6 ms·

> People don’t have to have children. Ah, here we go. This is a veiled "only people who have enough money should have children" argument. > And people can an

> People don’t have to have children. Ah, here we go. This is a veiled "only people who have enough money should have children" argument. > And people can and do stay at home with their children at all income levels. I am sure that disproportionately favors certain income levels.

endisneigh 5y ago
Poor people have more children than rich both per capita and in aggregate Also, I never said only rich people should be able to have children. However at the end of the day raising children requires money. Hence the newly introduced children tax credit.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  Birthrates among poor people are way down: https://www.statista.com/statistics/562541/birth-rate-by-poverty-status-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/562541/birth-rate-by-pov... There may be some effect of the very poorest people having children for the purposes of benefits, but the vast majority of women will have fewer kids once they get access to birth control and financial independence.
  - endisneigh 5y ago
    Birthrate isn't my point. Per your chart birth rates are down for everyone. The fact remains that poor people have more children. And more to the original point, people aren't being forced to leave their children.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      My point is lack of access to contraceptives and lack of women’s financial independence might be the reason poorer women have more children. My conjecture is their higher birth rates have little to do with them being poorer.
      - endisneigh 5y ago
        Sure, but that has nothing to do with the original comment which is to say that women don't have to go to work. Nor do men.
      - orangepurple 5y ago
        I am "poor" by choice because my wife takes care of the children in our household. Our lives are richer than those of countless lonely $ millionaires.
        hattmall 5y ago
        This is the real answer. Nothing else is going to change that. A basic lifestyle isn't that expensive and it's exponentially better than 99% of people's lives 50 years ago. Just making smart shopping decisions can literally double or more your buying power. I really don't get the point of doing something you don't enjoy for 8-12 hours a day just so you can have expensive things.
    - orangepurple 5y ago
      > The fact remains that poor people have more children. Not quite. $ rich people can't afford time with children.
jseban 5y ago
It doesn't need to be veiled, that's already the official policy: people are responsible for providing for their children. You have to have money to have kids. It's just a little less. On some level you have to encourage people to somehow try to support themselves and their children, and to adapt their footprint to match their contributions.
wbsss4412 5y ago
Didn’t you hear? Children are a consumer good now.
refurb 5y ago
What’s wrong with “only people who have enough money should have children”? I mean, that’s just being a responsible parent.
- em-bee 5y ago
  as a society we should not allow people to get paid so little that even a full-time salary is not enough for them to have children. that is what's wrong. if we want a balanced society then we need to enable everyone to have children, not just those who are able to get well paying jobs. in austria and germany this is solved with giving parents tax breaks and unconditional extra money for each child to offset the higher cost of raising children.
  - refurb 5y ago
    So if I choose a career as a not so good artist the government should subsidize me so I can have kids?
    - em-bee 5y ago
      to follow the existing examples, every child gets government money regardless of income. it's like UBI for minors. and if you get a minimum wage job as an animation assistant doing inbetweening work, then the laws should make sure that the minimum wage is high enough that you can afford your living costs. combined both measures will allow you to have children. if you are self-employed and you are not earning enough money from your art you need to apply for unemployment benefits with all the conditions related to that.

endisneigh 5y ago

Poor people have more children than rich both per capita and in aggregate Also, I never said only rich people should be able to have children. However at the end of the day raising children requires money. Hence the newly introduced children tax credit.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
Birthrates among poor people are way down: https://www.statista.com/statistics/562541/birth-rate-by-poverty-status-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/562541/birth-rate-by-pov... There may be some effect of the very poorest people having children for the purposes of benefits, but the vast majority of women will have fewer kids once they get access to birth control and financial independence.
- endisneigh 5y ago
  Birthrate isn't my point. Per your chart birth rates are down for everyone. The fact remains that poor people have more children. And more to the original point, people aren't being forced to leave their children.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    My point is lack of access to contraceptives and lack of women’s financial independence might be the reason poorer women have more children. My conjecture is their higher birth rates have little to do with them being poorer.
    - endisneigh 5y ago
      Sure, but that has nothing to do with the original comment which is to say that women don't have to go to work. Nor do men.
    - orangepurple 5y ago
      I am "poor" by choice because my wife takes care of the children in our household. Our lives are richer than those of countless lonely $ millionaires.
      - hattmall 5y ago
        This is the real answer. Nothing else is going to change that. A basic lifestyle isn't that expensive and it's exponentially better than 99% of people's lives 50 years ago. Just making smart shopping decisions can literally double or more your buying power. I really don't get the point of doing something you don't enjoy for 8-12 hours a day just so you can have expensive things.
  - orangepurple 5y ago
    > The fact remains that poor people have more children. Not quite. $ rich people can't afford time with children.

jseban 5y ago

It doesn't need to be veiled, that's already the official policy: people are responsible for providing for their children. You have to have money to have kids. It's just a little less. On some level you have to encourage people to somehow try to support themselves and their children, and to adapt their footprint to match their contributions.

wbsss4412 5y ago

Didn’t you hear? Children are a consumer good now.

refurb 5y ago

What’s wrong with “only people who have enough money should have children”? I mean, that’s just being a responsible parent.

em-bee 5y ago
as a society we should not allow people to get paid so little that even a full-time salary is not enough for them to have children. that is what's wrong. if we want a balanced society then we need to enable everyone to have children, not just those who are able to get well paying jobs. in austria and germany this is solved with giving parents tax breaks and unconditional extra money for each child to offset the higher cost of raising children.
- refurb 5y ago
  So if I choose a career as a not so good artist the government should subsidize me so I can have kids?
  - em-bee 5y ago
    to follow the existing examples, every child gets government money regardless of income. it's like UBI for minors. and if you get a minimum wage job as an animation assistant doing inbetweening work, then the laws should make sure that the minimum wage is high enough that you can afford your living costs. combined both measures will allow you to have children. if you are self-employed and you are not earning enough money from your art you need to apply for unemployment benefits with all the conditions related to that.