Being anti-immigrant is politically lucrative but misses the point

Far-right parties across Europe have slightly advanced in terms of their popularity by actively scaring people: immigrants will take over, immigration represents a threat to society. And, to their credit, it often works - just look at the recent elec

By: helsinkitimes.fi

Sep 30 2024
22
4668 Views

Being anti-immigrant is politi

Far-right parties across Europe have slightly advanced in terms of their popularity by actively scaring people: immigrants will take over, immigration represents a threat to society. And, to their credit, it often works - just look at the recent elections in Austria. On the surface the arguments make sense “they come here, you see, with different values and traditions, different religions, even a different appearance”. The average person continues the logical chain: they take our jobs, gain access to the healthcare and social protection systems, etc.

In my opinion, European xenophobia is an easy way to get votes (and get into a national and EU Parliament), but it absolutely misses the source of the problem. Immigration is just a result. The root cause is that there are few children in the European Union - there are fewer of us and we are aging. And this is happening quite quickly!

There are fewer of us.

The total fertility rate (TFR) represents the average number of children a woman could have during her lifetime. On average, each woman needs to have 2.1 children (a total fertility rate of 2.1) to maintain a stable population without migration. The current TFR in Europe as of 2022 was 1.46 live births per woman. This trend is common for the entire EU, and even the forerunners, France, cannot reach the figure of 2.1. There are simply fewer and fewer of us. Simply because many Europeans prefer to have fewer children, if any at all.

According to Eurostat estimates, at the current trend, by 2100 the EU population may decrease by 6%, or by 27.3 million people. Sociologists and demographers cite many reasons. A 21st-century woman is significantly better educated and has (hardly surprising to anyone) the right and desire to have a professional career. Having children is a) simply expensive. Yes, raising a child can be quite costly! According to a report by the US Department of Agriculture, for a married couple with an average income and two children, the average cost of raising a child from birth to age 17 in 2015 was estimated at US$233,610. Adjusted for inflation, this figure could be US$312,202 as of March 2024. By the end of 2022, up to 3 million children in 26 EU countries were living in conditions equivalent to relative income poverty! In the EU! This suggests that having children can lead to a relative decline in living standards, especially during economic downturns or crises; b) children limit our freedom and lifestyle (forget about surfing off the coast of Portugal or nightclubs in London). In Finland, I often hear new “arguments” for not having children - “I am saving the planet – there are too many of us”?!? But let’s not talk about the distant 2100. Let’s look closer. What awaits us by 2050? Nothing good!

We are aging.

Europe is also aging. Life expectancy has increased rapidly over the past century. Reducing child mortality, improving living standards, better lifestyles and education, as well as advances in healthcare and medicine, have greatly helped us. Since the 1960s, life expectancy has increased by more than two years per decade on average! The result? The average age of the population of the European Union (EU) increased from 36.5 years in 1995 to 44.1 years in 2021 (Eurostat, 2022). By 2100, people aged 65 and over will make up 32% of the population compared to 21% in 2022. People aged 85+ are the fastest-growing group in the EU. In 2022, 2.9 percent of EU residents were aged 85 and over. This share is projected to more than double by 2050 and nearly triple by 2100, reaching almost 10 percent of the total population. The fastest-aging population is projected in regions mainly in Eastern Europe (Baltic countries, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria) and Southern Europe (Italy, Spain, and Portugal).

Thus, solving the problem of population decline and aging is crucial for the demographic future of the EU. Not only demographic!

The economy needs people

And they are needed not in 20 years. Industries need people, but they are not there. Hospitals need staff, but they are not there. In cafes and restaurants, we want to see a live waiter, but there are few of them. Who will pick our strawberries in the summer? No one. There is no one to drive trucks either. There are few IT specialists. And when in the near future I sit in a nursing home, I will need help, but there will be no one. The stability of our pension system also requires enough working people. The stability of the pension system is closely related to the ratio of workers to retirees. A frequently mentioned indicator of a stable pension system is having at least 3 workers per retiree. This ratio ensures that the contributions of the current workforce are sufficient to support retirees’ pensions. But if in 1960 there were 5.1 workers per retiree, today this ratio has fallen to 2.8 and is expected to decline further. By 2030, this figure is expected to drop to two workers per retiree. Here is the heart of the problem! The far-right blame and scare us with immigrants, but if not them, then who? There are no children. We don’t want them.

Can the trend be reversed?

The first impulse is to make it “easier” to have children - places in kindergartens, financial incentives, and long paid leave programs for mothers and fathers. But look at Finland and the Nordic countries - it doesn’t work! We are also far from the coveted 2.1. The Economist magazine claims there is no evidence that financial incentives work. This is one rare case where I do not quite agree with The Economist. One of their main arguments - take, for example, the Nordic countries, with free kindergartens, education, healthcare, etc. And still, there are few children. It seems to me that the problem is significantly more complex and requires a) a more comprehensive approach and b) significantly more money. Having children is often perceived as not very prestigious - it is very costly in terms of effort and emotion (modern parents often have exceptionally high demands and expectations of themselves in terms of what good parents are), leads to inevitable loss of income (even in Scandinavia), and inevitably limits lifestyle choices.

But! If we love our comfort and freedom, value our income, and have few children (if any), it is not surprising that we all need immigrants. The fear of whom they try to impose on us, while carefully avoiding the reasons for their appearance. Want a scary story? It is not at all necessary that Finland, Bulgaria, Estonia etc. will always be on the map. The Roman Empire does not exist - young and dynamic Germanic tribes took its place. Byzantium also gave way to Bulgarians, Turks, etc. If a people get tired or fall into a negative comfort zone, other poeople take their place. And in this, from the point of view of history, there is nothing surprising!

By Peter Zashev
PhD, Professor of Practice

Peter Zashev, Adjunct Professor and Program Director at Hanken&SSE Executive Education

This is a "Viewpoint" opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or position of The Helsinki Times. This column is not fact checked and HT is not be responsible for any possible inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.