Bad but still one of the better ones by European standards.
Chads
The most telling part, and this phenomenon is same across all of Eastern Europe is that last peak around ages 30-40 does not show again one generation down, since when these people were younger the economy were in shits so many they decided to not have children yet, but by now despite better conditions they are reaching end of child-bearing age so will never create a ‘peak’.
And with this even the modest increase of TFR we see in some countries simply cannot offset the lower number of child-bearing age people. This is why Hungarian natalist policies are inherently flawed, as they encourage people to have three children, but sociologists long pointed out the biggest obstacle is having the first children, as ‘the rest’ comes easier after, but benefits for just one child are simple insufficient incentives.
Wonder how many of those in the 0 – 10 age group will stay in Romania when they’ll grow up
I wonder how the birth rate in Romania would look without counting the romanis?
What is the explanation for the male surplus from 0 to ~55? I guess the female surplus in old age can be explained by the average higher life expectancy of woman. But I would have thought that the birth rate of male and female babies would naturally be about 1:1. Maybe with some year to year fluctuations, but that bias towards male looks very consistent.
So weird seeing dates being MDY when it’s about Europe. The date would have been perfectly fine written as “1st January 2021”, but since the order is all messed up, it has that awkward hyphen in the middle of the date instead. So instead of actually writing the date properly, someone made it even worse … @_@
11 comments
Ceausescu’s babies gonna soon smack the pension system in the face.
Avem babe și vlăjgani 🙂 totul va fi bine, găina bătrână și morcovul tânăr, face supa bună.
For anyone wondering why the birth rate exploded in the late 1960s — [this is why](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decree_770)
Bring back Ceaușescu
Bad but still one of the better ones by European standards.
Chads
The most telling part, and this phenomenon is same across all of Eastern Europe is that last peak around ages 30-40 does not show again one generation down, since when these people were younger the economy were in shits so many they decided to not have children yet, but by now despite better conditions they are reaching end of child-bearing age so will never create a ‘peak’.
And with this even the modest increase of TFR we see in some countries simply cannot offset the lower number of child-bearing age people. This is why Hungarian natalist policies are inherently flawed, as they encourage people to have three children, but sociologists long pointed out the biggest obstacle is having the first children, as ‘the rest’ comes easier after, but benefits for just one child are simple insufficient incentives.
Wonder how many of those in the 0 – 10 age group will stay in Romania when they’ll grow up
I wonder how the birth rate in Romania would look without counting the romanis?
What is the explanation for the male surplus from 0 to ~55? I guess the female surplus in old age can be explained by the average higher life expectancy of woman. But I would have thought that the birth rate of male and female babies would naturally be about 1:1. Maybe with some year to year fluctuations, but that bias towards male looks very consistent.
So weird seeing dates being MDY when it’s about Europe. The date would have been perfectly fine written as “1st January 2021”, but since the order is all messed up, it has that awkward hyphen in the middle of the date instead. So instead of actually writing the date properly, someone made it even worse … @_@