this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2026
83 points (96.6% liked)

World News

58064 readers
1379 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

People aged 65 and older now outnumber children aged 5 and younger worldwide for the first time in recorded history

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Under age 5.

Not kids.

They cherry picked a kids age to be dramatic.

The birth rate is over 1. For almost all countries and it's almost 2 in the U.S.

[–] Tango@piefed.ca 13 points 1 week ago

The replacement rate is over 2, though.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Until recently in the US the fertility rate was almost 2 and we made it up with immigration. Now we’re trying to be isolationist and the fertility rate is no longer almost 2

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

1.6

Why not let more immigrants in then?

Oh that's right. Racism.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This is one of the things I don’t understand. They’re so intent on causing misery and destruction that it overrides their greed and lust for power.

Immigrants, documented and otherwise, are much more likely to be exploitable to maximize profit. Shouldn’t their greed, or that of their corporate masters, like immigration? Especially undocumented since we seem to push all the risk on the worker rather than the employer? Any motivated capitalist should love that

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah I'm pretty sure they intentionally push hate on immigrants to further exploit immigrants.

No one will hire you because you are a foreigner? Not to worry friends. This meat packing plant will pay you $4 an hour for 12 hr shifts.

Oh the meat packing plant gets caught hiring illegals.

That's deportation for the workers. Slap on the wrist for the company that just made millions from the cheap labor.

They don't want the workers to have legal status. Or rights. They want them scared and desperate.

That way they can pay them nothing. Put them in danger. Treat them like shit. And no one will call OSHA on them. No one will file a lawsuit.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

Almost as if the current government's real mission is to sabotage the US in every way possible.

[–] sbbq@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh no, how we will we maintain value for our shareholders?!

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I’m more concerned about people wanting to use that to raise the retirement age.

  1. They don’t understand averages. Reducing childhood deaths significantly raises average life expectancy by increasing the number of people who reach retirement ages, not by making them more able to work
  2. Nothing forces people to retire at a specific age. I’m more concerned about being able to work long enough to afford retiring. “Retirement age” is 67 and I don’t expect to be able to work that long
  3. Ageism is a thing. As I’m approaching 60, I understand I may never be able to get hired again in my field. This may be my last job, whether I want that or not, and regardless of what retirement age is
  4. There is no such thing as retirement age in the us. There is only the age range at which social security will start paying out. That has nothing to do with how old you need to keep working, how old you can keep working, or how old you’re allowed to keep working
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

They don’t understand averages.

It's more about mortality rates, remaining life expectancies at different ages, and how those have changed over time, but yeah. High infant mortality really skews those stats.

I’m more concerned about being able to work long enough to afford retiring.

You're not alone in that. I'm 70 and still working fulltime. I'll be retiring at 71. At that point, my mortgage will be paid off and my post-retirement disposable income will exceed what I get now while working. I was hoping for better, but life had other plans for me. At least, so far, I have good health and fitness, though I look like three miles of bad road.

Ageism is a thing. As I’m approaching 60, I understand I may never be able to get hired again in my field.

It made things more difficult for me but not impossible. I got my current job at age 58, and I'm in a highly technical field where age discrimination is even more virulent than elsewhere. Only three firms gave me an interview and I got offers from two of them. So I'd characterize it as shitty but not quite impossible. The (slightly) good news is that, in most US states, if you have a job, it's harder to lay you off as you get near retirement age. It's not quite a protected category, but close.

[–] valek879@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

I'm young still but well said. This is what my mom used to talk about but I still struggle to understand and implement. I'll get there but sooner would be better.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

It's okay. Now that AI can do all the jobs the population crisis is over.

Now everybody get dying!

[–] Vizzerdrix@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The graph states it happened in 2023... is this news at all?

[–] Tango@piefed.ca 4 points 1 week ago

Sometimes it takes a while for statisticians to notice things, I guess.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Cioran vindicated. Ligotti - We are all uncanny things. May we all march gracefully out.

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

So.. By the time the kids outnumber the boomers theyll be in the same age group as the people they criticize? Noice.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

oh im sure if they make things shittier plenty of folks will get on the. oh lets have kids bandwagon.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Seems like the approach we’re trying is to prevent people from not having kids they can’t care for, and prevent underage people from having the knowledge or medical support to not have kids when they are still kids

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 week ago

Over 65, at current life expectancy rate at age 65, is an age range from 65 to a median of 84. So 19 years.

Birth to 5 is, hmm, let me check my calculator: 5 years.

Comparing apples and canteloupes.