Iran's demography problem

[Mithridates]

Although I agree with you, but I think the economic aspect of the problem is not that big a factor. In fact, international data demonstrate that poorer countries have higher fertility rates. Look at Africa for example.

I think the main reason that Iran's fertility rate dropped so sharply is cultural. People started to value personal progress more than familial values and put individualism above societal norms. Meanwhile, a sharp increase in women's literacy rate and access to higher education are also responsible for this. After all, fertility rate depends on women. That aside, years of slogans like "fewer children better life", distributing free condoms, free vasectomies and tubectomies in 1990s played a huge role in dropping Iran's fertility rate. I remember when I was a child, there was a health center near our home and you could see the "fewer children better life" ads even on the exterior walls of the building and a sizable majority of people in Tehran believed (and continue to believe) that anything more than two children means bad prospects of good education, good job and other stuff in future for the child.

i know bro the cultural part is so important, nowadays you see people that are 40 years old and still are single and they are saying that i am proud that didn't gave birth to another human in this country with unknown future.
this is obviously a bad cultural feature recently formed in people believes and needs counter measures but as usual slogans are more important than actions in IR.
my point was that some people might have plans to marry and get children but unemployment is preventing them.

 

[QWECXZ]

i know bro the cultural part is so important, nowadays you see people that are 40 years old and still are single and they are saying that i am proud that didn't gave birth to another human in this country with unknown future.
this is obviously a bad cultural feature recently formed in people believes and needs counter measures but as usual slogans are more important than actions in IR.
my point was that some people might have plans to marry and get children but unemployment is preventing them.

Yeah, I understood you. But that's also a cultural thing. People want everything sorted out before they get married while in many cultures, marriage is considered by them as a catalyst for building a new successful life. They see marriage as an incentive for stop being lazy and spoiled. It used to be like that before the 70s (dahe haftad) in Iran too but things have changed. Now it's not like that anymore for many people, if not the majority of people. Here you have to get successful first before you want to think about marriage. It's totally a cultural thing.

I can ensure you that unemployment is far more widespread in Africa than in Iran.

 

[GWXP]

I don't knew why they get arrested as I'm not aware of detail but I guess it's not because they said iran has no demographic problem as many others say so and nobody is arresting them.

Many others who say Iran has no demographic problem dont publish scientific research with conclusions like they did.

Hardcore basijis generally want 150 million Iranians... But they don't think about how to provide jobs or transport or security for them.

Iraq is a semi-failed state so imagine how bad their problems will be with 80m+ people! Right on Iran's doorstep, that kind of instability is not good for Iran.

Economy grows much faster than population...for example population can grow 1 percent a year, while economy can grow 4-6 percent a year...so in the end everyone will get their jobs...plus in the long run increasing population is much more difficult than increasing economic output- one example is european countries that now solve their demographic problems through migration.

As for Iraq- government in Baghdad controls most of the country now and oil rich Iraq is considered to be a middle income country by its GDP per capita. So short term problems will be overcome and in the long run Iraq can turn into a big country that can threaten Iran one more time.

As for those who think that Shias in Iraq are an opportunity they should look at Al Sadr and Sistani who are not pro-Iranian at all.

I think that for Iraq's own long term stability...Iraq should start a government program to reduce fertility rate just like Iran did in 1990s

 

[Battle of Waterloo]

Economy grows much faster than population...for example population can grow 1 percent a year, while economy can grow 4-6 percent a year...so in the end everyone will get their jobs...plus in the long run increasing population is much more difficult than increasing economic output- one example is european countries that now solve their demographic problems through migration.

As for Iraq- government in Baghdad controls most of the country now and oil rich Iraq is considered to be a middle income country by its GDP per capita. So short term problems will be overcome and in the long run Iraq can turn into a big country that can threaten Iran one more time.

As for those who think that Shias in Iraq are an opportunity they should look at Al Sadr and Sistani who are not pro-Iranian at all.

