WEBVTT - The Late Debate | 11 June 0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:00.880 Get a man. 0:00:01.200 --> 0:00:03.600 Welcome to the Late Debates. 0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:07.280 Thanks for joining us on the Late Debate. 0:00:07.360 --> 0:00:10.640 I'm James Macpherson with Caleb Bond and freyer Leitch. Coming 0:00:10.720 --> 0:00:13.119 up tonight our dope of the day. You won't believe 0:00:13.119 --> 0:00:16.800 this bloke. He threatens to ruin working from home for everyone. 0:00:16.840 --> 0:00:19.440 And he's a police officer, which begs the question why 0:00:19.600 --> 0:00:22.080 is a copper working from home in the first place. 0:00:22.120 --> 0:00:24.040 We'll explain all of that a little later. 0:00:24.360 --> 0:00:26.840 Plus, when we look at the papers, a mother begs 0:00:26.920 --> 0:00:30.520 police to jail her thirteen year old son after he's 0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:33.600 involved in repeated break and enters. And a new study 0:00:33.720 --> 0:00:37.000 shows few of the sunscreens we buy are actually doing 0:00:37.400 --> 0:00:39.559 what they promise. All of that coming up when we 0:00:39.560 --> 0:00:43.760 look at tomorrow's headlines. But first, a school debating competition 0:00:44.080 --> 0:00:47.920 has been thrown into chaos after year nine students were 0:00:47.960 --> 0:00:51.280 asked to debate whether or not the traditional wife movement 0:00:51.840 --> 0:00:56.080 was good for women. Debating South Australia have been inundated 0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:59.720 by angry calls accusing them of setting back women's progress 0:00:59.720 --> 0:01:02.760 by our one hundred years for allowing the topic even 0:01:02.840 --> 0:01:06.760 to be discussed. They're accused of asking teenage girls to 0:01:07.000 --> 0:01:11.280 argue for their own subjugation. The fural was so bad 0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:15.039 that Debating South Australia had to reassure schools throughout the state. 0:01:15.520 --> 0:01:17.040 The debate wasn't about. 0:01:16.800 --> 0:01:20.679 Whether women must submit or subjugate themselves to men. It 0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:23.880 was simply about whether society would be better served by 0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:27.600 women being at home raising kids. Not only that, but 0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:31.080 they also had to explain how debating works. A statement 0:01:31.120 --> 0:01:35.479 from the Debating Society said, these people complaining they were 0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:37.800 outside people have got nothing to do with debating. 0:01:38.040 --> 0:01:39.480 They don't even know how it works. 0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:42.240 Debating is very formal, and not only do we not 0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:46.880 tolerate in civility, it never happens. It's an intellectual, academic 0:01:46.959 --> 0:01:53.600 exercise bound up in civility, politeness and good manners. Before 0:01:53.600 --> 0:01:56.120 we get to or whether we'll even get to the 0:01:56.160 --> 0:02:00.600 demonization of traditional gender norms and whether that's appropriate or not. 0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:05.200 This idea that we should shield children from debating. 0:02:05.280 --> 0:02:06.640 Isn't the point of debating? 0:02:06.800 --> 0:02:09.839 Frey that oftentimes you take on a position you don't 0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:14.119 even agree with, but you learn intellectual flexibility by debating 0:02:14.160 --> 0:02:15.400 and arguing principles. 