It's good to finally hear somebody in the public sphere saying what needs to be said about Great Britain's birth rate. We need to increase it, or the country will quite literary die. For the sake of supporting ourselves when we're older, and more importantly for the sake of keeping our nation strong, we have to maintain our population - and I'm afraid to say that relying on the migration into Britain of people who are neither born of this country nor care for it is not an option. While I'm only 19 at the moment (possibly a little young for children!), I consider it my duty when I do have a family to ensure that it is a) strong and b) large. For any Briton who still has any vestage of a sense of social responsibility left, that duty is no different.

Simon, London,

As an educated 23 year old female with enough on my plate after financing my education, I am loathe to finance the baby boomers' pension only to receive your petulance and continuous whining in return.

Your generation had it easy - education grants, cheap housing, better healthcare etc. My generation puts up with expensive education, inability to buy a house and paying for yours and our own healthcare.

When I am ready to start a family, I will not raise my children in the UK. They will not be made to suffer a poorer lifestyle for your sake. Seeing as you prefer the company of your own and older generations, we the young will leave you to it and we will take our expertise, taxes and labour elsewhere. Then where will you be?

Carys Mathews, Chester, UK

Yes I do like the company of old people, as I am retired and old whereas we share our background much more with common early, middle aged things like that, but meeting to young people is entirely different and you learn from them the way they are moving forward with new education and more intelligent in the sense tat they have been to either Universities or move around much more than us in the fastest moving world eg more travelling, more technology they had got at their back. It is better to build up the good relations and rapport between Old land New generations to be blended. Our experiences of our lives to pass on to them and their energetic power and strength to move forward with our experiences, wisdom if both parties are willing to share and enjoy the two LOTS.

S Verma, New Southgate, UK

The population of the UK has risen by a third since the end of WW2. The population of the world is currently increasing by about 210,000 per day. Equivalent to adding the population of Southampton every day.

Why do you think man is influencing climate change? There are more than 3 times as many of us as there was 100 years ago. We need to reduce the size of the human population, or at least stop it increasing.

The carbon footprint of a country is the avarage individual carbon footprint times the number of individuals. Trying to reduce the total by reducing the individual footprint whilst increasing the population is a hiding to nothing.

The only green thing people can do is not to have children.

Incidentally, when the OAP was introduced originally with a retirement age for men of 65 the average life expectancy was 63. The system has to change to reflect the new higher life expectancy or it will fail.

Frank, Winchester,

Bottom line. Young people do not think they can afford to raise kids. It will tax their life style. How can you own two Suv's and a couple houses, if you are raising kids. Latest US estimate, 180,000.00 dollars pre university.

Dan Green, palm beach gardens, US/Florida

I agree with Steve in Missouri - too many people my age (25-30) have really high expectations when it comes to having kids. They want a house of their own, health insurance that will 'cover everytyhing' and a big nest egg.

Don't leave the breeding to the idiots who 'don't know any better' not to have 6 kids while on welfare. I say if you want a child and are educated, take the leap and have one or two - even if your student loans aren't paid off and you're renting. It will pay off because in another 5-10 years what could be achieved naturally may start to take IVF, lots of medical care for risky pregnancy and worse health of the children produced. We don't want to end up with the world of 'Idiocracy' (movie) - and I know several sucessful people 40-50 now that wish they had had kids or had 'found that someone special' ten years ago.

Marie, Nashville, TN, USA

I also prefer a society of older people to younger ones. But I also like the idea of our planet having fewer people on it. I'm happy to work all of my life. I suspect a great many others are also. Unfortunatly that happy medium will never be achieved. Not by governments at least. Too many people = Too many problems.

oldgeezer, Nottingham, England, UK.

Another 10,000 IVF, with 50% of them sickly and more prone to Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Asthma etc etc etc. According to the latest reserch that is............

Judy , Liverpool, england

What does it say about a society that pays Footballers 100,000 pounds a week and attacks doctors for earning that sum in a year ?

Of course I work less hours. For instance I dont do 14 days without a break anymore! And of course I got a pay rise for delivering quality performance targets on patient care year after year since the new contract was introduced. This has actually increased the workload considerably during the hours that I do work.

When you are underpaid for years, a pay rise of this proportion would naturally look disproportionately big.

Above all I have a home life now. It is my right. Like everyone else. It also makes me a safer doctor.

It is up to the public to decide whether thay want to staff the NHS on the cheap. It is up to me to decide whether to stay in it or not.

Yours sincerely,

Dr S T David, portsmouth, UK

Well said Steve.

Dave Madley, Alicante, Spain

Ye Gods! The last thing this overburdened planet needs is more yuppy uber-consumers. Every childless woman should be given money for each year she remains in that state. The funds should be taken from the selfish parents who load the planet and the state with their spawn.

