Trump said strong families are the most important things.

I think this was his most important tweet ever.

100% right. That was my goal when I was young and got married, four children. God did bless me with 2, and I am so grateful. There were actually three for me... one lost very early and never born. Things might have been a lot different if I had had good sense in my selection of a life-mate. Young people need to be taught about rational decision making. Using intellect balanced with "the heart". Very, very difficult. Far more so if one does not know of God's love, and back then, I had no idea.

I always wanted a large family, but seemed to only meet men who didn't want children. :(

I did end up having 3 though. Yay!

Yet they hand out welfare and food stamps for women who stay single. Have more kids and you get more money. Quite the incentive for a few people I know who stay single but have a "husband".

The educational system indoctrination needs to end, I know many large families who are good Christians who’s children have all evolved into liberal, leftists and worse…

Very difficult to raise a family with how the economy is going.

I know we’ve heard about the lower birthrates, miscarriages, stillbirths, and infertility, BUT, has anyone else noticed the increase in pregnancies amongst the non-vaxed 30 somethings? Where I’m at it’s been insane. All healthy, non-vaxed, good people in happy marriages. I can count on two hands couples I personally know that are recently pregnant. More than half of them were unplanned too! My spouse and I included!! We’ve been together for a very long time and to get weird, I’d say for many lifetimes before. We never saw ourselves with more than two children. Low and behold, we’re having another, completely unexpected, well not completely...😉 It took careful calendar math and special lubricants to conceive the first two, this time it was obviously much easier. Who are we to question God’s plan? It just seems like from my vantage point God is using some of his finest soldiers to repopulate this current clown world.

here's the content of the article, for anyone interested:
Demographers Warn of Impending Population Collapse
Fertility data contradicts U.N. predictions of overpopulation and environmental devastation
By Kevin Stocklin June 5, 2022 Updated: June 6, 2022

Amid the deluge of dire predictions that the human population will rise exponentially, deplete the earth’s resources, and overheat the planet, two recent demographic studies predict the opposite—that the number of people will peak within the next several decades and then begin a phase of steady, irreversible decline.

In some places, including Japan, Russia, South Korea, and most countries in Europe, that population collapse has already begun. China is not far behind.

The United Nations has predicted that humanity will continue its rapid expansion into the next century, growing from just under 8 billion today to more than 11 billion by 2100. An oft-repeated interpretation of this data is that people are having too many babies, and many of the models for climate change and environmental degradation are based on projections like these. In August, the U.N. declared a “code red for humanity” over climate change and overpopulation, and analysts at investment bank Morgan Stanley stated that the “movement to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing.”

However, a demographic study funded by the Gates Foundation and published in the Lancet, a medical journal, paints a much different picture. This study, conducted by researchers at the University of Washington, predicts that the global human population will peak at 9.7 billion within several decades, and then start to decline. “Once global population decline begins,” the authors write, “it will probably continue inexorably.”

The Lancet study projects that by the end of this century, China will have shrunk by 668 million people, losing almost half of its current population, and India will lose 290 million. Despite all efforts to reverse this trend in China, including eliminating the one-child policy and providing incentives for child-rearing, couples are not cooperating; China experienced its fifth consecutive record low birth rate in 2021.

Findings like these are the basis for Tesla/SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s statement in May that “civilization is going to crumble” from the loss of so many people. Musk had previously declared at a speaking event in 2019 that “the biggest problem the world will face in 20 years is population collapse.” Jack Ma, co-founder of Alibaba Group, also present at the event, said, “I agree.”

Elon Musk (R), Co-founder and CEO of Tesla, and Jack Ma, co-chair of the UN High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, speak onstage during the World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai on Aug. 29, 2019. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images) Manoj Pradhan, economist and co-author of “The Great Demographic Reversal,” predicts that population loss will bring dramatic economic, political, and societal changes. “The future is going to look very, very different from the past,” he said. Some of the things we are experiencing today, such as high inflation, labor shortages, and the sacrifice of economic well-being to protect the elderly and the vulnerable, offer a “peek into the future.”

The most populous countries in the world today are China and India, both with about 1.4 billion people, together comprising one-third of the world’s population. The United States is a distant third, with 330 million. Indonesia, Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Russia, and Japan round out the top 10.

According to the Lancet and other studies, populations will soon start to fall throughout Asia and South America, catching up with chronic declines that are already taking place in Europe. Simultaneously, Africa will be one of the few areas that continue to grow their population, though even in Africa growth rates are falling. Nigeria is projected to gain 585 million people by the end of this century, becoming the world’s second-most populated country after India, with China falling to third and the United States falling to fourth. Japan, Russia, and Brazil will soon drop out of the top 10 altogether.

