Do Your Economic Duty: Get Married, Stay Married, and Have Kids!

A new report "co-sponsored by six international institutions and the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia" indicates that the “long-term fortunes of the modern economy rise and fall with the family” (HT: Tom Gilson per The Washington Times). A PDF of the study can be downloaded here. The report, entitled "The Sustainable Demographic Dividend, What Do Marriage and Fertility Have to Do with the Economy?", give four conclusions from the analysis:

1. Children raised in intact, married families are more likely to acquire the human and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.
2. Men who get and stay married work harder, work smarter, and earn more money than their unmarried peers.
3. Nations wishing to enjoy robust long-term economic growth and viable welfare states must maintain sustainable fertility rates of at least two children per woman.
4. Key sectors of the modern economy—from household products to insurance to groceries—are more likely to profit when men and women marry and have children.

The report analyzes various population statistics in major world countries across various continents in tandem with marriage, cohabitation, and divorce statistics, religious and social marriage values statistics and trends, and demographic spending statistics. While such a study is not deductively conclusive (and indeed cannot be!) the analysis appears very compelling; and indeed the burden of proof is placed on those who'd disagree. The statistical information is cast broad enough and the results are stark enough that the logical correlations follow naturally.


Among the more salient statistics are:

• The average woman in a developed country bears just 1.66 children whereas 2.1 children per woman is required for a sustaining a population (note that the U.S. hovers at 2.0 children per woman). Accordingly, the number of children age 0–14 is 60.6 million less in the developed world today than it was in 1965.2 Primarily because of their dearth of children, developed countries face shrinking workforces even as they must meet the challenge of supporting rapidly growing elderly populations.
• This means that though the world population is increasing, and is still projected to be 7 to 10 billion over the next 90 years, this is a different type of growth where the increase is from people over 60 instead of increased children. This means birth rates could start falling by the turn of the century.
• In the 53 countries investigated, those that attend religious services less than once a month average 1.69 children and those that attend once a month or more average 2.21 children.

This last point is particularly interesting. The report gives 10 policies that are appropriate in an aging society. The tenth and last "appropriate policy" is "Respect the role of religion as a pronatal force."

In recognition of the contribution that religion makes to family life and fertility, governments should not persecute people of faith for holding or expressing views that are informed by religious tradition, including ones that buck progressive or nationalist sensibilities. Alas, such persecution is now common in some countries around the world, from Canada to China to France. Faith brings hope, and ultimately it is hope that replenishes the human race. (pg. 23)

The significance of this with respect to, say, Richard Dawkins and fellow neo-atheists should be evident. It seems "survival of the fittest" as a philosophical guiding principle is self-defeating.

***** 

Alongside the conclusions are 4 line of action that should undertaken to promote the family structure.

1. Companies should use their cultural influence to get behind positive, family-friendly advertisements and public education campaigns.
2. Countries should increase access to affordable health care and lifelong learning to strengthen the economic foundations of family life.
3. Public policy should support marriage and responsible parenthood by, for instance, extending generous tax credits to parents with children in the home.
4. Corporate and public policy should honor the work-family ideals of all women by giving families the flexibility to pursue their own preferences for juggling work and family.

If anything seems questionable about these recommendations one should note the context: this is about economic factors and geared towards businesses. However, one has to question the nature of suggested action. When is a study going to be done on the effectiveness of corporate policy and government law at changing value-systems? This doesn't mean it would have no effectiveness at change, but such has to already rest on a value-system shift. Indeed, one may argue that change could be affected in such ways -the report references such action during the Renaissance - but I'd argue that it becomes merely another step in the chaos, a fad with no lasting power. The economic motivator serves itself, not the family, and to do both is to be in unstable tension.