I think that for Iraq's own long term stability...Iraq should start a government program to reduce fertility rate just like Iran did in 1990s

so economy grows much faster than population but you think iraq should reduce fertility rate anyway? ...

5% GDP growth doesn't equate to 5% increase job vacancies...

"At the global level, Kapsos (2005) finds that for every 1-percentage point of additional GDP growth, total employment has grown between 0.3 and 0.38 percentage points"

- 23 million Iranians have a job
- if 1% GDP growth = 0.3% increase in job vacancies (ignoring structural unemployment and mismatch of sectors/skills of employees and vacancies...) then 5% GDP growth = 1.5% increase in job vacancies
- 23m * 0.015 = 0.345m new jobs in a year of 5% GDP growth
- 1% population growth = 0.01*80m = 0.8m population growth

So even with 5% GDP growth that's a deficit of >400,000 per year! Average GDP growth in Iran since 1990s is probably below 5% (huge drop in 2012 and huge drop in 2019), so even that is optimistic.

Then we factor in the fact already there is a huge job shortage in Iran and very high unemployment (and biggest brain drain in the world). And the employment is with very very low salaries and often multiple jobs. And then factor in even if we have 5% GDP growth and 0.345m new jobs, what % of those jobs will be perfectly matching the new labour force supply? Probably <50%, which increases the deficit even more. Then we factor in the other societal costs of increased population (pollution, higher property/rent prices, need huge infrastructure investment, etc) and the maths doesn't really add up to me...

 

[GWXP]

so economy grows much faster than population but you think iraq should reduce fertility rate anyway? ...

Yes, because what Iraq is experiencing is a demographic boom. Their population will double in just 25 years and will be increasingly young. This will produce a lot of problems to them in the short run, including the ones you are talking about.

5% GDP growth doesn't equate to 5% increase job vacancies...

"At the global level, Kapsos (2005) finds that for every 1-percentage point of additional GDP growth, total employment has grown between 0.3 and 0.38 percentage points"

- 23 million Iranians have a job
- if 1% GDP growth = 0.3% increase in job vacancies (ignoring structural unemployment and mismatch of sectors/skills of employees and vacancies...) then 5% GDP growth = 1.5% increase in job vacancies
- 23m * 0.015 = 0.345m new jobs in a year of 5% GDP growth
- 1% population growth = 0.01*80m = 0.8m population growth

So even with 5% GDP growth that's a deficit of >400,000 per year! Average GDP growth in Iran since 1990s is probably below 5% (huge drop in 2012 and huge drop in 2019), so even that is optimistic.

You are the kind of demographer Iranian government would like to put to jail. Iranian government knows all the right calculations and even despite that they propose a baby boom.

Then we factor in the fact already there is a huge job shortage in Iran and very high unemployment (and biggest brain drain in the world). And the employment is with very very low salaries and often multiple jobs. And then factor in even if we have 5% GDP growth and 0.345m new jobs, what % of those jobs will be perfectly matching the new labour force supply? Probably <50%, which increases the deficit even more. Then we factor in the other societal costs of increased population (pollution, higher property/rent prices, need huge infrastructure investment, etc) and the maths doesn't really add up to me...

Economy grows faster than population means that wealth per person is increasing over time.

At the same time economic growth is a function of labor force growth, so the growth in labor force generates faster GDP growth.

Unemployment in Iran is 12%-this number is high but not a catastrophe. For example in Turkey it is 11% and in France -9,5%, in Italy-11.5%

Anyway, this is a short-term problem that doesn't matter in the long run. What matters in the long run is population size.

Economic problems can be solved over time, but solving demographic problems is much more difficult-just look at such nations like Germany and Japan- despite the wealth they have they can't increase their population whatever they do and are aging rapidly.

If Iran will not increase its fertility rate it will become a weak country with rapidly aging population---and this will create social and economic problems for the country. That's why Supreme Leader and the Iranian government who know and understand more than you propose a baby boom and are currently dismantling the old birth control program.