The key discrepancy between those who project rapid expansion and those who predict decline centers on fertility rates. Dr. Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson, co-authors of “Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline,” combed through global fertility data and traveled across six continents speaking with people throughout Asia, Africa, South America, and the West. What they discovered concurs with the Lancet Study; both statistically and anecdotally, birth rates around the world are significantly below what the U.N. has projected.

Driving the population collapse is what Bricker and Ibbitson call the “fertility trap.” For a country to sustain its population, women must have an average birth rate of 2.1 children. Once a country’s fertility rate falls below 2.1, it never comes back.

In 2020, the U.S. fertility rate was 1.6, the lowest rate in America’s history and a sharp decline from 3.7 in 1960. Europe’s average fertility rate is 1.5. Among other top-10 countries, the Lancet Study reports that Japan’s fertility rate is currently 1.3. China’s fertility rate ranges from 1.3 to 1.5, depending on the source, but some estimates put it as low as 1.15.

Russia’s fertility rate is 1.6. Deaths substantially outnumber births in Russia today, and it is projected to lose up to one-third of its population by 2050. A January Foreign Policy report stated that Russia’s loss of population means it will soon struggle to field enough soldiers for a major military conflict, likely a factor behind its recent threats to use nuclear weapons.

In 1960, the average woman worldwide had 5.2 children. Today that number has fallen to 2.4 and is projected to decline to 2.2 by 2050, barely at replacement level across the globe. By 2100, the Lancet predicts global fertility will be 1.66, taking into account current trends of urbanization, women’s education, workforce participation, and access to birth control.

Going from a birth rate of 5 to a birth rate below 2, writes Stanford University Economist Charles I. Jones, is the difference between “exponential growth in both population and living standards and an empty planet, in which incomes stagnate and the population vanishes.” Jones’ March 2022 report, titled “Consequences of a Declining Population,” describes what he calls the “empty planet result,” featuring not only a decline in human prosperity, but also a depletion of culture, ideas, and innovation. “Economic growth stagnates as the stock of knowledge and living standards settle down to constant values,” Jones writes. “Meanwhile, the population itself falls at a constant rate, gradually emptying the planet of people.”

For countries below the replacement rate, immigration can help sustain their population for a time, but there are few countries that allow significant immigration and even fewer that are managing it effectively. The global drop in fertility, however, means that even countries like the United States and Canada, which have been growing their populations through immigration, may soon hit their peaks as well.

While a future with fewer people may have environmental benefits, one demographic problem is that, as humanity shrinks, the composition of societies changes dramatically. Longevity is a key factor slowing the population collapse—the average human lifespan has increased from 51 years in 1960 to 73 years today. The Lancet predicts that by century’s end there will be 2.4 billion people older than 65, compared with only 1.7 billion under the age of 20. The median age worldwide has gone up from 22 years in 1960 to 30 years today, and is projected to increase to 41 years by 2100.

A large portion of the earth’s population will be older, beyond childbearing age, and more dependent on an ever-shrinking pool of productive young people to care for them in retirement. This inverse pyramid of the few supporting the many is most likely unsustainable. One phrase that is commonly used by researchers regarding countries like China is that they are “getting old before they are rich enough to get old.”

Urbanization Demographers say there are several causes of declining fertility rates, but they point to one factor that seems to be driving the rest: urbanization. When people move from the countryside to cities, the economics of having children shifts.

In purely monetary terms, children are no longer a source of labor for farms, etc., but rather an expense. In the United States, the average cost of raising a child to adulthood, not including college expenses, is $267,000. Another consequence of urbanization is that women become educated, employed, independent, and have better access to contraception. Regardless of which country they’re in, women react the same way, by having fewer children and having them later in life.

According to the “Empty Planet” authors, fewer than a third of the world’s people lived in cities in 1960. Today, just over half of the world’s population are urban dwellers; by 2050, that number is expected to increase to more than two-thirds.

Africa is projected to increase from 44 percent urbanized today to 59 percent by 2050, Asia from 52 percent to 66 percent. The rest of the world’s population is already more than 80 percent urbanized. The U.N. study predicts that China will go from having been 16 percent urban in 1960 to 80 percent urban by 2050. And China’s demographic problems are exacerbated by the fact that its one-child policy, although officially ended in 2016, has created a shortage of women today. Currently, China has 34 million more males than females, leaving a large portion of its male population now reaching adulthood without the prospect of having a family.