0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:18.200 But this is the corner the Left have found themselves in. 0:02:18.480 --> 0:02:23.600 They are unable to even comprehend that people think differently 0:02:23.639 --> 0:02:26.760 to them. So the very idea of debating, the idea 0:02:26.800 --> 0:02:29.680 that there could be two different perspectives on an issue 0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:32.680 is so foreign to them, because for them, there is 0:02:32.800 --> 0:02:35.400 only one side. It is their side, and anyone that 0:02:35.440 --> 0:02:38.680 disagrees with them is in this case arguing for women's 0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:41.960 rights to be stripped away, or they're evil, or they're stupid, 0:02:42.000 --> 0:02:43.400 and that's just how they think. 0:02:43.480 --> 0:02:45.800 I think they can comprehend that people disagree with them, 0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:47.760 they can't comprehend why they. 0:02:47.560 --> 0:02:48.519 Disagree with them. 0:02:48.600 --> 0:02:50.959 And so the point is that you have to suppress 0:02:51.440 --> 0:02:54.480 any other version of thought, because of course, if people 0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:57.080 have free thought and they don't agree with you, well 0:02:57.120 --> 0:02:59.359 then you're in a great deal of trouble, right and 0:02:59.639 --> 0:03:02.040 it is an extraordinary part of the left, I mean, 0:03:02.040 --> 0:03:05.360 the turnaround that we have seen in the last fifty 0:03:05.400 --> 0:03:08.600 odd years from once upon a time, you know. I 0:03:08.760 --> 0:03:11.280 like to think of real lefties, many of which I 0:03:11.320 --> 0:03:14.000 would call friends, who are going to university in the 0:03:14.280 --> 0:03:18.400 sixties and the seventies and were campaigning against the establishment 0:03:18.600 --> 0:03:21.639 and wanted to stop censorship and believed you should be 0:03:21.680 --> 0:03:24.320 able to say whatever the hell you wanted, and we're 0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:27.560 standing up for the common man. And oh, that's all 0:03:27.560 --> 0:03:29.720 the things that the right's doing these days. 0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:32.000 Right, So they have turned into the. 0:03:32.080 --> 0:03:35.960 Establishment, and now that they are the establishment, they want 0:03:36.000 --> 0:03:38.920 to protect themselves in the same way that once upon 0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:42.520 a time the right leaning establishment wanted to protect itself 0:03:42.880 --> 0:03:45.560 the idea that you couldn't say certain things because it 0:03:45.640 --> 0:03:49.720 might offend someone. It was against the sensibilities of the times. 0:03:49.760 --> 0:03:51.800 I mean, that is where we are now dealing with 0:03:51.840 --> 0:03:54.160 the left, to the point where you can't even have 0:03:54.240 --> 0:03:58.280 an intellectual argument about something without being told that you're 0:03:58.320 --> 0:04:02.280 somehow subjugating women. And how is it subjugating women anyway 0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:04.800 to have an argument about whether or not there is 0:04:04.880 --> 0:04:07.240 merit in being a stay at home mum. Of course 0:04:07.280 --> 0:04:09.120 there is merit in being a stay at home mum. 0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:11.920 But the idea, of course now is that unless you 0:04:12.000 --> 0:04:15.160 are a salary man and you're paying tax to the government, 0:04:15.640 --> 0:04:17.880 you have no purpose in life whatsoever. 0:04:18.040 --> 0:04:21.480 That The little trick that the left play, it's quite 0:04:21.520 --> 0:04:25.000 smart in the sense that it often works, is that 0:04:25.040 --> 0:04:27.200 they take an idea they disagree with, and they don't 0:04:27.200 --> 0:04:29.880 just say your idea is wrong, They say your idea 0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:33.000 is harmful. Well, no one wants to see anyone harm. 0:04:33.160 --> 0:04:36.160 So then having established that idea is harmful, they say, 0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:38.760 now we must protect people from harm. 0:04:39.120 --> 0:04:41.400 Therefore that subject cannot be discussed. 0:04:41.560 --> 0:04:43.440 But of course, as you pointed out, Fra, it's never 0:04:43.440 --> 0:04:47.240 about protecting anyone from harm. It's about power and it's 0:04:47.240 --> 0:04:48.000 about control. 