Fertility rate of 2,5 will be perfect for Iran

 

[QWECXZ]

Economy grows much faster than population...for example population can grow 1 percent a year, while economy can grow 4-6 percent a year...so in the end everyone will get their jobs...plus in the long run increasing population is much more difficult than increasing economic output- one example is european countries that now solve their demographic problems through migration.

That's incorrect. You just contradicted 300 years of scientific theories about population dynamics and economics.

Human population grows exponentially (as long as resources are available) while economy grows subexponentially (in many cases even linearly). And if human population doesn't stop growing, soon inflation will skyrocket because nearly all vital resources on the Earth are limited and consumed at a rate that does not allow them to be replaced. The reason that you think economies grow exponentially as well is because you're not taking into account the inflation of the US dollar in your calculations. The average inflation rate of US dollar from 1860 to 2019 is 2.18% per year. So, an economic growth of 4.2% is the minimum required for maintaining a 2% population growth while fewer than 50 countries in the world have a GDP growth higher than 4.2% and in the long-run (+50 years), it's almost impossible to maintain a >4% GDP growth. And your assumption that economies can grow 4-6% a year is wrong for 3/4 of the world currently. That aside, the majority of countries with a GDP growth higher than 4% have a negligible share of the world's economy and if you calculate the weighted average of the world's GDP growth, it is well-below 4%.

In case of Iraq, the GDP growth in 2018 was only 0.5%. That's barely sufficient for supporting any population growth. Also, Iraq has limited water resources too.

Then we factor in the fact already there is a huge job shortage in Iran and very high unemployment (and biggest brain drain in the world). And the employment is with very very low salaries and often multiple jobs. And then factor in even if we have 5% GDP growth and 0.345m new jobs, what % of those jobs will be perfectly matching the new labour force supply? Probably <50%, which increases the deficit even more. Then we factor in the other societal costs of increased population (pollution, higher property/rent prices, need huge infrastructure investment, etc) and the maths doesn't really add up to me...

Iran's unemployment rate is not as high as you say. There is no job shortage in Iran. Actually, there's a lack of skilled labor in many fields in Iran. And the biggest brain drain thing is a hoax. Ethiopia is by far ahead of us in brain drain (having lost 75% of its skilled workforce in less than 20 years).

 

[GWXP]

The reason that you think economies grow exponentially as well is because you're not taking into account the inflation of the US dollar in your calculations. The average inflation rate of US dollar from 1860 to 2019 is 2.18% per year. So, an economic growth of 4.2% is the minimum required for maintaining a 2% population growth

It is real GDP growth---already adjusted for inflation

---while fewer than 50 countries in the world have a GDP growth higher than 4.2% and in the long-run (+50 years), it's almost impossible to maintain a >4% GDP growth. And your assumption that economies can grow 4-6% a year is wrong for 3/4 of the world currently. That aside, the majority of countries with a GDP growth higher than 4% have a negligible share of the world's economy and if you calculate the weighted average of the world's GDP growth, it is well-below 4%.

Many countries grow faster than 4%. China is 25% of world's economy and was growing 10% a year for 30 years. Now they grow 6%.

Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Turkey and many other countries have all showed high average GDP growth rates.

Growth rate tend to slow when country becomes developed.

US for example already a developed economy was growing at 4% from 1950s to 1980s

 

[QWECXZ]

It is real GDP growth---already adjusted for inflation


Many countries grow faster than 4%. China is 25% of world's economy and was growing 10% a year for 30 years. Now they grow 6%.

Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Turkey and many other countries have all showed high average GDP growth rates.

Growth rate tend to slow when country becomes developed.

US for example already a developed economy was growing at 4% from 1950s to 1980s

OK. I thought it was nominal GDP. You're right.

But China's GDP growth has rapidly slowed down.

"As China's economy has matured, its real GDP growth has slowed significantly, from 14.2% in 2007 to 6.6% in 2018, and that growth is projected by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to fall to 5.5% by 2024."