Is Japan Our Future? Some say that if you want to see your future, look at Japan today. Japan is 92 percent urbanized and its population is shrinking by about half a million people every year. It is a fairly homogenous society with little immigration, and its marriage and birth rates have declined steadily, leaving it a “super-aged” nation with 20 percent of its population now older than 65. As Japan ages and empties, its economy has stalled and asset values have fallen.

Japan’s Nikkei stock market index crashed during the 1990s from a high of 39,000 to 20,000, marking the “start of a long adaption from a young, fast-growing economy to an aging, slow-growth new normal,” explained economist Martin Schultz. Japanese stocks never fully recovered; three decades later, the Nikkei index is currently at 27,000.

After rising dramatically for decades, Japan’s per capita GDP flatlined in 1995 and has not grown significantly since. With an aging and declining population, sales of adult diapers in Japan now exceed that of infant diapers, and some of the emptier places in Japan have even taken to posing life-sized dolls in public places to make these locations feel less deserted.

Asked if Japan was our future, Pradhan said “sadly, no, because that would’ve been quite comforting. Japan had its demography turning negative while the rest of the world was swimming in labor.” Japanese companies were able to prosper through the decline by shifting labor to places with abundant populations, while workers at home developed automation to increase their productivity. Consequently, Japan so far has avoided the inflation and debt levels that shrinking and aging populations will bring.

As countries produce less and dedicate more and more resources to caring for the elderly, Pradhan said, “we’re going to see an increase in debt-to-GDP ratios to the extent that no one has ever imagined.” This will lead to lower growth and chronic inflation. Stagflation could become a permanent feature.

On the positive side, labor shortages will likely lead to higher wages and greater equality among working-age p

In the old days, a guy could go to work 40 hours and make enough money to sustain a wife and 4, 6, or more children.

Now, both husband and wife need to work just to sustain a decent lifestyle for the two of them. This is all by design, to destroy and dismantle the nuclear family; there's no logical reason for everything today to cost five times what it did 40 years ago.

I think a lot of people are being a little too short sighted on this topic. I keep seeing comments and posts talking about how they want to, but it's not feasible right now. Key words being RIGHT NOW.

Yes, that's true. RIGHT NOW its hard to do this. Whether it's hard to do it because of finances and the economy, or as some people have pointed out, the corrupt and heavily biased court system that has created a class of women that are essentially relationship predators feeding off a broken system, or just finding a Godly partner who shares your morals and values, it IS hard to do this at the moment.

But we're not talking about doing this ASAP. We're talking about within the next 5-10 years as a start. 20-30 years down the line in the big picture. If the crap really hits the fan this year and it's all over by 2023 or 2024 like most of us think it will be, then your current circumstances are going to change drastically over the next couple years. More likely than not for the better.

Combine that with the literal death of the [D] party as Q said would happen (no more liberals contaminating the dating pool), and the Christian religious aspects of the Great Awakening kicking it into overdrive, and there more likely than not will be a PLETHORA of Godly, morally upright, conservative partners to meet and court.

5 years from now, you will more likely than not be in an infinitely better place financially, with a dozen possible suitors/women you can go after in the dating pool with asperations of marriage and a family, all maintained happily in an upper middle class lifestyle on a single salary.

What's old is new again, and all logic dictates that we're heading for a repeat of the 50s culturally, economically, and socially. So stop basing everything on TODAY and look to the future we all KNOW is coming.

Finding a Godly conservative mate is easier said than done. Where I live, those are off the market in their early 20s and the remaining options are women with kids and/or Godless liberals.

Leftists will shrink in numbers, and eventually die out. Common sense Bible loving conservatives will have large families, which will then have more large families, and we take over the earth. Amen.

I’ve been thinking a lot about this recently because I agree with you - why are first world countries not having more kids? Think about it. Is our generation better off than our parents (for me, the generation that came after the war)? Housing prices are insane, education costs are insane, Health insurance prices are insane, you can’t support a family on one income anymore. Everything has gone up except for wages. The answer to that question is I don’t think so, and I think a lot of us know that and we also know that it doesn’t make sense to have a lot of kids because there’s just no financially to support them. I’m not talking material stuff I’m talking just surviving a good quality life. And I think about the people that are immigrating here, are there lives here better than where they came from? Absolutely! That’s why they continue to come here and have lots of kids.

Your statement “Have at least 4 children. 2 - Be VERY active in their lives” Is extremely difficult for most people in this country since we just do not live in a culture or lifestyles that support that. Maybe if you live out on a farm in a rural area you can do this? But I live in a high density suburban area there’s just no way even for kids this is a stainable here without two people working, kids in schools (probably public), food costs, it just doesn’t make financial sense.

