.

Every one of these aspects of sustainability will relate differently to your scenarios. In the end, we are left with the simple truth that every effort to address every one of these issues will be aided by a reduced population. Either reduced from where it is today, or reduced from whatever future predictions you want to work from. (I’ve been ignoring the fact that humanity has generally been pretty shit about accurately predicting the future, because those predictions are entirely irrelevant to my point).

I’m not talking about culling the population, ethnic cleansing, forced sterilization, etc. People should be absolutely free to make their own family planning choices. But there are lots of ways to promote having fewer children without being coercive. Child free lifestyles should be more respected. Birth control should be more widely available. People should be more aware of the fragility of this planet, and the impact we have on it. Having one less kid than one would otherwise have is always going to blow away the impact of whatever other things we do to promote sustainability.

commie ,

But there are lots of ways to promote having fewer children without being coercive

i don’t believe you can do that without artificially selecting one part of the populace, but not another, or just having disproportionate impacts. even this comment was written in english, and even if it’s well-intentioned, everyone who doesn’t read english is not subject to the propaganda in it. by posting it on lemmy, you are also targeting lemmy and the broader fediverse as a demographic. so everyone who’s not online is already immune to this propaganda.

Tinidril ,

Your pushing the boundaries of “propaganda” pretty extensively there. Sure, technically it could apply, but then it applies to any political opinion communicated in any way by anyone, including you.

Of course it won’t be communicated equally. Neither will messages encouraging more children, something far more common from current governments. The right wing in this country (and others) explicitly encourages more “white Christian” children because of “replacement theory”. That’s far more sinister than suggesting that people in general should consider the impact before having more children.

Nothing in reality is ever totally fair, just like no society is ever totally sustainable. A perpetual motion machine is only possible in an ideal world, and so is a sustainable society. We will only ever be able to approximate sustainability, and that will require contributions systemic and cultural changes. That means “propaganda”, and it means that some demographics will cooperate more than others, meaning it won’t be “fair” regardless of the approach.

commie ,

but you see how this is exactly what eugenicists would do, right? create propaganda to discourage undesirables from procreating and create ineffective propaganda for their preferred demographic group. the intention doesn’t matter, to me. it’s all eugenicist propaganda as far as I’m concerned.

Tinidril ,

You just love that word, “propaganda”, but where did “undesirables” come in? I never mentioned targeting anyone, or even running an information campaign at all. I’m pointing out the reality that fewer people would be better. You can’t argue against that, so you make a bunch of ridiculous assumptions and attack those.

I think that when this topic is discussed, people should be honest and rational about it. You clearly don’t.

commie ,

I’m pointing out how quickly malthusianism becomes eugenics.

Tinidril ,

Even as slippery slope arguments go, this is truly pathetic.

commie ,

are you suggesting I’m too vigilant against eugenicist propaganda? better than laying the groundwork for a genocide, I think.

Tinidril ,

Thanos was right.

commie ,

I think that when this topic is discussed, people should be honest and rational about it. You clearly don’t.

i think calling your advocacy propaganda rubbed you the wrong way, and you can’t see what i’m saying.

Tinidril ,

I can see what your saying just fine. I’m not the one who’s unhinged here.

commie ,

I never mentioned targeting anyone, or even running an information campaign at all.

you ARE running an information campaign.

Tinidril ,

No YOU are running an information campaign. Fuck this is getting dumb.

commie ,

fewer people would be better. You can’t argue against that

yes, i can.

Tinidril ,

Then I gotta wonder why you haven’t. All you’ve claimed is that there are other options. All things being equal, a world with fewer people needs fewer resources. If we get the whole world on solar, that will still be true. If we get everyone to give up meat, it will still be true. If we stop polluting our waterways it will still be true. You have not argued against that, and you can’t do so in any rational way.

commie ,

this is some ecofascist shit

Tinidril ,

LOL, sure it is.

commie ,

I know.

