The global fertility rate, or the number of children per woman, has halved over the last 50 years. What will having fewer babies mean for the future of humanity? In this funny, eye-opening talk, journalist (and self-described exhausted dad) Wajahat Ali examines how the current trend could lead to unexpected problems — and shares why he believes we need to make it easier for people to have babies. "For those who can and choose to, may you pass on this beautiful thing called life with kindness, generosity, decency and love," he says.
Get TED Talks recommended just for you! Learn more at .
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more.
Follow TED on Twitter:
Like TED on Facebook:
Subscribe to our channel:
Automation, there’s going to be less workers required.
We SHOULD be having less kids than previous generations. The reason is child death rates are very very low by comparison to the past.
I would agree, if it weren’t for the fact we are all working longer and longer hours, as well as it being necessary for both parents to go to work now. It’s all going wrong because of capitalism, and we need to start taxing companies who profit through automation, and putting this money back into society an a universal basic income.
Bro, your math doesn’t check out. If women aren’t even having two children on average, then one generation isn’t replacing itself even if child death rates are zero.
+a7i20ci7y I didnt say less than 2 children, I said less than previous generations. The human population becoming smaller as a whole isn’t necessarily a bad thing
+Mandrake there’s nothing wrong with automation, it’s a scientific inevitability. Things like universal income and other changes at a society level need to happen.
I completely agree that capitalism is a problem on many levels but we need a solution that keeps people (as a whole) productive so that society doesn’t collapse. Which isn’t easy
+a7i20ci7y world is overpopulated right now, maintaining population isnt the need, need is to reduce it slowly… At this time, The world simply does not produce enough food and resources for its entire population to live a healthy and good life…
The case to have kids: 13 min
My case not to have kids: 13 hours
It was just a case fitted to TED talk times
+Aykut Reread the title of this video.
Economic growth has to be scrapped because it is destroying the environment. Less people would help to limit growth. Cultural dogma (masquerading as religion) is the spanner in the works & is no justification to raise the fertility rate. The planet would be a much better place with under 6 billion people who could all be fed: it would enable us to reclaim natural areas to give a much needed to faltering biodiversity, and help the marine ecosphere to recover from its downward spiral.
UN AGENDA 21 is doing all this and giving you no choice.. wonder if your family is going to be needed?
+way lander You forget your tinfoil hat
Absolutely agree Mike
I was going to upload a video called “The case for NOT having kids” but YouTube said the file size was too large… *ZING!*
I am a millennial and part of the evil generation which isn’t birthing enough children. I’m not a sentimental person and I have tried to find valid reasons to have children. Raising children is not an easy task and I’d really have to rationalize things before choosing to have a child. Here are some of the most common reasons I’ve heard or come up with and my though process regarding those reasons. 1. My parents want grandchildren *I don’t owe them grandchildren and this reason alone is a bad one to start a family. This kind of decision should not be delegated to other people. 2. Having children to save a relationship *If the relationship requires children to survive, it might not be the long term relationship I want to be in. 3. Any reason that could be fulfilled by getting a pet *If you need a companion or something to care for – just get a pet. 4. I need someone to take care of me when I am old. *With the money you would save by not having children you could easily pay for professional care. Not to even mention the elderly care automation we’ll have access to in 40 years. 5. The biological reason. Spreading your genes. *I don’t find my genes to be particularly remarkable or unique and so I can’t use this reason to justify anything.
+Doom Maker what’s the difference? somebody have a pet for 20 years or somebody have children for 20 years? you end both ways emotional invested. So basically not so much difference, depends on the time and how you spend your time with that child or pet.
Zikzy lol since when do children only last 20 years?
Christian Sison I have nothing against adoption. The point I’m trying to make is that people these days would rather not take the responsibility of being a parent or blame it on social construct which to me sounds selfish
+Defect In Design It’s an example of emotional investment, stupid. However it’s all depends in that person and how they spend their time together. Humans can build relationships to anything.
Zikzy is it the possible loss of emotional investment that you’re afraid of?
We can deal with a decreasing population. We need to. I don’t think we should encourage people to have more children. The idea that we have to have an ever-increasing population is unsustainable. Don’t forget that we have AI that will replace many of todays jobs.