Peter, Oxford, UK

Baby making was diminished by Madison Avenue ad men and their clients who manipulated people into being more selfish by not having babies and spending more money on themselves for self-gratification.

These greedy manipulators failed to recognize that more babies means more products and more services sold which creates more jobs and keeps the population from graying.

Emzy Veazy III, Aspen, Colorado/USA

When I was born the world population was 2 billion. 70 years later in my own lifetime the world population is 6.5 billion. It is said that in 40 years time it will be 9 billion. What then is Melanie McDonagh saying? I suspect she means there are not enough of her own kind in the world, but that does not sound politically correct to me.

Brian Lewis, Manila, Philippines

An unfortunate set of comments about assisted conception. Now that it is socially unacceptable to stigmatise people because of colour, sex, religion or creed, it appears that its open season on the infertile.

Are we really morally questionable abortionists whose children will 'catch' our infertility. Who is next, perhaps fattys, smokers, drinkers and child abusers should be prevented from procreating in case they pass their habits on and sully the next generation.

The debate on population size is very real and very serious isn't enhanced by such cheap shots.

claire, harrow,

"I prefer the society of old people to young ones" ~ Melanie McDonagh

Then who is going to fight *IF* there was a war?

Dad's army ?

Mohammed, London, UK

The economist and others were right to worry about the demographic and pension problem which will be a huge problem. Unfortunately an even bigger problem has come along since that one was envisaged a few decades ago - climate change. Yes, we'll have huge pension problems but declining birth rates are to be celebrated in general. The problems we'll have with workers supporting pensioners is essentially the same one - far, far, far too many humans to be occupied in the core jobs of feeding, manufacturing, basic service etc. This is the same one as climate change where it seems unless there is some gargantuan leap in human knowledge and efficiency in the next few decades 10 billion humans can't possibly be supported on earth.

Paul, York,

This piece is so full of internal contradictions that it would take excessively long to detail them. It is though representative of the atitude of an urban dweller whose food is obtained from a supermarket with no thought as to its origins. In normal years we import about half our food, largely from the Americas and Europe. But now there is increasing competition on these food supplies from India and China. Furthermore the recent rains have damaged a substantial part of not only our crops but that of Eastern Europe. The crops in the Mediterranian region have also been hit by drought. Worldwide arable land is being diminished by both urbanisation and land degradation. Although in the short term genetic crops may help to increase food supply a warning should be taken from the previous 'green revolution' which in parts of , for instance, the Indian subcontinent has led to unsustainable use of groundwater and mineral contamination of massive areas of land

Adrian Moon, Bridgwater, UK

We do face a terrible dilemma. The planet cannot sustain its present population (let alone an increasing one), at the standard of living (GDP) that most in the west already have, & are striving for in the rest of the world. Energy, mineral, food and water resources cannot be exploited indefinitely on a finite planet. Non-renewables cannot be renewed; renewables are being consumed far faster than they are being renewed. On the other hand a falling population results in too many old people being supported by fewer young ones. This is the case even without the effects of climate change.

The only solution is to stabilize the population, whatever problems it causes, and adopt a much simpler lifestyle. If this is not done we will face catastrophe. As someone said recently, if we reject reality, reality will reject us.

Dave, Wrexham,

Why is this a tragedy? Global population has tripled in my lifetime to far beyond the level of sustainability. How can this author seriously mention economics in an essay that pretends population can grow indefinitely in a finite world? It's sheer economic illiteracy. It will be difficult to deal with contracting markets, tax bases, and labor pools, but population WILL decline. The only question is how catastrophically. Dealing with babies who are never born, and people having to work longer, is a far more humane alternative than letting population increase until the environment is hopelessly degraded and people begin dying from disease or famine. Or war, as people begin fighting for ever more scarce resources.

Steve, Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA

There does indeed seem to be some sort of myth that a certain level of financial comfort is necessary before breeding should begin, at least amongst educated women.

I was brought up in the seventies and eighties to believe that the correct order of procedure was education, career, car, house, marriage and then and only then children. Fortunately for me, once education was out of the way I decided that this path was not necessarily the best, had children, got a career, got married, learned to drive and finally got a house after starting out in a tawdry flat. We now have a lovely home, are financially comfortable and a fourth child on the way, and I'm still (just) on the right side of forty. True, a lot of juggling is required, but if one wants to have it all...

If we want educated middle class women to breed, rather than leaving it to chavs and the ultra-rich, we need to encourage them to change their priorities, with government policies geared towards this end.

