3 ms·
> a chief argument being unemployed people have time to make babies. That is an incredibly stupid argument, and I've never heard anybody make it, chief or not
by matt4077 9y ago
> a chief argument being unemployed people have time to make babies.
That is an incredibly stupid argument, and I've never heard anybody make it, chief or not.
It's easily proven by comparing across time: being a peasant in the middle ages didn't come with a lot of leisure time, yet they had plenty of children.
Reproductive rates are driven by education, health care (esp child mortality), women's agency, and alternative methods of ensuring one's welfare in old age.
- dnautics 9y agoover the long span of history (things may have changed) reproductive rates are chiefly driven by whether not having children is a economically a liability.
- ng12 9y agoIt's the reductionist view but certainly not wrong. You're saying the same thing: time is more valuable for educated women with agency. Women in poor countries have more time on their hands because it's undervalued, and that excess of time tends to translate into a larger family. http://www.econ.yale.edu/~pschultz/cdp925.pdf http://www.econ.yale.edu/~pschultz/cdp925.pdf