A new paper by a couple of economists suggests that the world population may already be in below-replacement-fertility territory. While the United Nations estimates that Earth's population will peak in the 2080s, economists project it could happen around 2056 at 9 billion. Either way, the planet needs babies, and many places are not having little Jimmy and little Suzy. Like other Asian countries, Singapore is trying to prevent its demise by expanding natalist policies.
Singapore Wants Babies
Singapore's fertility collapsed to a record low of 0.87 in 2025. It is on track to become a "super-aged" society this year, meaning more than a fifth of the population is aged 65 or older. By 2030, a quarter of Singaporeans are expected to surpass that threshold.
Prime Minister Lawrence Wong is trying to reverse the trend by announcing comprehensive pro-family measures at the 2026 National Day Rally this past weekend. Wong unveiled the contours of his plan, offering families money, housing, childcare, and time to encourage men and women to have at least one child.
In what might be the most comprehensive initiative to facilitate child-rearing, Singapore will offer almost $60,000 in indirect financial support from birth to age 17. This is in addition to a lucrative "Baby Gift," an annual cash payment, health care coverage, and education savings (think Trump Accounts) that could bring the government’s tab to $100,000.
Other policies include extensive childcare programs through age 12, greater odds of securing a home with more kids, and government-supported, child-related employment leave. Suffice it to say, according to the prime minister, “We want every family to know: if you choose to have children, the government will stand with you. We will provide more support and over more years.”
This is a Hail Mary from the Singaporean government and complements a series of other measures to support its population, including expanded immigration. But it might not be enough to nudge women to produce babies.
Pro-Family Governments
Politicians have realized the error of their ways. No longer are they talking about depopulation to protect the climate. Now they are discussing ways to bolster the number of men and women in their countries to protect the economy, preserve infrastructure, and ensure their nations live on.
While birth rates are cratering worldwide and firmly below the standard 2.1 replacement rate, the situation is most pronounced in East Asia. According to United Nations World Population Prospects 2024, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and China have rates at or below 1.0, and Japan's rate is 1.14. Policymakers have sprung into action. China abandoned its one-child policy, South Korea is advancing pro-natalist efforts, and Japan is introducing similar tactics to Singapore.
We could be in the early innings, but the data show these efforts are not stimulating birth rates, at least not in any meaningful way.
As the Romans Do
In the end, the world is proceeding as the Romans did. By 59 BC, Julius Caesar acknowledged that a population crisis was brewing in Ancient Rome. Years later, Emperor Augustus tried to rectify the situation through public policy, to no avail. Addressing the childless men, he likened them to beasts, accused them of murder, and charged them with bringing ruin upon the state.
In 109 AD, Roman historian Tacitus offered a summary of the situation:
"And yet, marriages and the rearing of children did not become more frequent, so powerful were the attractions of a childless state. Meanwhile there was an increase in the number of persons imperiled, for every household was undermined by the insinuations of informers; and now the country suffered from its laws, as it had hitherto suffered from its vices."
Experts have presented various theories why modern-day civilization is refusing to raise families, including smartphone-enabled isolation, the cost of living, climate change fears, the lack of support, and the growing gap in political opinions between men and women. Whatever the cause, humanity’s doom may be nigh, like Rome before it.








.jpg%20Social%20Media&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg%20Trump&w=1920&q=75)
