| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
| | An excerpt for abstract for the journal article ''The decline of the world's IQ'' published in the journal Intelligence by Richard Flynn and John Harvey states: | | An excerpt for abstract for the journal article ''The decline of the world's IQ'' published in the journal Intelligence by Richard Flynn and John Harvey states: |
| | {{Cquote|Dysgenic fertility means that there is a negative correlation between intelligence and number of children. Its presence during the last century has been demonstrated in several countries. We show here that there is dysgenic fertility in the world population quantified by a correlation of −0.73 between IQ and fertility across nations. It is estimated that the effect of this has been a decline in the world's genotypic IQ of 0.86 IQ points for the years 1950–2000. A further decline of 1.28 IQ points in the world's genotypic IQ is projected for the years 2000–2050. In the period 1950–2000 this decline has been compensated for by a rise in [[Phenotype|phenotypic]] intelligence known as the [[Flynn Effect]], but recent studies in four economically developed countries have found that this has now ceased or gone into reverse. It seems probable that this “negative Flynn Effect” will spread to economically developing countries and the whole world will move into a period of declining genotypic and phenotypic intelligence.<ref>[http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2008.pdf The decline of the world's IQ] by Richard Flynn and John Harvey, Intelligence 36 (2008) 112–120</ref>}} | | {{Cquote|Dysgenic fertility means that there is a negative correlation between intelligence and number of children. Its presence during the last century has been demonstrated in several countries. We show here that there is dysgenic fertility in the world population quantified by a correlation of −0.73 between IQ and fertility across nations. It is estimated that the effect of this has been a decline in the world's genotypic IQ of 0.86 IQ points for the years 1950–2000. A further decline of 1.28 IQ points in the world's genotypic IQ is projected for the years 2000–2050. In the period 1950–2000 this decline has been compensated for by a rise in [[Phenotype|phenotypic]] intelligence known as the [[Flynn Effect]], but recent studies in four economically developed countries have found that this has now ceased or gone into reverse. It seems probable that this “negative Flynn Effect” will spread to economically developing countries and the whole world will move into a period of declining genotypic and phenotypic intelligence.<ref>[http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2008.pdf The decline of the world's IQ] by Richard Flynn and John Harvey, Intelligence 36 (2008) 112–120</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | == IQ, socioeconomic status, fertility rate and France's pronatal policies == |
| | + | |
| | + | There is a positive correction between a higher IQ and an individual's higher socioeconomic status. And education is positively correlated with attaining a higher economic status. And as noted above, increased education is strongly associated with delayed childbearing in both sexes. |
| | + | |
| | + | The 2015 article ''France, a Pro Natalist Country'' states: |
| | + | {{Cquote|In addition to the rapidly decreasing support ratio, France’s population also faces the problem of a falling birth rate & low total fertility rate. The fertility rate of France in 1960 was 2.75 children per woman, well above the replacement level of 2.1. However by 1992 the total fertility rate had fallen to 1.67, substantially lower than the replacement level. This low fertility rate is due to an increasing proportion of educated women who are pursuing careers. Today, 81% of women in France are employed. Women are now focusing on their careers rather than on raising families, resulting in women putting off having children until they’re 30 or deciding to just not have children, especially middle class women. This has the effect of lowering both the fertility rate and the birth rate to levels below replacement level, resulting in smaller successive generations. This, combined with an ageing population, presents the problem of a low number of economically active individuals in the future, resulting in a decreased support ratio and raising costs to care for the elderly which ultimately increases the strain on France’s treasury. |
| | + | |
| | + | In order to combat the falling fertility rate, France has employed an aggressive pro-natalist policy which employs a system of monetary incentives and rewards for women giving birth to multiple children which seems to have helped raise France’s total fertility rate to 1.98, the second highest in Europe next to Ireland, but still below replacement level. In 1939, the French government passed the “Code de la famille”, a complex legislation that introduced a set of pro-natalist policies in order to attempt to improve France’s flailing fertility rate. One of the key aspects of the legislation was a series of incentives offered to working women, in order to encourage them to have children. The legislation introduced a long maternity period of 20 weeks to 40 weeks depending on the number of children the woman has already given birth to. In addition to the long maternity leave, women also receive full pay during the maternity period, the idea of which is to ensure that women don’t lose out on their careers should they have children. In addition to fully payed maternity leave, the legislation also introduced a series of generous grants to women having children, especially multiple children. When a women has her third child, the French government will pay her up to €1,000 per month, depending on how well off she already is, as a reward. This is just €200 less than the French minimum wage. This, combined with next to free public transport (families are given a “large family card”, halving metro costs), €174 a year for extra-curricular activities and free entrance to public swimming pools and other public facilities, essentially means that the poorest families in France can raise a child for virtually nothing and the most well off can raise one for around €500. |
| | + | |
| | + | In addition to grants and discounts on public services, the French government also offers subsidised state run childcare for children of 3 months, again, ensuring that women can continue to work after giving birth with minimal financial penalties. The level of subsidisation works on a scale of €0 to €500 a month, again, depending on the family’s income. Families also receive full tax subsidisation until the youngest child reaches 18, further reducing the financial impact of having multiple children. Finally, for when women reach retirement age, the French government offers full pension schemes for mothers of multiple of children. |
| | + | |
| | + | Recently, the French government announced plans to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62 (by 2018) in an attempt to increase the support ratio by reducing the number of people who are classed as elderly. In addition to the increased retirement age, people will need to work 41.5 years in 2020 to claim a full pension versus the 40.5 years they must work now.<ref>[https://geographyas.info/population/france-pro-natalism/ ''France, a Pro Natalist Country''] by Alex Jackson</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| | == See also == | | == See also == |