Completely agree. His pro’s for more children sadly don’t outweigh the con’s. And like you said, as technology moves on, more and more jobs could be replaced, removing the problem of having too few people working those jobs (or atleast dimming it out a bit).
Loved his presentation though, he’s great at it!
it depends in the west and far east they should have more kids. in Africa and India maybe they should use more condoms
+last shadow It’s the people in the West which have the largest footprints though, by far. The people in Africa and even Indians have relatively small footprints. Their populations are also predicted to lower due to more people reaching adulthood (see Kurzgesagt on overpopulation)
Incredible that he could still do this talk after such terrible news. I hope things get better for him and his family.
What happened?
Well stage-IV is usually terminal, so the prognosis isn’t great.
Hard pass
I don’t think anyone is saying humans are reproducing too slowly
If you immigrate the best from other countries then you leave the worst behind.
The govt isnt helping the world, they’re being $elfish for their own economy.
so what? you could say the same thing about internal migration.
+Patternicity 2 exactly, it should all be discouraged, trump is right.
+LOCAL COPE WRONG, trump should be handed over to ISIS so they can make a viral video.
I think the reasons for not having kids far outweigh the reasons for, both in number and importance. Plus, I don’t buy his biological feelings “argument” and I don’t think our economies should be based on constant growth in the first place.
i agree only for the third world, we need high IQ children to help solve problems, not welfare suckers
+LOCAL COPE So basically you shouldn’t breed?
“Breed”? No, definitely not. Couples shouldn’t have half a dozen children.
Well, in the end, you just shocked me, my heart skipped a beat when you mentioned stage 4 cancer, well god bless u and your family with all the best wishes, luv from India
Young people are struggling to buy homes, healthcare, and education, and we want to add children on their backs?
If boomers want grandchildren, they can start by paying us more.
Wtf so selfish remark. Wy not try to make a stand against this Pocket filling asholes that you need to pay those absurd amount of money
young people refuse to get better paying jobs, young people refuse to get a GOOD education, (gender studies).
bruh did you not watch the same talk i just did? he was literally suggesting affordable healthcare and child services
Wake up people:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/31/millennials-have-an-average-net-worth-thats-significantly-less-than-previous-generations/?utm_term=.c2b32f05e55c
Labor shortages aren’t a problem when all the jobs are being replaced by machines anyway
+Thomas Bridgewater They fact that they ARE working shows the system is broken. Do we need busywork? Gains in productivity should give the general populace more freedom, instead the monetary gains are going to the top 0.0001%.
+badvermin People have a better standard of living now than ever before. People don’t do busywork.You complain about money going to the top, but then you think they hire people to just do busywork? Which is it? They aren’t going to be wasting money by making people do pointless tasks. People working just means people aren’t stealing stuff from other people to support themselves. It’s a good thing.
then why do people want low skill immigrants for such jobs??? won’t they suffer from a smaller market too!
Also with a smaller population won’t there inherently be less work to do? Less people to feed, less people to teach, less people to consume…etc.
Last I checked robots don’t pay into social security and Medicare.
Pretty flawed arguments… Not even considering imitating… If he actually answered the question based on the arguments he sharw he would say don’t have babies. But totally biased as he is a father
Nope, still adopting…
sad very sad your genes will die
+last shadow Thank god im not narcissistic and that doesnt concern me. But yeah, sad…
+matale66 it is the whole point of evolution. to preserve your genes. actually one might argue that it is the meaning of life.
Me too. Meeting my third in 2 weeks! He’s 14.
Here is an idea, a living wage so you can afford children.
there are living wages, get better jobs, get a better education, stop wasting your money.
the market sets wages, not the government .
That’s not good enough. The problem with having children isn’t a lack of daycare or a toy or sneakers. The problem is that there are too many people in the world as it is, so by the time the kid grows up, they’ll have to fight to the death in a gladiatorial arena for whatever few jobs and homes are still available.
How can the world’s problems be solved with overpopulation, the world and its nations need to decrease their populations until they find a healthy balance.
Economic growth should not rely on increasing populations we have technology to increase output with fewer people needed.
I would much rather see self sustainable nations who can survive on their own resources.
When i just heard of your thought bout Nusayba, i… i just don’t know. I’m still terrified to have babies, but it indeed give me a moment
I start worrying about underpopulation when the global population drops below 500 million.