As birth and fertility rates decline around the world, scientists say population collapse has become a real possibility.

We're witnessing the most fundamental shift to take place in modern human history, the shift towards pervasive and permanent low fertility, population aging, and eventual de-population.

What's behind this troubling trend? I'm Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief John Vickley. It's May 25th, and this is a Saturday edition of Morning Wire. Food stamps are supposed to help feed struggling Americans, but a new report says that nearly two-thirds of recipients are able-bodied adults refusing to find work. And a college quarterback is suing a coach who says he didn't fulfill a promise of millions of dollars under his name, image, and likeness. Will this first NIL lawsuit open the door to dozens more?

The entire area of NIL is is one big easy mess right now. There really are no enforceable rules right now.

Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know.

Can your savings, whether another economic storm? Think about what you've put away for the future. Inflation can render cash worthless, plus who can forget the real estate crash of 2008? Birch Gold understands the difficulty of navigating financial decisions. If you're considering converting an existing retirement account into a precious metals IRA, their dedicated in-house IRA Department guides you every step of the way, making the process feel as simple as a walk in the park. Text Wired to 989898 to talk to one of Birch Gold's experts and claim your free info kit on gold. That's Wired to 989898 today.

Following decades of plummeting birth rates worldwide, scientists are now sounding the alarm, warning that for the first time in modern history, the human population will soon begin to decline. Here to break it all down is Daily Wired's Senior Editor, Kabbit Phillips. Hey, Kabbit. A concerning and obviously very important story here. Walk us through these numbers.

Yeah. So throughout the '90s and early 2000s, many experts were concerned with the exact opposite problem, overpopulation. But it's now clear things are heading in a very different direction as the global population is on pace to begin declining in a few years time. Now, that might sound alarm us, but the numbers don't lie. So in order for a country to maintain its population, you need a birth rate around 2.2, meaning the average woman has at least that many children over her lifetime. In 1950, that number was 4.84 worldwide, and the global population boomed. But every decade since, it has fallen dramatically, and at latest count, the global birth rate is 2.23, just barely above replacement level. According to a new study published in the journal Lancet, if the current pace continues, we'll dip below replacement level this decade, and the global birth rate will fall to 1.59 by the end of the century. That is when the global population decline will begin to take root.

Which countries are being impacted the most by this trend?

Well, many of the countries at the bottom of the list are in Asia. South Korea is currently dead last with a birth rate of just, get this, 0.76. China is just behind, hovering around one. As the number of new babies born there last year was half of what we saw in the year 2016. In Japan, where the birth rate has fallen to 1.2, the country's Prime Minister said they're now, quote, standing on the verge of whether we can continue to function as a society. A number of European countries, including Italy, Greece, and Spain, are also at the bottom of the list with birth rates under 1.4. The same goes for other larger countries like India, Mexico, Russia, and Brazil. The only countries comfortably above replacement level on planet Earth right now are in sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East. But even there, birth rates are still declining rapidly over the last few decades. So this is a global phenomenon. Yeah.

And what about here at home in the US?

Yeah, the United States is hardly immune. According to the Census Bureau, at our current pace, America's population is set to decline by the end the century. Since 2007, our birth rate has fallen 19%, now sits at 1.6, again, well below replacement level. For context, last year, the US had the same number of total births as we had in 1966, despite the fact that our population has nearly doubled since then. That's going to have an enormous economic impact as baby boomers continue to age out of the workforce. The big question becomes, who will replace them in the coming decades?

Yeah, and who will pay for their retirement. To the big question, what's behind What is this global trend?

There seem to be both social and scientific factors. We'll start with the former. In virtually every developed country, women are simply waiting longer than ever to get married and, consequently, have children. In the US, for example, the average first-time mother is now 27 years old. In 2011, they were 25. In 1980, they were 22. Now, some experts say that data is proof the trend is primarily driven by women being more involved in the workforce. Obviously, that certainly plays a role, but it doesn't explain the decline we've seen in poor countries like India, where just 25% of women are in the workforce. That's where the scientific side comes in.

