Hacker News Reader

Comment by tacticalturtle | Hacker News Reader

Immigration sounds good for Sweden then, because they have a fertility rate of 1.42, well below replacement.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/25/sweden-pm-ivf-...

Define "good." The people immigrating aren't suddenly going to behave like Swedes - we've seen that. Will the geographic entity that is Sweden maintain or grow the population? Sure. Will it still be Sweden? No. If the majority of people are from, say, the middle east, it'll be run like a country there. I don't think that'll be good for the existing Swedes.

If you could somehow pick the best and brightest from those regions to immigrate - sure, great, probably good for your country. Existing countries are the way they are because of their people. When you shift your demographics to such a degree, your country will also become that. I don't know why this is such a hard concept for people to grasp. It's the same base concept that explains why the US policy in the middle east has failed so badly over decades. The people there largely don't want US-style democracy. Some do, sure, but the majority either don't care or like the system they have.

> The people immigrating aren't suddenly going to behave like Swedes

As somebody from a country near Sweden, I sure as hell hope not.

People are trying to have a serious conversation here. There's no need for dismissive jokes.

Are you joking? Because I'm not. I'm serious.

So how would you feel about unchecked mass migration of Swedes into your country?

Sadly, I have to live with that every day. Still, I somehow managed not to become a raging racist. I recommend not becoming a raging racist; it's good for the heart.

What will the country become?

A country is not just a random set of people. They have to be linked by a common set of values. Importing people who don't want to assimilate, or importing more people that can be assimilated will lead to disaster in the long term.

Additionally, immigration is not a solution for low fertility. If they assimilate, they will also have a lower fertility rate, pushing the problem down the line. If they don't assimilate, and keep a high fertility rate, they will replace the population.

Immigration is a positive thing, but it needs to be low and open only to like minded people.

This presupposes many things which are not reasonable to suppose. Like these immigrants being economically useful instead of fiscally negative their whole lives, or that people are just interchangeable economic units and forcing together separate groups will not cause any trouble.

This might sound facetious but I'm completely serious -- why does this "problem" need a solution, and especially this solution? If the Swedes have collectively decided they want less fertility, who's to judge them?

Because a society whose quality of life depends on robust social programs needs working age adults to man those programs

Because a demographic crisis is a real problem:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_Japan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_South_Korea

Because there are 3 solutions to this problem:

1. Improve Technology so that a smaller working age cohort can support a larger elderly cohort

2. Increase the birth rate, which no developed country has managed to sustain

3. Increase migration

1 and 2 are theoretical - no has proved that this can work.

It’s perfectly fine for the Swedes to decide that 3) is not for them.

We’re on a discussion board - Why wouldn’t I be able to comment on a country’s policies?

Of course you can comment on a country's problems, and I apologise if the wording I chose sounded aggressive. My point was just that the Swedes might decide to bite the bullet and bear the consequences, and it looks like we agree on this.

Immigration is not a solution to low fertility. It might be a solution to labor being expensive, particularly if you’re a capitalist, but it doesn’t solve the problem of low fertility among a native population.

Robots are also advancing fast. They have all the upsides and none of the downsides of mass migration.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com