3 ms·

How can they if they have to work full time to take care of their babies? Part of the problem with today's economy is that it's basically impossible for a midd

How can they if they have to work full time to take care of their babies? Part of the problem with today's economy is that it's basically impossible for a middle-class woman to have a child and work. There needs to be a large population of unskilled laborers to do these kinds of low-level jobs that a person with a college degree won't do. This is why data shows areas with a large population of lower-class have a higher fertility rate.

godzillabrennus 8y ago
That’s why they aren’t having kids and the population is declining.
chrchang523 8y ago
Your model strongly predicts that fertility of preexisting natives would be higher in areas with more unskilled immigrants. The opposite is true, and the effect is not small. It is safe to reject your model. Moreover, if you do not adjust your beliefs in response to contrary evidence, it is appropriate to presume that you are arguing in bad faith rather than trying to figure out the truth, and dismiss everything else you say on this subject. (This principle is equally applicable to someone arguing the other side of this particular issue in similar bad faith, of course; reversed stupidity is not intelligence.)
- JamisonM 8y ago
  Your model strongly predicts that fertility of preexisting natives would be higher in areas with more unskilled immigrants. The opposite is true, and the effect is not small. It seems like you have a lot of confounding variables to work through to make this case with such confidence, if you have research that makes this case I would like to see links to it.
  - chrchang523 8y ago
    Yes, there are confounding variables; population density in particular jumps out. But once you acknowledge that population density has enough negative causal impact through various channels on native fertility to be worth explicitly controlling for, you've already rejected mozumder's model: what effect does immigration have on population density?
    - JamisonM 8y ago
      Why would one acknowledge that population density has a "negative causal impact" without evidence of such? You can argue that density and fertility are correlated, sure, but causation is a much higher bar. Why would you restrict the model such that you assume that any increase in density at any starting level of density would decrease fertility? Why would you assume that without evidence?
      - chrchang523 8y ago
        Okay, I was assuming you had at least a little bit of familiarity with the field. There are a lot of papers which cover this. Starting with a Google search on population density and fertility rate, without including "causes" in the search, the top academic results I get are: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304387817300135 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438781... https://www.jstor.org/stable/27503981 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27503981 http://paa2004.princeton.edu/papers/41719 http://paa2004.princeton.edu/papers/41719 The population density-fertility rate assumption was not made without evidence.
- mozumder 8y ago
  Data shows the opposite of what you say. I guess that means you are arguing in bad faith?
  - JamisonM 8y ago
    I am interested in what the data does say, but we should articulate what this discussion is about. I take your post to mean that: - access to affordable childcare increases fertility rates - inflows of lower-skilled workers to an area would increase access to affordable childcare - a way to increase the quantity of lower-skilled workers would be through immigration The 3rd point above I think is trivial to accept, I am inclined to believe the other two points but would want to see the evidence that this is actually how things shake out.
  - chrchang523 8y ago
    See my comment above. I've pointed to data that backs up my conclusion. You have not, and I predict that it will be trivial to tear massive holes in whatever source(s) you end up citing.
- pjschlic 8y ago
  Did you have (even a vague) source for this - I'm willing to search for it given even a vague gesture? I think this indeed sounds like it could be strong evidence, so I'd love to see it. Indeed, I would also think that a high skill population living mixed with a low skill population would have a higher birth rate than a high skill population NOT near a low skill population.
  - chrchang523 8y ago
    You can start from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_fertility_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ... and its list of sources, and drill down from there. Remember to subtract births to recent immigrants from the numerator, and number of recent immigrants from the denominator. It won't take long to verify my claim.

godzillabrennus 8y ago

That’s why they aren’t having kids and the population is declining.

chrchang523 8y ago

Your model strongly predicts that fertility of preexisting natives would be higher in areas with more unskilled immigrants. The opposite is true, and the effect is not small. It is safe to reject your model. Moreover, if you do not adjust your beliefs in response to contrary evidence, it is appropriate to presume that you are arguing in bad faith rather than trying to figure out the truth, and dismiss everything else you say on this subject. (This principle is equally applicable to someone arguing the other side of this particular issue in similar bad faith, of course; reversed stupidity is not intelligence.)

JamisonM 8y ago
Your model strongly predicts that fertility of preexisting natives would be higher in areas with more unskilled immigrants. The opposite is true, and the effect is not small. It seems like you have a lot of confounding variables to work through to make this case with such confidence, if you have research that makes this case I would like to see links to it.
- chrchang523 8y ago
  Yes, there are confounding variables; population density in particular jumps out. But once you acknowledge that population density has enough negative causal impact through various channels on native fertility to be worth explicitly controlling for, you've already rejected mozumder's model: what effect does immigration have on population density?
  - JamisonM 8y ago
    Why would one acknowledge that population density has a "negative causal impact" without evidence of such? You can argue that density and fertility are correlated, sure, but causation is a much higher bar. Why would you restrict the model such that you assume that any increase in density at any starting level of density would decrease fertility? Why would you assume that without evidence?
    - chrchang523 8y ago
      Okay, I was assuming you had at least a little bit of familiarity with the field. There are a lot of papers which cover this. Starting with a Google search on population density and fertility rate, without including "causes" in the search, the top academic results I get are: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304387817300135 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438781... https://www.jstor.org/stable/27503981 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27503981 http://paa2004.princeton.edu/papers/41719 http://paa2004.princeton.edu/papers/41719 The population density-fertility rate assumption was not made without evidence.
mozumder 8y ago
Data shows the opposite of what you say. I guess that means you are arguing in bad faith?
- JamisonM 8y ago
  I am interested in what the data does say, but we should articulate what this discussion is about. I take your post to mean that: - access to affordable childcare increases fertility rates - inflows of lower-skilled workers to an area would increase access to affordable childcare - a way to increase the quantity of lower-skilled workers would be through immigration The 3rd point above I think is trivial to accept, I am inclined to believe the other two points but would want to see the evidence that this is actually how things shake out.
- chrchang523 8y ago
  See my comment above. I've pointed to data that backs up my conclusion. You have not, and I predict that it will be trivial to tear massive holes in whatever source(s) you end up citing.
pjschlic 8y ago
Did you have (even a vague) source for this - I'm willing to search for it given even a vague gesture? I think this indeed sounds like it could be strong evidence, so I'd love to see it. Indeed, I would also think that a high skill population living mixed with a low skill population would have a higher birth rate than a high skill population NOT near a low skill population.
- chrchang523 8y ago
  You can start from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_fertility_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ... and its list of sources, and drill down from there. Remember to subtract births to recent immigrants from the numerator, and number of recent immigrants from the denominator. It won't take long to verify my claim.