0:04:48.560 --> 0:04:51.919 And let's also remember the topic they're debating here, the 0:04:52.120 --> 0:04:55.240 triad wife movement. Here's a girl I found on TikTok 0:04:55.279 --> 0:04:59.960 earlier explaining exactly what this radical and dangerous trade work 0:05:00.040 --> 0:05:00.719 I stand for. 0:05:02.120 --> 0:05:04.640 Have you seen these millennial and Gen Z girls. They 0:05:04.720 --> 0:05:06.440 just want to be at home with their kids. They 0:05:06.440 --> 0:05:08.039 want to have husbands and they want to take care 0:05:08.080 --> 0:05:09.400 of their husbands. They want to cook, and they want 0:05:09.400 --> 0:05:11.680 to clean, and they want to wear dresses. It's insane 0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:13.480 when in reality, it's literally like. 0:05:13.440 --> 0:05:14.919 The oldest lifestyle in the book. 0:05:14.960 --> 0:05:17.320 Before this, they were just called stay at home moms, 0:05:17.320 --> 0:05:19.400 and before that they were just called women. But now 0:05:19.440 --> 0:05:22.839 our society has gone so far in the feminist direction 0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:24.880 that anybody who wants to live like a little bit 0:05:24.920 --> 0:05:26.800 old school and a little bit like how women used 0:05:26.800 --> 0:05:30.680 to live is fringe, right, Like in extremist. 0:05:31.160 --> 0:05:35.240 So the radical feminists have completely demonized anyone that wants 0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:38.520 to take on a more traditional role, which I think 0:05:38.720 --> 0:05:42.000 is to be honest, insulting to women's choice because many 0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:46.840 women choose this lifestyle. But also on the evidence, there's 0:05:46.880 --> 0:05:50.880 a survey that shows conservative young women are three times 0:05:51.000 --> 0:05:54.280 more likely to report being happy with their lives than 0:05:54.320 --> 0:05:57.160 their progressive peers. If you look at mental health studies, 0:05:57.520 --> 0:06:01.679 young progressive women are far more likely to experience mental 0:06:01.720 --> 0:06:05.840 illness than young conservative women. Across a whole range of indicators. 0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:08.840 They are less happy, less fulfilled, and less satisfied with 0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:13.120 life because the message the radical feminist movement sends them 0:06:13.200 --> 0:06:16.640 is it's all about you, it's all about your material advancement. 0:06:16.680 --> 0:06:17.960 It's all about autonomy. 0:06:18.160 --> 0:06:21.640 You shouldn't be shackled with any responsibility or obligation to 0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:22.280 other people. 0:06:22.640 --> 0:06:25.080 Anything like that is just subjugation. 0:06:25.440 --> 0:06:29.080 But really, the recipe for a happy life is responsibility 0:06:29.360 --> 0:06:32.080 and self sacrifice, and that is what the triad wife 0:06:32.080 --> 0:06:32.960 movement embraces. 0:06:33.160 --> 0:06:35.520 What I liked most about this story, Caleb, was a 0:06:35.560 --> 0:06:38.120 lot of the fueral was instigated by an author in 0:06:38.200 --> 0:06:41.839 Queensland who wrote on Facebook a tirade about how wrong 0:06:41.920 --> 0:06:44.840 it was for year nine students to debate whether or 0:06:44.920 --> 0:06:48.280 not traditional gender roles were appropriate. And then when there 0:06:48.320 --> 0:06:50.920 was some pushback on Facebook, this person who said it 0:06:50.920 --> 0:06:53.640 should not be debated promptly shut down all comments on 0:06:53.680 --> 0:06:56.119 their fast book page. So well, clearly has a problem 0:06:56.160 --> 0:06:57.679 with debate webstop exactly. 0:06:57.880 --> 0:06:58.680 And that is the point. 0:06:58.680 --> 0:07:00.760 They don't want to discuss any They just want to 0:07:00.760 --> 0:07:01.679 tell you it's it's. 0:07:01.560 --> 0:07:04.200 My road or the high road. I mean, no wonder that. 0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:07.440 They struggle so badly with these things, because it's a 0:07:07.480 --> 0:07:10.280 hard life being a victim all the time, the victim mentality. 