Tinidril ,

Got anything but ad hominems? You pretty much proved my point.

commie ,

please don’t spread malthusianism.

Tinidril ,

Please stop throwing around labels like they are arguments.

IHadTwoCows ,

Everything was better when there were half as many of us.

Ataraxia ,
@Ataraxia@lemmy.world avatar

It’s not a problem. When us women have the resources to be able to educate ourselves in the realities of the bull shit that’s been peddled to us, we stop being brood mares.

kashara , (edited )

Ordinary Western and US propaganda - no matter what Putin may do, it’s a sign of his weakness. Whether he eats ice cream, smiles, fucks women, sleeps, urges the women to give birth to more children, washes his teeth or itches his left shoulder – it’s a proof that he’s weak.

In reality, he’s ever stronger and supported by the russians – thanks to none other than the West and US.

SendMePhotos ,

Isn’t he just a Russian trump?

kashara ,

Yeah. He’s smart and strong.

Meowoem ,

Yeah the media have a tendency to exaggerate his flaws but this isn’t a well thought out move, it’s probably a mix of that white birther thing musk is into and general desperation at the industrial and military problems he faces.

The reality is Russia is not doing well economically, Russian families can’t afford to bring up eight kids even in the poverty conditions they’re getting increasingly used to. The Russian state can’t afford even the shitty education kids get now so it’s certainly not going to cope if there was a sudden baby boom.

This isn’t a well thought out economic, social, or moral plan so what else is it beside foolish bluster and weak minded desperation?

vsh ,
@vsh@lemm.ee avatar

Wow defending alternative Hitler is such a bold move. Now go birth/rape until you have 8 kids like your daddy Poutine said. Landmines won’t clear themselves!

kashara , (edited )

Wow. Defending Boris Jonson, Ze and Biden is akin defending Adolf Hitler. They’ve already killed over a milltion of ukranians by sending them to the russian meatgrinder. And they’ve made UA complitely dependent on their own financial aid.

vsh ,
@vsh@lemm.ee avatar

Welcome to politics 🤷

detalferous ,

So they can be sent to the front line in ten years? Putin had already screwed the pooch.

DragonTypeWyvern ,

Don’t be ridiculous, the Russian officers mostly want teenagers to rape, not children.

Vant ,

I’m sorry about your head injury.

ATDA ,

With what husband? Got em

GardenVarietyAnxiety ,

Putin will be remembered as the man who destroyed Russia.

netchami ,

And Ukraine

electrogamerman ,

Maybe they can open the borders to immigrants?

TransplantedSconie ,

Those also will be thrown into the grinder.

All they get are 70 year old alcoholics to lay back and think of the empire for.

electrogamerman ,

I doubt any immigrant on its right mind would move to Russia, and even if some did, no immigrants on its right mind would fight a war for RuSsIA

kalkulat ,
@kalkulat@lemmy.world avatar

Hmm. Sure, Vlad. Wait: how much will that pay, per child per month?

Rin ,

Children are an investment! After a couple of years, you can send them to the mines and reap all the rewards.

TheWoozy ,

Mines? No, they are needed for the “special military operation”.

boeman ,

Land mines are still mines.

Algaroth ,

That’s fantastic. Super dark but very well played.

Kase ,

🏆

IHadTwoCows ,

Get those little bastards to Ghana! I’m out of cocoa and peppermint bark!!

Matombo , (edited )

Well … I don’t want to say literally Hitler, but …

Ekybio ,
@Ekybio@lemmy.world avatar

Literally Hitler

(No need to thank me)

Chakravanti ,

There’s competition for that in America, right now.

majestic ,

Not Hitler, not even close. Im not allowing what he did nor defending him, but what Hitler did compared with Putin is major difference. It does not change the fact that both of them deserve a special place in hell

Huschke ,

I mean Hitler didn’t start by genociding. Give Putin time.

IHadTwoCows ,

Hitler started by getting hold of a PA system. Today that is AM radio and the internet.

