this is a 35 per cent jump in the last decade and way way more than women in Italy, Germany and Spain

but did State subsidies really make the difference?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/29/opinion/edpfaff.php
It began in the 1970s, in a typical French government technocratic concern for developing the service sector, for which women seemed a prime labor source. Therefore free, full-time municipal crèches, or nurseries for the very young, were expanded. Free public pre-kindergartens and canteens were vastly increased in number, as well as subsidized vacation camps during school holidays. Competition for places in these institutions remains high, and is increasingly subject to means tests, but this has simply pushed the development of cooperative crèches organized by better-off families.

but I think it is also a state of mind, a cultural moment that is harder to define

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

...free, full-time municipal crèches, or nurseries for the very young, were expanded. Free public pre-kindergartens and canteens were vastly increased in number, as well as subsidized vacation camps during school holidays.

---

quote:

---

their population will decline by 10% each replacement cycle

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sara Mayo:

Only if they put an imediate end to all immigration, which they won't.

---

Yes, and the American's stopped at replacement rates in about 1970. Their growth is coming from Latin American's escaping abject poverty. I read where about a half of white 30 something couples are without children. The white power groups are in an uproar because of it.

A friend of mine earned two degrees while living in France a number of years ago. She paid something like $80 dollars in admin fees for the year. Very people-friendly, France is.

Meanwhile in 2002, Canada's birth rate was at its lowest level since 1921. Canadian's are doing their part in keeping inflation at bay on behalf of rich people everywhere.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sara Mayo:

Another great argument for universal childcare!

---

Ireland doesn't have it, though. And from everything I have heard so far, it's a great place to live today. Low taxes, knowledge-based economy, no more IRA...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
In 2002, Canada's birth rate was at its lowest level since 1921. Canadian's are doing their part in keeping inflation at bay on behalf of rich people everywhere.

---

I don't know what exact point you are making, but I'd have to say that Canadians having fewer babies has nothing to do with 'keeping inflation at bay' and a whole lot to do with children being very expensive, especially if you want to ensure that they can get educated beyond high school. Not that that's the only reason people don't have kids, but I know it's a factor among everyone I've spoken to. (... try raising 5 kids anywhere these days, it doesn't even have to be a city, it's still really expensive)

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Amy ]

In Paris, les crèches are like those in Montréal or Toronto - littlies of all colours, speaking perfect Parisian titi. Oh yes, there are some dull and privileged parts of "les beaux quartiers" where small ParisienNEs of colour are less common, but that is the case in many lands and cities in the West.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Krago:
Je me souviens that during the 1995 referendum, Lucien Bouchard make a stupid remark about Quebecois having the lowest birth rate of any of the "white races". I tried to find a link to it, but the only sites Google showed were heritagefront.com, freedominion.ca and stormfront.org.

---

to Sara Mayo way above:
I do not think social spending alone can explain the boom; these subsidies were in place in the 1980s and 1990s, too, a time when birth rates were plunging

Le Monde did a cover feature a while ago about "le mini-baby boom" in France, and emphasized that French women in interviews stressed that 2.0 children was their ideal:
search le Monde for July 21-22 cover story

However, mathematically it does seem that for the birthrate to be that much higher, at least part of it would have to be uniformly in all of french culture. It's about 0.5 higher than most of Europe, and for it to be purely from in 20% of the population, which is a generous quantity to apply to unassimilated minorities, it would mean that these minorities average 2.5 children per women MORE than the europeen average, or roughly about 4. That's a lot, though perhaps unassimilated women might average 3.5, making up most of the difference.

Ultimately though, the issues are obvious.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DA_Champion:
This doesn't say much about child care policies if all the extra children are coming from immigrant communities who are not assimilating into the mainstream culture. In fact, then it is likely a negative.

---

they began to reach their ideal in early 2000's

En matière de démographie, la morosité, que refusait de voir Jacques Chirac dans son intervention du 14-Juillet, n'est pas de mise. Les chiffres parlent d'eux-mêmes. En 2004, selon des données encore provisoires, 764 700 enfants sont nés en France, confirmant une reprise de la natalité observable depuis 1998, avec un pic à 774 782 naissances en 2000. On est loin des 885 200 naissances de 1900 ou des 862 300 de 1950. Ce n'est pas un nouveau baby-boom, mais le signal est positif.