0:07:10.680 --> 0:07:13.880 Speaking of victims, I'm sure one time or another you've 0:07:13.920 --> 0:07:16.400 been a victim of a screaming child on a plane 0:07:16.480 --> 0:07:19.040 or in a restaurant or something, and you've gone, jeez, 0:07:19.080 --> 0:07:21.520 I wish I could just have a few moments where 0:07:21.560 --> 0:07:22.760 I didn't have to listen to kids. 0:07:22.800 --> 0:07:24.280 You may well be out on a. 0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:26.880 Date night and you've got the kids with a babysitter, 0:07:26.960 --> 0:07:30.000 and it's like, can I just have four hours or 0:07:30.000 --> 0:07:32.160 I don't have to listen to think about. 0:07:32.080 --> 0:07:33.920 Or deal with any children. 0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:37.080 Well, interesting opinion piece I read today in the Sydney 0:07:37.080 --> 0:07:41.720 Morning Herald from the Nine Newspapers. Travel writer Ben Groundwater 0:07:41.960 --> 0:07:45.200 about the fact that in France they're now looking at 0:07:45.200 --> 0:07:50.360 the possibility of banning restaurants and hotels and clubs and 0:07:50.440 --> 0:07:55.120 resorts and whatever else from saying that you cannot bring 0:07:55.240 --> 0:07:58.080 your kids. The reasoning is, of course, that you should 0:07:58.080 --> 0:08:00.000 be able to take your kids anywhere. Apparently this is 0:08:00.120 --> 0:08:03.640 been put up by a Socialist senator in France. That 0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:05.680 probably tells you most of what you need to know. 0:08:06.000 --> 0:08:09.320 But their High Commissioner for Childhood in France is also 0:08:09.360 --> 0:08:11.920 looking into the legalities of this and whether or not 0:08:11.960 --> 0:08:15.080 they would be able to prosecute a hotel or another 0:08:15.200 --> 0:08:19.000 venue for not allowing children in. She goes so far 0:08:19.080 --> 0:08:22.040 as to say that to not allow a child into 0:08:22.080 --> 0:08:26.320 a restaurant is violence against children, which seems. 0:08:26.000 --> 0:08:27.000 A bit ridiculous. 0:08:27.120 --> 0:08:30.800 I mean, honestly, surely this is a decision for the 0:08:30.840 --> 0:08:34.360 owner operator of the venue to make. If you say, 0:08:34.400 --> 0:08:37.600 if you have a restaurant or a cafe, or any 0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:40.640 venue for that matter, and you say I don't want 0:08:40.720 --> 0:08:43.240 children in here, surely that's your prerogative. 0:08:43.440 --> 0:08:44.199 If you say I. 0:08:44.160 --> 0:08:47.880 Don't want people with blue hair in my venue, surely 0:08:47.920 --> 0:08:51.200 that's your prerogative. You should be able to have the 0:08:51.280 --> 0:08:54.280 freedom to make the decision about the atmosphere that you 0:08:54.400 --> 0:08:57.600 want in your place. There are plenty of restaurants, plenty 0:08:57.600 --> 0:09:00.920 of cafes that cater to children, that have family friendly 0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:03.880 and they're great places to go. But why can we 0:09:03.960 --> 0:09:06.839 not have a select number of places where they say 0:09:07.160 --> 0:09:10.319 this is an adult only venue for adults to come 0:09:10.360 --> 0:09:12.199 and hang out with other adults. 0:09:12.400 --> 0:09:15.400 I have to laugh when they say not allowing children 0:09:15.440 --> 0:09:19.600 into certain restaurants or hotels violence against children. Allowing children 0:09:19.640 --> 0:09:21.959 in the front half of an aircraft is violence against 0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:26.240 premium passengers. But this is a builder's being discrimination right. 