Tell us about that. What are the experts saying?

It's not exactly fun dinner party conversation, but we've talked about it for the last year or two. There is a fertility crisis affecting men around the world, and very few people are aware of it. A slew of studies have shown that since 1970, the average man's sperm count has fallen by 62%. Rates fell by around 1% a year throughout the latter half of the '90s, but since 2000, They have fallen an average of 2.5% annually. So the problem is accelerating. If the current trend holds within the next three years, the average male on planet Earth will have a count that falls within what doctors call the fertility danger zone. Scientists point to a variety of factors driving that trend, including diet and lifestyle. We know that obesity lowers testosterone and also fertility rates in men. Since 1970, we've seen a tripling of the obesity rate in most developed countries. So that's playing a role. Experts also point to exposure to chemicals and food and other everyday items that disrupt hormone production and again, hinder fertility. So bottom line, there are a number of scientific and cultural factors at play, but it's impossible to overstate just how serious this problem is.

Like you said, a stunning reversal here from our past concerns about overpopulation. Kabeh, thanks for reporting. Anytime. A new study has found that the 42 million Americans who use the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as food stamps or Snap, are spending it on unhealthy foods. Here to discuss the study is Daily Wire Senior Editor, Ash Short. Hey, Ash. So first, how much are taxpayers spending on this program each year? And then how are recipients spending that money?

So we're spending $135 billion US Taxpayer dollars a year on food stamps. And as to how that money is being used, a report from the Economic Policy Innovation Center found that the most commonly bought items using food stamps are Coca-Cola, Sprite, and other sugary sodas. Candy, potato chips, ice cream, cookies, frozen pizza, and other unhealthy, old to processed foods make up the majority of the top 20 items purchased by those using the program. That's not to say that none of the money is being spent on healthy items, of course. Milk is the second most purchased item, and ground beef is number three. Cheese, bread, fresh chicken, lunch meat, infant formula, water, juice, eggs, and potatoes are also in the top 20. But remember, even some of those foods like juice, bread, lunch meat, and chicken have added ingredients that aren't healthy. Right.

Now, various versions of the Food Stamps program have been around for decades. Are there any plans to make any changes to the program?

Well, Republicans in Congress are currently looking to cut $27 billion from the program over 10 years, meaning a $2.7 billion reduction in a program that, as I mentioned earlier, cost taxpayers $135 billion a year. This is a pretty minuscule cut, and there doesn't seem to be anything included that would limit what items be purchased using the program.

Are there any items that cannot be purchased using food stamps currently?

Yes. Alcohol, tobacco, and broadly, hot foods, like those already prepared by the grocery stores and ready to eat, are all prohibited from purchase.

Well, like so many government programs, this one has grown over the years. How has the program expanded over the last few decades?

In the '90s, the program cost around $31 billion a year, and less than a fifth of those receiving the handouts were in the program for more than for 20 months. Now, though, nearly half of recipients are in the program for at least that long. This stat is quite concerning. Nearly two-thirds are able to work but do not, as Snap does not have a work requirement. The pandemic seems to have further inflamed the situation. Economist Steve Moore from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity points that out and says we need to stop the freebies.

This is an outrage. When we had COVID, what happened was millions and millions of Americans went on to food stamps, and a lot of them never got off. They said, Hey, this is pretty good. I can get food stamps. I can get all these other government benefits, rental assistance, and so on. Those benefits could pay as much as an $80,000 a year job. Here we are in 2024 in an economy that is not in recession. There are problems with the economy, but there are jobs out there. These welfare recipients, especially food stamps recipients, they're able to work. They just won't work because they've got this cushy a year are called welfare benefits, and that's not what the American people want.