Dans l'Union européenne, l'indice de fécondité est de 1,4 enfant par femme (contre 1,3 au Japon, 1,6 en Chine et... 3 en Inde), mais en France, chez le mauvais élève de la classe européenne en matière de chômage, de croissance et de déficits publics, il est de 1,9. On retrouve le niveau atteint au début des années 1980. En matière de fécondité, la France est dans le peloton de tête, devant le Danemark et la Norvège (1,8), juste derrière l'Albanie, l'Irlande et l'Islande (2), mais très loin devant l'Allemagne et l'Italie (1,3).

La bonne santé démographique de la France ­ qui en 2004 offrait une espérance de vie à la naissance de 76,7 ans pour les hommes et de 83,8 ans pour les femmes ­ est due à une politique familiale habile et consensuelle. Elle a su inciter à la natalité en alliant des prestations familiales et des aides au logement ­ malgré un retard en crèches et en équipements pour la petite enfance ­ à une politique qui ne dissuade pas les femmes de travailler. Mais cette bonne natalité montre surtout que, en dépit de l'air du temps, on trouve encore en France des raisons d'espérer.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Geneva ]

I was wondering if french culture was still going to be around in a hundred years. Pure intellectual speculation of course. All past predictions of the future have proved completely false There are some deep divisions in French society. In a poll a couple years back, 40% of french ADMITTED they were racist against "les beurres," (arabs), 25% against blacks and 15% against Jews. I wonder what the real rates are? I've met a lot of people from France, and from my anecdotal experience, they say things I don't even think. It's unfortunate. I'd rather see France survive as a package.

Elle a su inciter à la natalité en alliant des prestations familiales et des aides au logement - malgré un retard en crèches et en équipements pour la petite enfance - à une politique qui ne dissuade pas les femmes de travailler.

France has implemented policies that do not try to keep mums out of the labour market - as in Germany - or encourage merely "part-time" work, as in nice social-democratic Sweden.

They understand that one must provide help to housing and to daycare - and have provided parental leaves for both parents. Sure, as in Cuba, mentalities are more retrograde, and more mums than dads take them, but the principle is there, and I do know dads in France who have taken parental leaves.

The rest of the stuff about racism, ghettoes, etc is kind of veering off the issue - it is much more complex than that. When I said young mums in France weren't necessarily white, I didn't mean to imply they were necessarily of colour either.

I think we have a troll here, playing both sides - both "fear of immigrant ghettoes" and "those nasty racist French". Best ignored.

quote:

---

Disclaimer: I do NOT mean it should be more difficult for couples to separate - it is a complex cultural issue

---

Pour le professeur ... cette situation ne correspond en rien à un quelconque affaiblissement du "désir d'enfant" chez les jeunes couples italiens. "Quand on interroge les femmes qui entrent en âge de procréer, toutes disent souhaiter, en moyenne, donner naissance à deux enfants ; 1,9 dans le nord du pays et 2,1 dans le sud, précise-t-elle.

" Mais l'absence de véritable politique familiale alliée aux contraintes professionnelles, matérielles et immobilières font que ces femmes se résignent à n'avoir qu'un enfant, voire à ne jamais donner la vie. De ce point de vue, nous savons, en Italie, que nous sommes confrontés à un véritable drame face auquel le pouvoir politique actuel est muet parce qu'impuissant."

Ce phénomène n'est pas isolé et inquiète la Commission européenne qui, depuis 2000 et la stratégie de Lisbonne, accorde une importance accrue aux questions démographiques. Elle encourage les Etats à aider les femmes à concilier vie professionnelle et familiale, pour relancer la croissance économique et limiter le vieillissement de la population.

La situation française actuelle, perçue comme conséquence d'une politique familiale généreuse, est souvent citée en exemple. Elle ne doit pas faire oublier que les indices étaient nettement moins favorables au début des années 1990. Ils se sont brutalement inversés pour des raisons que les démographes ne s'expliquent pas, à partir de 2000.

..............

les indices étaient nettement moins favorables au début des années 1990. Ils se sont brutalement inversés pour des raisons que les démographes ne s'expliquent pas, à partir de 2000.

exactly my point about French rebound, some X-factor working here, probably cultural, since State support has not guaranteed baby booms in the past

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

Another great argument for universal childcare!

---