0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:28.720 You can't discriminate against people on the basis of race 0:09:29.080 --> 0:09:31.400 or on the basis of religion, So why should you 0:09:31.440 --> 0:09:34.280 be allowed to discriminate against children on the basis that 0:09:34.320 --> 0:09:37.440 they are children. The argument is flawed, Freyer, for this reason, 0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:41.880 no one is discriminating against children. You are simply saying 0:09:41.920 --> 0:09:45.839 to parents you can't come with your child, and if 0:09:45.840 --> 0:09:49.120 you have a child, that's a lifestyle choice. We're not 0:09:49.200 --> 0:09:54.920 discriminating against children, We're discriminating against adults with children. Second, 0:09:55.240 --> 0:09:58.640 this travel writer is so hypocritical. He says hotels should 0:09:58.720 --> 0:10:01.400 not be able to discriminate against children, though they should 0:10:01.400 --> 0:10:04.440 be allowed to have some adult only areas within the hotel. 0:10:04.760 --> 0:10:07.440 So he's picking and choosing when he wants to discriminate. 0:10:07.679 --> 0:10:10.400 As the only person on this desk who has children, 0:10:10.720 --> 0:10:13.840 can I just say, love them dearly, but it's nice 0:10:13.880 --> 0:10:15.600 to get away from them just occasionally. 0:10:15.800 --> 0:10:18.040 No, I understand what you're saying, and I think the 0:10:18.240 --> 0:10:21.160 argument at the core of this article makes no sense 0:10:21.200 --> 0:10:23.920 because we do already discriminate against children. 0:10:24.000 --> 0:10:26.200 We don't let them into nightclubs, into. 0:10:26.000 --> 0:10:31.320 Casinos, into bars unattended, so that argument doesn't really stack up. 0:10:31.440 --> 0:10:35.439 But I will say I think that as a culture, 0:10:35.880 --> 0:10:38.160 if we want people to be having more kids, and 0:10:38.240 --> 0:10:41.679 we'll talk later in the show about our depopulation crisis, 0:10:42.000 --> 0:10:45.400 then we need to make our country and our culture 0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:49.880 a place where children and family life are actually valued. 0:10:50.240 --> 0:10:52.600 Kids shouldn't be something we just you know, lock away 0:10:52.600 --> 0:10:54.120 at home and we don't want to see them. They're 0:10:54.120 --> 0:10:56.640 too much of an inconvenience. We've got to shift people's 0:10:56.679 --> 0:11:00.240 mindsets from saying kids are a burden to kids are 0:11:00.240 --> 0:11:03.400 a blessing, and I think they are and families should 0:11:03.400 --> 0:11:05.600 be the center of national life, and when you have 0:11:05.800 --> 0:11:10.040 so many spaces that exclude families, it doesn't send the 0:11:10.120 --> 0:11:10.720 right message. 0:11:10.880 --> 0:11:13.680 But people were having far more children when the prevailing 0:11:13.720 --> 0:11:16.280 attitude was that children should be seen and not heard. 0:11:16.600 --> 0:11:18.640 So I'm not sure that anyone's failing to have kids 0:11:18.679 --> 0:11:20.040 because they can't take into a risk. 0:11:20.200 --> 0:11:23.720 No, But it's the implicit cultural message that's sent, which 0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:26.079 is that children are this annoying burden. 0:11:26.160 --> 0:11:29.439 They impinge on your enjoyment, your ability. 0:11:29.040 --> 0:11:33.120 To live a selfish life, care free, unencumbered by responsibility 0:11:33.120 --> 0:11:35.280 to others, and that is not the message we should 0:11:35.280 --> 0:11:35.720 be sending. 0:11:36.120 --> 0:11:39.080 I'm not sure that having kids running around an exclusive 0:11:39.160 --> 0:11:41.760 resort in the middle of the Pacific where people are 0:11:41.760 --> 0:11:45.959 trying to relax after stressful three months is promoting family. 0:11:45.600 --> 0:11:46.520 And child rearing. 0:11:47.800 --> 0:11:50.600 People that the rise of the anti child movement is 0:11:50.600 --> 0:11:53.120 a thing. You make a great point, but I don't 0:11:53.160 --> 0:11:57.120 think this is that where people desire just to get 0:11:57.120 --> 0:11:58.680 away for a little bit, you know, just as a 0:11:58.720 --> 0:12:00.000 couple away from them kids. 0:12:00.280 --> 0:12:02.000 But it can be taken to an extreme. 