Obviously not a hint of open borders and a probable willingness to do whatever it takes to retain the oversea colonies. Figure a current USA population 0f 400 million with the demographics of 1955 including those of the workforce. Social Security is highly solvent. Consumer goods are much more expensive but also much more durable. The wage gap from top to bottom of the scale is narrower and income from capital is less dominate in the economy. Religion and morals again much like the 1950's. Med tech and computers less advanced than today but mega-engineering projects including a luna and near earth orbit colonies far more advanced. Politics- the names Clinton and Obama are utterly unknown.
Why is technology less advanced but we have space colonies?
Religion and morals again much like the 1950's. Med tech and computers less advanced than today but mega-engineering projects including a luna and near earth orbit colonies far more advanced.
Obviously not a hint of open borders and a probable willingness to do whatever it takes to retain the oversea colonies. Figure a current USA population 0f 400 million with the demographics of 1955 including those of the workforce. Social Security is highly solvent. Consumer goods are much more expensive but also much more durable. The wage gap from top to bottom of the scale is narrower and income from capital is less dominate in the economy. Religion and morals again much like the 1950's. Med tech and computers less advanced than today but mega-engineering projects including a luna and near earth orbit colonies far more advanced. Politics- the names Clinton and Obama are utterly unknown.
Isn't the logical consequence of a high birth and survival rate, that means a population growing faster than the technological possibilities of feeding them, the search for the ressettlement of the population excess?
Found Martian colonies![]()
As the tin says, what if the Post WWII baby boom among western nations didn't slow down and the birth rate continued to remain at that level? How would this effect social policies in western nations that have ever increasing domestic populations? Does it effect immigration policies?
As the tin says, what if the Post WWII baby boom among western nations didn't slow down and the birth rate continued to remain at that level? How would this effect social policies in western nations that have ever increasing domestic populations? Does it effect immigration policies?
Obviously not a hint of open borders and a probable willingness to do whatever it takes to retain the oversea colonies. Figure a current USA population 0f 400 million with the demographics of 1955 including those of the workforce.
That's kind of implausible. First-world TFRs were rapidly declining in the first half of the 20c, and were already not far above 2 in the 20s. There just aren't enough women who are interested in having this many children. There exists one developed country with a TFR significantly above replacement, and there it's because of substantial fundamentalist and traditional-religious ethnic groups, while the TFR for more educated ethnic groups is at replacement.
This may be a stupid question, but what country is that?
As the tin says, what if the Post WWII baby boom among western nations didn't slow down and the birth rate continued to remain at that level?
In the U.S., fertility declined from the beginning of the 1800s (down by 1/3 from 1800 to 1850). I have no data on other countries before the 1980s, but by that time, birth rates in other developed countries were way down from pre-industrial levels - and continued to decline.
Wikipedia's "demographics of ___" articles will give you TFRs going as far back as 1950-ish in many countries; in France it goes back to 1900. The story is pretty much as you say - the fertility decline was universal. There's one exception in the developed world, again, but it involves very religious subcultures with TFRs of 6-7.

Why is technology less advanced but we have space colonies?
......In the US, there was considerable opposition to the 1920s immigration quotas in the 1940s and 50s, and early moves to allow more people in. The immigration liberalization of 1965 passed at the tail end of the Baby Boom; the TFR then was still about 3.
............................
Speaking personally, if this was how things had been, I'd probably have wound up with 5 kids, like my parents had, rather than the 2 that my wife and I produced. I was born right in the middle of the baby boomer period [1955] and I have often told people that I grew up in the golden years. My mother worked until she got pregnant with me, and didn't work again for many years. One paycheck was enough. The difference is that my parents paid for 0 children to go to college, and I paid for 2 to go. The world does not stand still.