Louisiana Voice

By John Sachs
Guest Columnist

This discussion of the effects of technological advancements centers on population and societal concerns. I’d much rather Dr. Gary Stokley or Dr. Judith Howard discuss the sociological or psychological effects and ramifications of technological advancements, but I’ll take a layman’s stab at it. If either expert gives me a thumping, I’ll take my licks.

In 1800, the average American woman bore 7 children. By 1940, that birth rate had fallen to 2 per woman and has stayed roughly in this range since, with the exception of the “baby boomer” spike in the 1950’s.

Although 2 children per couple roughly equates to zero population growth, it takes approximately 70 years for that to take effect. That is, it takes roughly 70 years before a child is born, has children of his or her own, and then dies at age 70 just as a great-grandchild is born. In the interim, in absolute numbers, population continues to grow. Therefore, it will be a number of years before we see a shrinking population even if we are immediately successful at significantly reducing our current birth rate to that of China, Canada, and most European nations.

Several factors led to the dramatic decline in the birth rate mentioned above. Mechanization of farming created less demand for human labor. Tractors with cultivators, plows, discs, and harrows, and cotton pickers, grain threshers, and potato diggers are examples of such mechanization.

However, at this same time, industrialization was hitting its stride, and nonexistent child labor laws created a climate for hiring cheap child labor. These children lived at home and their meager wages went into the household coffer. So even as rural families were decreasing, urban families had reason to increase family size.

But urban families did not increase in size as much as rural families decreased. Why? First, during this 140 year period, wages increased six fold, and women chose to enter the workforce as contributors to the family income rather than staying at home having babies to work the farm or in the mills. And second, women were becoming educated and wanted more from life than being a subservient bearer (I won’t say beast) of burdens for their husbands.

Are you beginning to see that history is in the process of repeating itself as a result of today’s technological advancements? Again, fewer people doing more work. Educated men and women seeing themselves as more than just procreators of the species (parents) eking out a drab existence. Economic factors are again significantly affecting social behavior. But this time the world is a far different place.

The populations of almost every nation have reached a level where there are not enough jobs to sustain functioning, much less vibrant, economies. There are certainly not enough jobs for the unskilled and uneducated or under-educated. And there never again will be. The remedy for this is twofold: fewer people and a better educated and more skilled workforce. And both must be dealt with simultaneously.

One factor that will continue to reduce birth rates is gainful employment of better educated men and women of child-bearing age. Such couples choose to have smaller families — unlike the marginally employed and poorly educated couples OR SINGLE PARENT. Job success, rather than producing children, provides a sense of accomplishment. Also, educated couples provide better educational environments for their fewer children. This is Quality over Quantity.

And as to the issue of single parents, children born to unwed mothers now represent 40% of all American births. This is up by 25% in just the last 5 years. 5 years! That’s an explosion. Worse yet is the fact that 70% of Black children are born to unwed mothers. I’m not sure what I can or should say about that statistic, so I’ll leave it saying only that this is a problem of epidemic proportions that absolutely must be resolved.

Never mind the ethics regarding absentee and irresponsible fathers. Look only at the economic impact. In large measure, children born to unwed mothers and raised without two present and involved parents will not, on average, receive the education and skills needed to compete in the job market. And what will result from more and more such people comprising a significant percentage of the population? You fill in the blank. And I’ll bet in your worse case scenario you’ll underestimate the negative effects.

An educated, employable, and employed populace is an absolute necessity to national survival. America has already fallen to #18 in technology development, whereas less than 10 years ago we thought that we would always be #1. At #18 we are virtually out of the race. Remember, the country that develops the technology gets first crack at creating the jobs utilizing such technology.

That’s why La Tech’s Enterprise Center and others like it are so critically important. America’s math and reading skills rank so low that I don’t even care to report them to you. Suffice it to say that at our current rate, American children had best learn to speak and read Chinese, Hindi, and Spanish at a minimum so that they will be able to communicate with their bosses.

Anything, ANYTHING in the near-term that slows effective classroom education and skill-set training to our entire population will negatively impact our economic well-being and ultimately our national security. Keep this in mind as you listen to and discuss political debates.