3 ms·

Not surprising considering for the past 2-3 generations we've been seeing kids often worse-off than their parents. Crippling student debt, insane healthcare co

Not surprising considering for the past 2-3 generations we've been seeing kids often worse-off than their parents. Crippling student debt, insane healthcare costs, soaring housing prices in major cities. People are anxious and things are more competitive. All while worker productivity continues to increase with stagnant wages. If you look at adjusted median household income over the past 20 years its either stayed roughly the same or declined. Median home prices dipped during the recession, but have already outpaced median wage growth again. We don't want our kids to be subject to this, so we push them to be better than their competition. Being the top 50% isn't often a comfortable life anymore so we're pushing them to squeeze into the top 10-20%. The wealth gap in this country is squeezing all the joy out of life for every penny its worth.

antisthenes 8y ago
Well put. I personally would opt out of having a kid if I knew they were going to end up outside of the top 20%. I just don't want that life for them and I'm not sure I can guarantee that they end up in the top percentiles. > The wealth gap in this country is squeezing all the joy out of life for every penny its worth. Every capitalist society needs a periodical wealth tax, otherwise the natural accumulation of wealth results in such a gap.
- aeontech 8y ago
  Even if you are a millionaire your kid might end up penniless (cf. Great Depression or any number of squandered fortunes throughout history). Even if you are are born in a eastern european village you might survive a world war and end up in a comfortable American middle upper class lifestyle). You can’t guarantee anything in life, all you can do is do your best for your kid and let them fly as well as they can. And, agreed about the wealth tax :)
  - thisisweirdok 8y ago
    Sure but the Great Depression and squandered fortunes are extreme examples. The median in the US is being completely hammered without any extreme circumstance at play.
    - aeontech 8y ago
      I don’t think we disagree? My point was just that there is no guaranteeing safety and success for your offspring.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  Geometric increase in population does a pretty good job of eroding the accumulation of wealth.
  - asdff 8y ago
    Doesn't seem to be the case in this century
  - thisisweirdok 8y ago
    If that were true wealth wouldn't becoming more concentrated. People love to jump to population as an issue, but in most cases it's not a problem. On a global scale there's still more than enough to go around.
InclinedPlane 8y ago
Look at the graph of spending on children, look at how the lines for the bottom 3 quintiles have gone down since the '80s and '90s. That's very disheartening to see, parents are going to try their hardest to give their kids the best chances, and yet 60% of families have been squeezed by the economy into providing less for their children than previous generations. This despite inflation adjusted per capita GDP nearly doubling since the early '80s. The economy is growing, wealth is being created, but it's being funneled into a tiny portion of the population. For so long "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer" has been a common refrain without being strictly true, but now it's become true.
- souprock 8y ago
  I don't know that the graph tells this story. It could be that the very slight decline in spending for the lower quintiles is from getting help that isn't counted (free preschool for example) or from products being more affordable (measuring money is not equivalent to measuring the value gotten) or from more people being able to avoid childcare expenses by being home. It could be that the major increase in spending for the top quintile is wasted. Maybe the kid wants to own a horse. All sorts electronic things eat up money while delivering little value.
  - InclinedPlane 8y ago
    Yeah, you're probably right, I'm sure it's just horse ownership and free preschool rather than income stagnation, exploding debt in the under 35 age bracket (much of it due to student loan burden), and massively increasing housing costs.
  - thisisweirdok 8y ago
    Free preschool isn't incredibly widespread, but I wouldn't be surprised if increasing daycare costs are causing more people to drop out of the workforce to care for their kids. It's certainly complex.
- jacobolus 8y ago
  My suspicion is that a big part of this is declining family size among all income brackets. The reported numbers are per household rather than per child (excluding households with no children). Amount spent per child might be flat or even still even be slightly rising for these groups (though obviously nothing like the booming spending of the wealthy).

antisthenes 8y ago

Well put. I personally would opt out of having a kid if I knew they were going to end up outside of the top 20%. I just don't want that life for them and I'm not sure I can guarantee that they end up in the top percentiles. > The wealth gap in this country is squeezing all the joy out of life for every penny its worth. Every capitalist society needs a periodical wealth tax, otherwise the natural accumulation of wealth results in such a gap.

aeontech 8y ago
Even if you are a millionaire your kid might end up penniless (cf. Great Depression or any number of squandered fortunes throughout history). Even if you are are born in a eastern european village you might survive a world war and end up in a comfortable American middle upper class lifestyle). You can’t guarantee anything in life, all you can do is do your best for your kid and let them fly as well as they can. And, agreed about the wealth tax :)
- thisisweirdok 8y ago
  Sure but the Great Depression and squandered fortunes are extreme examples. The median in the US is being completely hammered without any extreme circumstance at play.
  - aeontech 8y ago
    I don’t think we disagree? My point was just that there is no guaranteeing safety and success for your offspring.
toasterlovin 8y ago
Geometric increase in population does a pretty good job of eroding the accumulation of wealth.
- asdff 8y ago
  Doesn't seem to be the case in this century
- thisisweirdok 8y ago
  If that were true wealth wouldn't becoming more concentrated. People love to jump to population as an issue, but in most cases it's not a problem. On a global scale there's still more than enough to go around.

InclinedPlane 8y ago

Look at the graph of spending on children, look at how the lines for the bottom 3 quintiles have gone down since the '80s and '90s. That's very disheartening to see, parents are going to try their hardest to give their kids the best chances, and yet 60% of families have been squeezed by the economy into providing less for their children than previous generations. This despite inflation adjusted per capita GDP nearly doubling since the early '80s. The economy is growing, wealth is being created, but it's being funneled into a tiny portion of the population. For so long "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer" has been a common refrain without being strictly true, but now it's become true.

souprock 8y ago
I don't know that the graph tells this story. It could be that the very slight decline in spending for the lower quintiles is from getting help that isn't counted (free preschool for example) or from products being more affordable (measuring money is not equivalent to measuring the value gotten) or from more people being able to avoid childcare expenses by being home. It could be that the major increase in spending for the top quintile is wasted. Maybe the kid wants to own a horse. All sorts electronic things eat up money while delivering little value.
- InclinedPlane 8y ago
  Yeah, you're probably right, I'm sure it's just horse ownership and free preschool rather than income stagnation, exploding debt in the under 35 age bracket (much of it due to student loan burden), and massively increasing housing costs.
- thisisweirdok 8y ago
  Free preschool isn't incredibly widespread, but I wouldn't be surprised if increasing daycare costs are causing more people to drop out of the workforce to care for their kids. It's certainly complex.
jacobolus 8y ago
My suspicion is that a big part of this is declining family size among all income brackets. The reported numbers are per household rather than per child (excluding households with no children). Amount spent per child might be flat or even still even be slightly rising for these groups (though obviously nothing like the booming spending of the wealthy).