Germany (1.4%), Japan (0.8%), South Korea (2.6%), Taiwan (2.6%), Turkey (2.5%). And considering the fact that GDP growth slows down over time and South Korea and Taiwan are recently developed and Turkey is a developing nation, it is not clear that they can maintain the same GDP growth over time. The GDP growth for Germany and Japan are not sufficient to support population growth.

And the US has had recessions too. Plus, the US loots other countries' resources. Not all countries can do that.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

I

Although I agree with you, but I think the economic aspect of the problem is not that big a factor. In fact, international data demonstrate that poorer countries have higher fertility rates. Look at Africa for example.

I think the main reason that Iran's fertility rate dropped so sharply is cultural. People started to value personal progress more than familial values and put individualism above societal norms. Meanwhile, a sharp increase in women's literacy rate and access to higher education are also responsible for this. After all, fertility rate depends on women. That aside, years of slogans like "fewer children better life", distributing free condoms, free vasectomies and tubectomies in 1990s played a huge role in dropping Iran's fertility rate. I remember when I was a child, there was a health center near our home and you could see the "fewer children better life" ads even on the exterior walls of the building and a sizable majority of people in Tehran believed (and continue to believe) that anything more than two children means bad prospects of good education, good job and other stuff in future for the child.

I think Iran is lucky and low population is good. India is overly populated and we have a lot of problems. Fortunately now, the fertility rate is reducing as people increasingly are moving towards cities. In my city, majority of the families just have 1 or 2 kids which is a sign of development. You will very rarely see families with 3 kids or more in Pune.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Actually, population growth rate has nothing to do with your today's conditions. a baby today wont take your job! though lots of peo

We had a population boom in 8 year of war with Iraq . did we manage to provide enough job for them when they were looking for job.
Also they don't take my job but I can't provide enough job for them.

Future generations will define amount of your social welfare when you get old, so even if you are looking to your own interests, you should vote for a positive rate

The question is why I must get welfare at the age of 40 or 45 I must work at that age.

A little drop in growth rate will compensate for lack of jobs (if our current generation can't create enough jobs till then, which honestly is unlikely), but current sharp drop means lots of empty positions in the future, which either has to be filled with immigrants, or through reducing the busines

Fix the problem correctly don't retire people at the age of 40 or 45

It's worth mentioning, in a letter from health minister to supreme leader (published now), he admits that the 2.1 fertility rate was fake and after new studies they have came up with 1.84 figure.

Why health ministry publish statistic so they come up with fake data we have another organization for that . and fertility rate below 2 means population reduce not increase . how com iran population is increasing.

At the end a healthy position is when your population increase at very slow rate not when you have a population jump or when your population decrease.

Many others who say Iran has no demographic problem dont publish

mdecrease.many do.

 

[Stryker1982]

no racism, Iraq had a population of 16mln in 1980 and Iran had a population of 54mln. And yet Iraq invaded Iran and killed a million people.

So Iran should be aware of potential threats arising from its Western borders in the long run.

Iran's security can not afford a powerful Iraq one more time

If Iran will not increase fertility rates, by 2050 it will become a country with the oldest population in the region

Iran to have oldest population in region by 2050
https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/440584/Iran-to-have-oldest-population-in-region-by-2050

Iran did not have 54 million at 1980. Irans population more than doubled since the start of the war. A simple google search will tell you that.

 

[QWECXZ]

Iran did not have 54 million at 1980. Irans population more than doubled since the start of the war. A simple google search will tell you that.

Yup. Iran's population was more like 30 to 35 million people at the time.

I

I think Iran is lucky and low population is good. India is overly populated and we have a lot of problems. Fortunately now, the fertility rate is reducing as people increasingly are moving towards cities. In my city, majority of the families just have 1 or 2 kids which is a sign of development. You will very rarely see families with 3 kids or more in Pune.

No. Low population is not good. After a certain threshold is passed, severe problems are bound to happen and it becomes a serious problem for the government and society. A society which is old needs healthcare and nurses. The healthcare itself becomes a headache for people and the government because there are too many old people and too few young people to take care of them. And the absence of young labor force will crush the economy.

