Raw LLM Responses

Correlation without causation. In fact, the decline in birth rates (read: misnomer as "fertility" rates as that's applying a medical term to a sociological assessment, and actually represents 'getting pregnant' rather than 'successfully popping out new kids') is a laggard indicator evaluated using data from up-to half a decade behind current situations. Also, they are estimates which are inconsistent across nations to the point of their international comparisons cause significant over/under-counting of actual births per annum around the globe. Overall, the latest technological hype-train of so-called AI has limited economic impact around the world; its impact is so limited that with its immediate removal (hypothetically) the entire global economy would still hum away as though nothing ever happened -- that's how impactful it truly is. To add hard numbers, the US GDP in 2024 was $\~29.2 TRILLION USD, the US market cap of spending specifically for AI in 2024 was $\~0.2 Trillion USD (yeah, that little decimal from the GDP is roughly how much $ was speculatively invested into AI in hard dollars). In other words, all of this AI brouhaha reflects *less than* 1% of US GDP in 2024. The other 99.9% of US GDP is \*not\* AI but in all other measures of the global economy. Thus, the major factors influencing the declining birth rates (again a lagging indicator inferred from publicly disclosed filings since it takes 9months to carry to term and that's with instantaneous statistics which don't exist) are things like an aging demographic, economic health for those in "peak fertility" bracket, and immigration. (This last point is huge: for the last 20-30 years the US' birth rates have been stabilized by the influx of families in the 'peak fertility' bracket thus allowing their newborns to officially count towards the US' birth rate rather than only their countries of origin; their countries of origin may count the newborns as 'citizens' but the US would still identify the ch