I agree we need to change this from the top down with tax incentives for families. I just remember thinking “if my husband and I had tons of money right now we would just nonstop having kids” it has nothing to do with material stuff, it just has to do with being able to give them a good life (me stay at home, home school or private school) and that’s very hard to do right now.

For what it’s worth, my friends who have two kids and both work high-paying government jobs are all struggling right now so I know this is something felt at all levels throughout our country.

Just my two cents. Again I wholeheartedly agree with you, I just think it’s difficult to have more than2 kids in most places in this country, that’s all.

I completely agree with this plan, the only problem is that it is an easier said than done type of thing for many of us.

This assumes that 1) everyone is cut out to be a parent, 2) everyone is able to be a good parent.

I don’t disagree on the concept, but as a grandchild of an incredible religious, alcoholic grandfather who had six kids, I can tell you that more isn’t always better. Still dealing with the familial turmoil from his decisions decades later. He continues to put the Catholic Church before his family.

I had a co-worker decades ago tell me that the smart people needed to have lots of babies.

Just watch the beginning of Idiocracy to reinforce why smart people need to procreate.

You forgot to add feminism to that list. Feminism is absolutely a contributing factor to population decline. I don't mean choosing careers over family, specially, either. I mean the "me too" and "toxic masculinity" nonsense, along with others.

2 down 2 to go

Ill get to working in it as soon as hes off work 😄😂

Most conservatives WORK for a living and can't afford to have all those kids. Welfare people have them and its free. The system is rigged this way!

Amen. We have six kids and most in our circles have at least four kids but most conservatives have bought the liberal anti family world view. They want their things, two incomes, two kids, etc. It's sad. And I'd venture, evil. God said to be fruitful and multiply, he said children are a blessing not a curse.

Yup. out breed their stupidity.

I plan to have at least 5 children, the problem is finding a man worth having a family with. Finding a conservative man who hasn't been vaxxed is unfortunately difficult, because many conservatives I know also got tricked into the vax or truly believe in its "power." My dating/marriage pool just became a tiny drop of water which I must find in a scorching desert before it dries up.

Great idea however there is one thing that will separate a father from those kids and will allow the cabal and left free reign to manipulate those kids. The family court. The mainstream incentivises and praises single motherhood and far too many women want the praise of being a "strong independent single mother who dont need no man." Until the family court is either fixed or outright destroyed those kids will be easy targets for the left cause the family court, police, and CPS will take them from their father by force. The texas father should not have been forced by threat of the state to not only allow his son to be force transitioned but also forced to pay for the procedures.

I think when people are optimistic about the future, they tend to plan larger families.

I never had children, probably because when I was young I was not optimistic about my future. (I am female.) I was fearful. Even now (in my 60's) I am fearful.

Estranged from my very screwed up family and no support system to speak of; no familial stability in my life; working to make it on my own and be financially independent); no suitable partner at the right time; a conviction that I did not want to be the type of parent my parents were - not-great parenting can leave its scars and be horrendously difficult to "unlearn" in a limited fertility time window.

My late sister, who also never had children, also felt strongly about that last point. By the time we had matured enough to have any sort of wisdom and knowledge to be decent parents, it was way past our time.

I never bought into the BS line "women can have it all." Nope. I had no desire to pop out a baby just to throw the kid in day care and live on McDonalds junk while I worked.

Trump is great but if want to upvote for families than upvote God’s words. Go forth and multiply. Ever wonder why the all powerful God almighty didn’t just create everyone at once? Because he empowered us to do it. He did it for all life, plants, animals, humans. He created us in His image and made us creators.

FYI, I’m 48 and just went through 3yrs of IVF failures with my 35 yr old wife. I had a procedure that cut in my testicle and take the youngest freshest swimmers. We are now due next month and have 3 more on deck chillin on ice. Do whatever you have to go follow God’s command to multiply. Multiply your family and multiply God’s family by teaching them to love Jesus and keep a biblical world view. God wins and those who know Him and what to expect from Him have extreme joy, even through these tough times. Numbers 6:24-26

4 children sounds expensive. Most families dont make 100k a year

I'm down, but we're already struggling with two. And we both work.

I gots four and they are homeschooled. Do I get a blue checkmark? 😁

On the flipside, this is the only thing that kept me neutral on abortion. Liberals are most of them lolol. Let them leave their future in the planned parenthood dumpster