0:12:02.160 --> 0:12:04.440 Sure resources and this is why I don't support a 0:12:04.679 --> 0:12:09.320 ban on adults only venues. Resorts are probably an exception 0:12:09.440 --> 0:12:11.040 but when you get to the point of saying no 0:12:11.160 --> 0:12:14.439 kids in restaurants, no kids in cafes, we just don't 0:12:14.440 --> 0:12:15.360 want kids around. 0:12:15.920 --> 0:12:16.800 This is the mentality. 0:12:16.800 --> 0:12:17.920 It's a true blanket thing. 0:12:17.960 --> 0:12:20.440 It's just that there should be some restaurants where you 0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:22.600 know you go and you're not going to be annoyed 0:12:22.640 --> 0:12:23.720 by other people's kids. 0:12:23.760 --> 0:12:24.360 And there's a problem. 0:12:24.400 --> 0:12:27.920 If you could ban bad parenting, well problem would correct. 0:12:28.080 --> 0:12:30.280 Correct, But why should we be able to dictate to 0:12:30.480 --> 0:12:33.160 private venues what they do with their entry rules. 0:12:33.200 --> 0:12:35.200 I mean, there are certain places. 0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:37.800 You cannot go into pubs, clubs, whatever it says on 0:12:37.840 --> 0:12:39.320 the front door, you can't come in if you've got 0:12:39.400 --> 0:12:42.880 visible tattoos. Well, that's simply the rules of entry. You 0:12:42.960 --> 0:12:45.360 cover up your tattoos. If they say you can't bring 0:12:45.400 --> 0:12:47.280 in your kids, you can't bring in your kids. Who 0:12:47.320 --> 0:12:49.440 are waiting to tell a private operator what they can 0:12:49.520 --> 0:12:50.600 and cannot do, Well, that's. 0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:53.280 Why I'm not supporting the legislation. But I think as 0:12:53.320 --> 0:12:56.120 a cultural message, we need to be careful to remain 0:12:56.480 --> 0:12:57.160 pro family. 0:12:57.559 --> 0:12:58.400 And here's why. 0:12:58.520 --> 0:13:02.960 A new study by the UN Population Fund has one 0:13:03.160 --> 0:13:05.000 of collapsing birth rates. 0:13:05.040 --> 0:13:07.319 This is something conservatives have been talking. 0:13:07.120 --> 0:13:10.800 About for a long time, but the prevailing orthodoxy has 0:13:10.840 --> 0:13:14.680 been no, the world is overpopulated, we have too many people. 0:13:15.080 --> 0:13:19.080 But that's actually not the case. In fact, so many 0:13:19.120 --> 0:13:21.240 countries are below replacement rate. 0:13:21.320 --> 0:13:21.560 Now. 0:13:21.600 --> 0:13:24.440 Our birth rate here in Australia is one point five 0:13:24.480 --> 0:13:25.440 births per women. 0:13:26.000 --> 0:13:28.200 Even India now. 0:13:28.080 --> 0:13:32.160 Has a birth rate below replacement rate. Now, this study, 0:13:32.360 --> 0:13:35.520 it surveyed thousands of people across fourteen countries. It was 0:13:35.559 --> 0:13:38.720 representative of people from a low income to high income, 0:13:38.880 --> 0:13:42.160 every category of society, and they found about one in 0:13:42.280 --> 0:13:45.880 five people are having fewer children than they would like. 0:13:46.040 --> 0:13:51.199 That is hundreds of millions of people having fewer children 0:13:51.559 --> 0:13:54.280 than they would like. And the two primary reasons for 0:13:54.360 --> 0:13:59.400 that was one financial which makes sense, but two the 0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:04.600 inner bild to find a partner. Now, this is genuinely 0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:08.079 so sad. South Korea has the lowest birth rate in 0:14:08.120 --> 0:14:12.720 the world at just zero point seven eight children per woman. 0:14:12.760 --> 0:14:15.960 That means in about three or four generations their population 0:14:16.160 --> 0:14:19.520 will more than half the country and its culture and 0:14:19.560 --> 0:14:24.120 its history is literally going extinct. This is the greatest 0:14:24.160 --> 0:14:27.320 crisis the world faces, yet no one seems to be 0:14:27.400 --> 0:14:28.200 talking about it. 0:14:28.280 --> 0:14:28.560 James. 