Those numbers are pretty astonishing - from 1.06 to 0.72 since freaking 2018, in spite of the government throwing money at the problem. Anyone doubting that Idiocracy is prophecy is deluding themselves - smart people everywhere are dying out.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49583047)

so no, the only explanation is that their brains have been hijacked

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49583583)

nobody on xo or otherwise has “explained” to me that this is a myth

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584218)

historically:

1) people were motivated to have sex

2) sex and reproduction were tightly linked

3) reproduction had economic benefits

as soon as 2 and 3 go away, reproduction collapses. this pattern occurs regularly and is strong evidence that there is no instinct to reproduce

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584244)

this isn't even a value-judgment that we're talking about here. we are speaking about strictly factual matters. calling him a "soulless ghoul" in response to his posts is totally incoherent. it's like calling someone a "soulless ghoul" for relaying the melting point of iron

so strange

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584307)

we dont need more people. we need more competent, intelligent, pro-social people. now how do we specifically encourage pro-creation of those people...

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49583057)

you could also heavily tax women and redistribute the money to men, but it would be way easier and more effective to just take away women's rights

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49583065)

What's even wrong if Japan has like 50,000 people, US has 2 million people, and EU has another 2 million?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584317)

Using a standard demographic model (assuming a generation length of 30 years and a replacement rate of 2.1), here is how a population of 100 million collapses over time at these fertility rates.

TFR 1.5 (Current rate of Japan/Italy)

50 Years: 57 million

100 Years: 32.6 million

150 Years: 18.6 million

200 Years: 10.6 million

TFR 1.0 (Current rate of China/Thailand)

50 Years: 29 million

100 Years: 8.4 million

150 Years: 2.4 million

200 Years: 711,000

TFR 0.7 (Current rate of South Korea)

50 Years: 16 million

100 Years: 2.5 million

150 Years: 411,000

200 Years: 66,000

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584348)

or at the very least you must ban all feminazi BS, all anti-natal BS, and from early education teach bitches their sole role is to get married and maek babby

but none of this will happen in our lifetimes prob so we are all gonna go extinct except for N'Delaowaodjabatu and his bros in Chad and Sudan

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584322)

However, given rising housing costs and stagnant wages, it remains unclear whether such measures will make a difference—especially as Japan and South Korea have seen limited success despite committing far more funding than Taiwan over the years to boost births."

lmao $3200. wow great effort guys. I have zero sympathy for pro-fertility sentiment but if this is the best they can do then wow lol.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584328)

Lee Kuan Yew’s views on fertility subsidies evolved from skepticism to a form of grim resignation. While Singapore has some of the world's most generous "Baby Bonuses," Lee himself eventually argued that they were largely a waste of money because the problem was cultural, not financial.

His stance can be summarized by three main points he made toward the end of his life:

### 1. The "Two Years' Salary" Experiment

In his 2013 book *One Man’s View of the World*, Lee made a provocative proposal. He said that if he were still in charge, he would offer a baby bonus equal to **two years' salary** of the average Singaporean for a limited time.

However, his goal wasn't to actually raise the birth rate. He wanted to do it to **"prove beyond any doubt"** that it would fail. He argued that such an experiment would show that low fertility has nothing to do with "economic or financial factors, such as high cost of living," but is instead driven by a fundamental change in lifestyles and mindsets that money cannot fix.

### 2. "I Have Given Up"

Lee was famously blunt about the failure of pro-natalist policies. In the same 2013 book, he wrote:

> "I cannot solve the problem, and I have given up. I have given the job to another generation of leaders. Hopefully, they or their successors will eventually find a way out."

He believed that once women became highly educated and entered the workforce with equal status to men, the "opportunity cost" of having children became so high that no government subsidy could ever truly compensate for it.

### 3. Culture Over Cash

Lee argued that the decline in birth rates was a byproduct of the very success he helped create. He noted that:

* **Lifestyles have changed:** Young people now value autonomy, travel, and career progression over traditional family structures.

* **Marginal Effect:** He stated that large monetary incentives would only ever have a "marginal effect" on the birth rate because they don't address the "educational arms race" or the stress of modern urban life.

* **The Migration Solution:** Because he believed subsidies wouldn't work, he argued that the only way for Singapore to survive was to **accept immigrants**, despite the social friction it might cause. He often pointed to Japan as a warning of what happens to a society that refuses both babies and immigrants.

---

### Comparison of LKY's Eras

| Period | Policy | His Belief |

| --- | --- | --- |

| **1970s** | "Stop at Two" | Population growth is a threat to infrastructure and survival. |

| **1980s** | "Three or More" | Realized the "Stop at Two" worked too well; began targeting elite/graduates to breed. |

| **2010s** | Massive Subsidies | Believed they were ineffective "window dressing" for a deeper cultural shift. |

**Would you like me to find the specific "Baby Bonus" amounts Singapore currently offers in 2026 to see how much they have increased since Lee's death?**

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584355)

*Cabinet bursts into laughter*

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584479)

But at least homeowners have lots of equity!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5821071&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310822#49584490)