There should be a balance. High population is terrible, but low population is equally terrible too. The Chinese are now regretting their one child policy.

Why health ministry publish statistic so they come up with fake data we have another organization for that . and fertility rate below 2 means population reduce not increase . how com iran population is increasing.

You can't ask him that. You should ask the people running the Ministry of Health that question.
And a fertility rate below 2 does not mean a negative growth. Although 2 is close to replacement level for most countries, a number below 2 does not imply negative growth immediately.

 

[Salahuddin Ayyubi]

In the 1960s. Germany population was double that of Pakistan's. So was UK population. Now look at what Happened.

I'm neither against population control. Nor am I for it.

I'm simply saying that a populations fertility rate should increase depending on the income status. Those who have a certain income should be allowed to have more children as they can support them. Those with income below a certain predefined threshold should be encouraged to work harder and raise their income social status before being eligible for more children.

This whole notion of "Allah will provide" has not been beneficial because it's prevented us from increasing our GDP per capita for decades.

no racism, Iraq had a population of 16mln in 1980 and Iran had a population of 54mln. And yet Iraq invaded Iran and killed a million people.

So Iran should be aware of potential threats arising from its Western borders in the long run.

Iran's security can not afford a powerful Iraq one more time

If Iran will not increase fertility rates, by 2050 it will become a country with the oldest population in the region

Iran to have oldest population in region by 2050
https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/440584/Iran-to-have-oldest-population-in-region-by-2050

 

[Battle of Waterloo]

You are the kind of demographer Iranian government would like to put to jail.

They like to put a lot of people in jail. What does that have to do with anything?!

Economy grows faster than population means that wealth per person is increasing over time.

Not when population growth exceeds GDP growth (read: the jobs created by the GDP growth), which is exactly what happens as I already explained in my last post.

Unemployment in Iran is 12%-this number is high but not a catastrophe. For example in Turkey it is 11% and in France -9,5%, in Italy-11.5%

Clearly you know nothing about this topic.

Do you know how Iran calculates employment?

Or what even 'official' statistics of unemployment for young people (and graduates) are?

Or about salaries?!

Or about the already existing huge deficit in job creation every year?

Read about these then rethink everything you are writing.

Economic problems can be solved over time, but solving demographic problems is much more difficult-just look at such nations like Germany and Japan- despite the wealth they have they can't increase their population whatever they do and are aging rapidly.

If Iran will not increase its fertility rate it will become a weak country with rapidly aging population---and this will create social and economic problems for the country. That's why Supreme Leader and the Iranian government who know and understand more than you propose a baby boom and are currently dismantling the old birth control program.

Fertility rate of 2,5 will be perfect for Iran

"Economic problems can be solved over time" - how much time? In the last 40 years what has happened to Iran's economy vs Turkey and Israel and Saudi Arabia? How many more decades until these problems are fixed do you think...?

Yet you think Iran should take a huge gamble to add even more people that it can't afford to educate, provide infrastructure and resources for or - most importantly - create jobs or a future for! All in the hope that Iran will magically fix all the economic problems and have a huge GDP boom of 7%+ for 10+ years like it is China. And if this doesn't happen? What then? I guess we shouldn't think about that and blindly assume the next 40 years will be totally different to the past 40 years (based on nothing but false optimism/blind faith).

 

[Saddam Hussein]

no racism, Iraq had a population of 16mln in 1980 and Iran had a population of 54mln. And yet Iraq invaded Iran and killed a million people.

So Iran should be aware of potential threats arising from its Western borders in the long run.

Iran's security can not afford a powerful Iraq one more time

If Iran will not increase fertility rates, by 2050 it will become a country with the oldest population in the region

Iran to have oldest population in region by 2050
https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/440584/Iran-to-have-oldest-population-in-region-by-2050

Even with a population of only 5 million, the important thing is to radicalize our people and we will be able to export hell. Which insallah this radicalization will happen to the 90+ million population in the future so that we can burn the entire region.

The first should be our government and everyone in it, the next on the Kurdish animals.