IHadTwoCows ,

When Russia collapses again they can pay all these mothers and their kids in vodka like they did last time.

bruderschaft ,

My Russian brothers and sisters, hold fast. As an American, there will soon be a change in American political power that will align with sanity and not disinformation like this evil and corrupt incompetent American president. Soon you will be free from antagonizing drug addicted neighbors that intentionally create false nuclear attacks upon your unsuspecting and peaceful people putting fear in you and your children. We support you brothers and sisters of Russia!

bruderschaft ,

Wow. Didn’t know Lemmy censored. Might as well be the red version of Russia. For shame!

01011 ,

They’ve had a population crisis in Russia for at least 20 years.

Nukken ,

More like 120 years.

Gradually_Adjusting ,
@Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world avatar

It turns out if you don’t value human life, it doesn’t flourish.

Mistic ,

More than that. We have a giant demographical pit starting down from 25 y.o. and bottoming out at around 20-22 y.o.

It’s WW2 stacked on top of the economic collapse in the 90ies and now this. It is ugly.

Clbull ,

That’s one way to deal with an ageing population demographic.

Another way is to perhaps not throw every able-bodied young man into a militaristic meat grinder because you still yearn for the Soviet Union days.

Mistic ,

He’s probably yearning for the Russian Empire instead of Soviet Union.

Russian governmental officials have some really outlandish views for an average Russian person.

They’re very religious, believe in conspiracies, actively anti-lgbt, don’t support abortions, antisemitic to name a few. None of these qualities are present in the general masses. They are in their own informational bubble.

As far as I understand it, he believes that the Russian Empire and collective Europe were always at each other’s throats, and that never changed for over 200 years. At the same time, Russia is a successor of the Russian Empire, and USSR is being omitted for some reason. That’s the simplistic explanation of it.

For you to understand how crazy that is, Russians (in general) have little to no idea of how the Empire worked and what the views those people held. USSR essentially wiped out all of that culture.

Enfors ,
@Enfors@lemm.ee avatar

So, basically, Putin is telling Russian women to “get fucked for Putin”?

Quexotic ,

Maybe “You got fucked by Putin and now go get fucked for Putin”

Jeredin ,

…angry upvote…

Quexotic ,

Nice. The dad jokes are improving… Well, actually it’s sorta an uncle joke.

Happy Friday

some_guy ,

Thanks for helping me start my weekend with a laugh after a rough week.

smeenz ,

Isn’t that what Elon said too ?

Rouxibeau ,

Let’s keep going until there’s a 1:39 male to female ratio. That’d be ideal. Not strange at all.

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Let’s keep going until there’s a 1:39 male to female ratio. That’d be ideal. Not strange at all.

It’s not about the ratio, it’s about a total amount of bodies, regardless of gender, available to run/work the country, in the future generations.

They already took a big hit in World War II, and they’re taking another hit now, and most nations taking two pop hits in a row don’t recover well.

hydrospanner ,

I mean, with Russia, it seems like it’s just been constant: WW1, revolution, WW2, Stalin’s reign, now this.

If anything, rather than WW2 and this being “in a row”, that time frame includes probably the biggest gap in the past century without a grievous population loss.

For as much as we (Americans) regard Russia (as a state) with an adversarial eye, as far as Russians (the actual common people) are concerned, I kinda feel for them. Seems like their entire history is dominated by difficulty, hardship, and death.

Then again maybe that impression is precisely the impression that the American education system has very carefully cultivated…

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

If anything, rather than WW2 and this being “in a row”, that time frame includes probably the biggest gap in the past century without a grievous population loss.

I’m speaking towards actual graphs I’ve seen before from education videos (RealLifeLore, etc.) on the subject that show specific peaks in population drops following war, and how they affect Russia directly.

I wasn’t trying to elaborate on the whole history of Russia, just that they’ve had large population drops because of death via war.

Iamdanno ,

It’s like the copypasta about Russian history,

… and then it got worse.

recapitated ,

Best climate change refuge ever

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •