Tim Worstall e-mails me after reading Sarah Conly’s Malthusian call for mandatory restrictions on people’s reproduction choices (available here ):
The strangest part of Sarah Conly’s diatribe about children is that she seems entirely unaware that the fertility rate in the US is already below replacement level (1.88 rather than the 2.1 needed).
She doesn’t even seem to be aware that 2.0 is not the replacement rate, because there has to be an allowance for accident, early death, infertility and so on.
Entirely apart from the vileness of her moral position, she just doesn’t seem very informed on the subject.
(I thank Tim for his kind permission to post his e-mail here in its entirety.)