Lux, Nancy, France

It is a striking contradiction that the very governments now expressing anxieties about the growing number of old people spare no expense in promoting the curious notion that we have an obligation to extend our lives as long as we possibly can by minimising risk. We can help succeeding generations by ignoring the health fascists, and living lives which are not risk averse, thus increasing mortality rates. Let’s carry on smoking, drinking, driving fast cars, taking part in dangerous sports, allowing people to use whatever drugs they wish. And we need to change our attitude to our place in the world. Instead of seeing ourselves as the summit of creation, for whom the rest of the world simply constitutes “resources” waiting for us to use them, let’s see ourselves for what we really are, just one other species, albeit an especially destructive one, of which there are already more than enough.

Trofim, Birmingham, UK

As an 'intelligent, attractive woman over 35' I am single and childfree because of just that - I'm intelligent. I go travelling and live an interesting life that I wouldn't be able to do if I was lumbered. Selfish? If it means I've got a more interesting life than you and other breeders have, then yes, I'll take that accusation.
Anyway, what's more selfish than bringing even more humans into an overpopulated, denuded environment, just because YOU want them?

FJ, Sandown, Isle of Wight, UK

Take a comprehensive look into the whole issue and factor in the demographic reality of Africa's contribution in this globalising world. You may discover that adjustment to your projection may become necessary

Odumosu, Tayo , Ijebu Igbo , Nigeria

Have I completey got it all wrong? Until today mu undestanding was that the biggest problem we faced was overpopulation - now it seems that the opposite is the case.
This is getting confusing.

Hugh Davies, Reading, England

Current human population levels are not sustainable in the long term and will be corrected downward either by ourselves or by nature - plague, famine etc.. Surely declining populations are a positive trend while the pensions crises will be temporary phenomenon easily adjusted to by being productive for longer.

Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK

"And there’s only so much the state can do about it, though cash rewards for larger families, as in Portugal, and handsome paternity leave for fathers, as in Sweden, are two options that seem promising. "

But don't both these countries have _lower_ birthrates than the UK? Perhaps we need to look to countires that have higher birthrates - the US and the Republic of Ireland, for example.

Otherwise an excellent article.

Oh, and if any of those attractive, intelligent, single graduate, 35 yr old females are reading...please get in touch!!

David J Timson, Belfast, UK

Factor in the CSA effect and I'm surprised that the birth rate is as high as it is. Who'd voluntarily expose themselves to the possibility that if Mummy and Daddy cease to get along as we're statistically informed that one in two don't, Mum can retire and Dad can't move on. That puts an abrupt halt to half of the breedable males in the UK at a stroke.

Pu Li, Guangxi,

Surely the overwhelming problem for the whole world is that its resouces cannot support the the exploding population of human beings. If the human race is to continue to exist it is essential that our numbers are drastically reduced as quickly as possible. If not we shall all be faced with rapidly declining standards of living as supplies run out, followed by people dying ever earlier,

Jim Andress, Chippenham, England

Bob, you might like to consider coming over to Europe to look for a wife. Believe me, there are many women here that fall into the category described in the article.

It really does seem that those who breed the most are the ones on benefits or low income with a low level of education. If an educated (i.e. university graduate) breeds, then it usually stays at one child.

Tina, Duesseldorf, Germany

Baby boomers better turn out to be grateful pensioners! Free university, cheap houses iwhen you left uni which then become worth 4 times as much just in time for retirement, retirement age 60/65...

My generation has to get into ultra-massive debt to go through uni, pay astronomical prices for a house (and most likely rent until 35) our retirement age is to rise to 68, and we'll probably have raised taxes to pay for the army of baby boomer biddies!

Chris, Leeds,

fantastically one-sided to talk about men who won't commit. there are plenty of women who don't want to give up their designer lifestyles and freedom. too, my friends and i, all of whom aren't hideous, imbecilic swine, are professional, responsible, professional and making a respectable wage, have encountered countless women who are trying to live the dream--meet a fabulously attractive, charming, sweet guy who makes 100,000/yr. life ain't bridget jones....

bob, san jose, california usa

Well, Melanie, you're just as wrong as you can be, but I know I'm not going to convince you.

What's happened over the past generation or so in the US, and I would suppose over there, too, is that young people - the "breeders", as you put it, have become convinced that they shouldn't have to wait for all the trappings of financial or economic success. Starting off with the shabby little house or apartment, raising the kids, working your way up through a series of lifestyle improvements just doesn't seem to score very high on the social meter anymore. We have to "have it all", and THEN, cap it off with a baby, which of course, we'll want to put with the nanny.

We all WANT it all - but for some of us, family starts first, and then we take what part of "all" we can get later --

Steve, St Joseph, Missouri, USA