0:14:28.600 --> 0:14:28.800 Yeah. 0:14:28.800 --> 0:14:31.800 The UN study says the world has begun a quote 0:14:31.880 --> 0:14:35.760 unprecedented decline in fertility rates, and as you said, Freyer, 0:14:36.400 --> 0:14:38.680 so many people lamented the fact that they hadn't been 0:14:38.720 --> 0:14:41.440 able to have more children. Fully, a third of people 0:14:41.480 --> 0:14:44.480 over the age of fifty surveyed said they wish they 0:14:44.520 --> 0:14:48.040 had had more children, but primarily it was because of 0:14:48.480 --> 0:14:52.080 financial issues that they'd been prevented. This is a welcome change, 0:14:52.160 --> 0:14:54.560 by the way, from the United Nations talking about the 0:14:54.600 --> 0:14:58.560 need to have more children, because just last April they 0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:03.920 were promoting their commitment and dedication to advancing and accelerating 0:15:04.000 --> 0:15:08.680 abortion rights. There's seventy three million children aborted every year. 0:15:09.080 --> 0:15:13.120 That's thirty percent of all pregnancies worldwide are aborted. And 0:15:13.520 --> 0:15:16.600 a year ago the United Nations were championing that. Now 0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:18.720 they're saying, look, maybe that's not such. 0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:19.320 A great idea. 0:15:19.400 --> 0:15:25.040 Fertility rates are falling, and obviously that's got massive economic implications. 0:15:25.240 --> 0:15:29.080 It's got massive implications for how we look after our elderly, 0:15:29.560 --> 0:15:33.040 and it's got massive implications for culture as well. And 0:15:33.120 --> 0:15:35.360 I think Caleb, there is a cultural issue here. Yes, 0:15:35.360 --> 0:15:38.360 there's economics, but when you've got a culture, particularly in 0:15:38.440 --> 0:15:42.680 the West, which is nilistic in worldview, we end up 0:15:42.720 --> 0:15:46.560 as nothing. We just return to dust. Life is tough anyway. 0:15:46.600 --> 0:15:48.800 Why would you want to bring more people into a 0:15:48.840 --> 0:15:51.640 world that's already filled with trouble and there's no hope 0:15:51.680 --> 0:15:54.280 for the future. Then you end up with people who 0:15:54.320 --> 0:15:56.840 are living for the here and now with no thought 0:15:56.880 --> 0:15:59.560 for the future. And that actually does have some economic 0:15:59.560 --> 0:16:02.000 implications because we live in a culture where no one 0:16:02.000 --> 0:16:04.920 wants to save, no one wants to sacrifice in order 0:16:04.960 --> 0:16:08.600 to have a surplus. Again, we're happy with deficits as 0:16:08.680 --> 0:16:11.160 far as the eye can see, because we don't actually 0:16:11.160 --> 0:16:12.800 believe in the future, which is one of the reasons 0:16:12.800 --> 0:16:14.120 why we're not having children. 0:16:14.200 --> 0:16:19.000 Well, ironically, the people who campaign on climate change, which 0:16:19.040 --> 0:16:21.360 they say is a threat to the world, call themselves 0:16:21.360 --> 0:16:24.680 extinction rebellion, by which they're implying that they think the 0:16:24.760 --> 0:16:28.400 human race should continue on this planet. And they are 0:16:28.400 --> 0:16:31.400 the same people I suspected would say that the planet 0:16:31.440 --> 0:16:33.080 is being killed by human beings. 0:16:32.840 --> 0:16:35.440 Right, and so it's somewhat of a nonsensical argument. 0:16:36.240 --> 0:16:40.640 The cultural and the economic I think are heavily intertwined 0:16:40.680 --> 0:16:41.800 when it comes. 0:16:41.800 --> 0:16:42.800 To this issue. 0:16:43.120 --> 0:16:46.240 Because, of course, as the survey bears out, one of 0:16:46.280 --> 0:16:49.040 the major causes of this is the cost of having 0:16:49.200 --> 0:16:52.840 children and the cost of living in general, because if 0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:55.400 money was no object, you'd be able to have as 0:16:55.400 --> 0:16:58.080 many children as you wanted. But in the modern world, 0:16:58.160 --> 0:17:02.040 particularly in western nations, the only place that has a 0:17:02.120 --> 0:17:06.200 positive birth rate now is sub Saharan Africa. Literally, the 0:17:06.240 --> 0:17:10.639 rest of the world is not meeting replacement rate. So 0:17:10.680 --> 0:17:13.800 you follow that through to its logical conclusion, and we'll 0:17:13.800 --> 0:17:16.720 go back to the original days of human beings when 0:17:16.720 --> 0:17:18.879 they came from Africa, and they will have to come 0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:20.600 and colonize the rest of. 0:17:20.520 --> 0:17:21.200 The world again. 