As to the report that found junk foods are the most common purchases, this isn't even the first such report to find that. A 2016 study from the US Department of Agriculture found the same thing, and data from the CDC show that low-income Americans tend to be more obese than those with a higher income. It's not like we haven't known for a long time that this is an issue, but that hasn't inspired many attempts to make changes to the program, even though other government funded food programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infant, and Children, places limits on what can be bought using those funds. The National School Lunch program also has to meet federal nutrition standards.

We'll see if Republicans seek any further alterations to the program soon. Ash, thanks for reporting.

You're welcome.

Collegiate athletes now have the ability to profit from their likeness, and this has spilled over into the recruitment of these athletes, and it's also now prompting lawsuits. This week, a quarterback for the University of Georgia filed a federal lawsuit against the head coach at the University of Florida over broken promises during recruitment that the player says costs him millions of dollars. Here to tell us more about this potentially game-changing moment in the NIL era is David Cohn. Hey, David. Good morning. First, can you begin by explaining the current landscape of NIL and what these college collectives are?

Absolutely. As you stated, college athletes have been able to profit from their name, image, and likeness, NIL, since the court case of O'Bannon versus the NCAA ruling in 2021. This led to the formation of collectives which pull money from boosters and other donors to create resources and opportunities for prospective recruits. This is how athletic programs use NIL to essentially pay high school athletes to sign with their schools. Since the NCAA has lost nearly every court case brought against it, there is no recourse against this practice at the moment.

Now we have this lawsuit filed against a head coach of a major college football program. What transpired in this case, specifically?

Florida Coach Billy Napier was recruiting a quarterback named Jaden Rishada. Florida's collective, known as the Gator Collective, offered Rishada an N-I-L deal worth $13.85 million over four years. If he would flip his commitment from Miami to the which he did in November of 2022. We should pause to note that this is an unprecedented amount of money for a high school recruit, and it included a $500,000 signing bonus. That's a pretty good deal there. Yes. The only problem is The deadline for Rishada to receive that bonus came and went without payment. The following day, his NIL contract was terminated by the collective completely. At this point, Rishada alleges that head coach Billy Napier stepped in, called his father, and guaranteed the promise payment if the young man would still sign his national letter of intent with the University of Florida. Rishada signed, but he still received no money.

The allegation here is that the coach made the promise himself. That's why he's named in the lawsuit. Correct. Was Rishadah forced to honor that letter of intent despite this lack of payment?

No, he was released from his signing a month later, and that made national news as well. Whereupon he chose to play for Arizona State his freshman year. Now, he had limited play time there due to an injury, and he has since transferred to the University of Georgia, where he has filed a federal lawsuit alleging fraud against Coach Napier, former Gator's recruiting staffer, Marcus Castro-Walker, and Florida donor, Hugh Hathcock. As if the story couldn't get more interesting, Kirby Smart, the head coach at the University of Georgia, Florida's biggest rival, has apparently given his blessing for Rishada to move forward with this lawsuit.

All right, so another intriguing wrinkle there, the implications of a player on a team seeking damages against a rival team they play every year.

Yes, truly unprecedented.

So did Coach Napier sign this NIL contract that Rishada received?

No, and that's one of the more interesting aspects of this lawsuit. No one mentioned in the suit was listed on the contract. The only name mentioned on the contract that Rashaada signed is Edward Rojas, the CEO of the Gator Collective. But surprisingly, he is not mentioned in a lawsuit.

Projecting forward here, what appears to be the most likely outcome of this situation?

College football recruiting has always been an ugly business, but this is a seismic moment, and it comes at a time when so much about the sport is changing. With this situation in particular, Rashaada and his team, they're going to need to prove that Coach Billy Napier exercised some undue influence over his decision to sign. The termination clause of the signed contract will also be heavily litigated. No matter the outcome, though, John, this is a bad headline for all involved. Yeah, indeed.

This case has the potential to set some very consequential precedents here for college athletics, so we'll be tracking this one closely. Dave, thanks for coming on.

Thank you for having me.

Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back this afternoon with an extra edition of MorningWire.