- Elon Musk has persistently cautioned that declining birth rates endanger economies and societies.
- In response, the US and Europe have implemented measures this year, offering tax concessions, childcare help, and extended parental leave.
- Experts express skepticism that such policies can effectively reverse the decline in fertility, referencing experiences of Scandinavian countries and Hungary.
For quite some time, Elon Musk has been vocal about his concern that reduced birth rates could potentially endanger our society. The influential CEO argues that this trend could compromise the strength of economies, leading to a weakened workforce and diminishing viability for the West.
Posting on X just last week, he asserted: “The biggest menace to the West is a low birth rate. If this trend continues, the West as we know it will cease to exist.”
Additionally, in August, Musk amplified a caution shared by commentator Tim Pool, who stated: “The population hasn’t just declined—it has collapsed. We’re witnessing a retreat and the looming tsunami no one seems to recognize.” Musk shared this, emphasizing, “I’ve been raising this concern since the early 2000s.”
This year, steps have been taken by US and European governments in an effort to reverse the trend of diminishing birth rates by promoting programs aimed at encouraging family growth. These initiatives range from tax incentives and prospective family financial benefits to lengthened parental leaves and financial support for childcare.
While Musk has been an outspoken supporter of influencing birth rates upward, demographers informed Business Insider that he isn’t the driving force inspiring governmental policies.
Emergence of Pro-Native Policies
French President Emmanuel Macron has initiated a call for a “demographic renewal.”
This year in July, the French government dedicated itself to improving parental leave policies, transitioning from low-paying plans to a better-paying “birth leave,” which aims to provide parents with several months off at nearly half of their wages, with a ceiling of €1,900 (around $2,200 monthly).
Netherlands has joined in through a newly passed family law in July, enhancing paid maternity and paternity leave up to 17 weeks. Some areas, Madrid leading among them, are expanding on infant support programs.
Italy focuses on financial strategies, having established payroll tax reductions for mothers of multiple children and offering interest-free”First Home” loans in conjunction with children’s allowances since the beginning of January.
Similarly, Hungary has expanded its existing initiatives, enabling lifelong personal-incometax exemptions for mothers with two or more children since January.
The UK, a generally cautious player in family funding, has also stepped up with its significant reforms—seeing a launch in September that will offer parents of infants as young as nine months 30 hours of free care per week.
In the U.S., a federal initiative was approved in July offering enhanced family tax credit opportunities and new savings accounts under the “Working Families Tax Cut” message.
‘Musk and Certain Commentators Have Increased Awareness’
As governments enhance their pro-natalist efforts, demographic specialists warned against equating Musk and his tech counterparts as prime movers behind these policy changes.
“Worries regarding declining birth rates have been long-standing, and certainly, no one in the tech realm, including Musk, can claim origin or leadership on this issue,” stated Ronald Lee, co-founder of UC Berkeley’s Center for the Economics and Demography of Aging.
He pointed to existing pronatalist policies which proliferated across Europe and East Asia many years ago, reminding us how the US Social Security framework was adjusted in the early 1980s to cater to aging populations.
Similar sentiments were echoes by Tomas Sobotka, deputy director of the Vienna Institute of Demography.
“Researchers and numerous policymakers have long engaged in discussions on these matters,” he remarked, citing France’s family benefits rooted back in the 1930s and Japan’s measures from the 1990s.
“Musk and other speakers have only heightened focus on an already significant issue—and, regrettably, have also intensified its political divide.”
Wolfgang Lutz, founder of the Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital, emphasized the point further, criticizing tech leaders like Musk who, despite their expertise in their fields, lack demographical insight. Their perspectives hinge more on instinct and vast conjectures rather than strong, scientific reasoning.
Rising Concerns Among Voices
Several other tech figures have reiterated Musk’s apprehensions.
For instance, Telegram’s CEO, Pavel Durov, has gone to the extent of supporting complimentary IVF therapies in Moscow for women utilizing his genetic material.
In a Telegram announcement last July, he labeled declining fertility as “an increasingly dire worldwide situation” and encouraged his followers to “Resist uniformity—revise the norm!”
OpenAI’s leader Sam Altman has diverted interest-oriented investments towards reproduction-tech start-ups, such as Conception, aimed at advancing fertility options even potentially allowing biological children from same-sex male couples.
No Clear Solutions Yet
The possibility of this flurry of new incentives actually reversing current trends remains unclear. Across developed regions, fertility rates have been below the necessary replacement level for decades—driven largely by financial burdens, postponed parenthood strategies, and shifting cultures.
Many signaled how grand solutions attempted in South Korea, Japan, and Hungary have demonstrated inevitable declines without positive outcomes on birth rates.
Lee pointed out how even the ample parental new policies employed in Scandinavia have failed to compel fertility rates back up. He commented, “Current financial incentives are minimal compared to the overall cost of raising a child,” recalling how Hungary invested nearly 5% of its GDP annually into pro-fertility plans but saw limited success.
Sobotka mentioned that while governments can’t easily address the expenses related to parenthood, judicious policies can assist parents in pursuing the specific family size they wish while potentially lifting birth rates incrementally.
“The accumulated Family Programs could moderately enhance fertility rates by up to 0.2 to 0.3 children per woman,” he stated.
However, Lutz expressed doubts, asserting that although supportive family initiatives exist to bolster children’s welfare, their direct influence on fertility appears minimal, sometimes pushing women out of the job market instead.
Anna Rotkirch, research director at Finland’s Population Studies Institute, presented Estonia as a case where expanded family initiatives initially elevated birth rates of subsequent children, only to watch first births plunge within the decade.
“We need innovative and bolder measures,” she emphasized, noting the necessity for contributions from employers, local planners, and overall societal context—not solely political action.
In the attended context, Karen Benjamin Guzzo, who leads the Carolina Population Center in the U.S., added that the preferable changes currently nudged towards the market likely won’t significantly raise birth rates, as they overlook the central challenges encountered by American parents such as high housing costs, infant care expenses, and inadequate paid leave options.