0:17:22.040 --> 0:17:24.840 But we have ended up with a society where we 0:17:24.960 --> 0:17:29.840 are chasing eternal economic growth, and in order to fund 0:17:29.880 --> 0:17:33.480 that eternal economic growth, everyone has to go to work. 0:17:33.640 --> 0:17:36.200 And we come back to the argument we were having 0:17:36.320 --> 0:17:38.840 before about the validity of. 0:17:39.119 --> 0:17:40.360 Stay at home mothers, etc. 0:17:41.280 --> 0:17:45.280 The moment at which it was decided that women should 0:17:45.359 --> 0:17:47.119 go to work, not just that they should have the 0:17:47.160 --> 0:17:49.199 option to go to work, but it should be the 0:17:49.240 --> 0:17:52.040 fault that women do go to work. That was the 0:17:52.200 --> 0:17:55.719 cultural moment where we all turned around and ended up 0:17:55.720 --> 0:17:58.960 in this position. Because that was great for governments because 0:17:59.000 --> 0:18:01.600 it meant they could generate more tax revenue, which is 0:18:01.640 --> 0:18:03.920 great for them because they can spend more and give 0:18:03.960 --> 0:18:06.360 more things to more people and pump themselves up, etc. 0:18:07.000 --> 0:18:10.399 But in doing so, by having more people in the economy, 0:18:10.480 --> 0:18:14.639 generating more income and paying more tax, it means inflation. 0:18:15.040 --> 0:18:18.040 And then inflation means that you have to pay more 0:18:18.040 --> 0:18:20.800 for things, and so you can't afford to be a 0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:24.000 one income family anymore. I mean, my brother and I 0:18:25.280 --> 0:18:28.760 and we're both in our twenties, were raised by my 0:18:28.960 --> 0:18:32.560 parents on one and a quarter incomes. My father worked 0:18:32.560 --> 0:18:35.840 as a laborer and still works as a council gardener, 0:18:36.240 --> 0:18:38.760 and my mom did a shift on Saturdays and one 0:18:38.800 --> 0:18:41.879 on a Thursday night in retail. They weren't making a 0:18:41.880 --> 0:18:44.840 lot of money. But you know, twenty five years ago 0:18:44.960 --> 0:18:47.320 you could raise two kids on an income like that. 0:18:47.720 --> 0:18:50.919 It is impossible today. And I go back to the 0:18:50.920 --> 0:18:54.040 words of John Howard in two thousand when he said 0:18:54.040 --> 0:18:56.240 it a speech in London, and these words are in 0:18:56.280 --> 0:18:58.840 true today. It is important for all of us, whether 0:18:58.920 --> 0:19:00.720 we are in business or in pos all of us 0:19:00.720 --> 0:19:02.760 who are concerned about the future of our society, in 0:19:02.800 --> 0:19:06.600 the cohesion of our society, whether it be in Australia 0:19:06.720 --> 0:19:09.639 or here in Britain to remember that economic policy, however 0:19:09.680 --> 0:19:12.400 you define it and however you pursue it, is never 0:19:12.640 --> 0:19:16.800 some end in itself. That the purpose of economic policy 0:19:17.119 --> 0:19:20.840 is to produce a social dividend, to achieve social goals. 0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:25.520 Personal contentment and human fulfillment and the stability and cohesion 0:19:25.520 --> 0:19:29.879 of society are the ultimate goals of sound economic policy. 0:19:29.920 --> 0:19:32.480 And he echoed this again in four at his campaign 0:19:32.600 --> 0:19:35.520 launch when he said that running the economy well only 0:19:35.560 --> 0:19:38.640 has a purpose if it delivers a human dividend, if 0:19:38.640 --> 0:19:42.320 it delivers things for the Australian people. That is what 0:19:42.359 --> 0:19:45.920 we have lost. Sight of the economy no longer serves us. 0:19:46.359 --> 0:19:49.320 We serve the economy and that's why people don't have kids. 0:19:49.359 --> 0:19:52.000