When you make $100k vs $50k that usually means your skillset is in higher demand and rarer, so you have better long term job security. Working class people don'

When you make $100k vs $50k that usually means your skillset is in higher demand and rarer, so you have better long term job security. Working class people don't have that luxury. So yes I think people who earn more have better job security and ability to support a spouse during mat leave. I also live in Canada with liberal mat leave laws so that's not an issue. If anything the biggest pressure on my wealthy urban friends vs working class suburban/small town people is a) cost of housing and b) lack of savings. But OP said "a competitive and maximally efficient society" dissuades kids. First, a competitive economy should generate plenty of housing for people with the $$ to pay for it. Secondly, an efficient economy should provide plenty of ways to save/invest beyond just housing. The public stock market is highly exclusive and controlled. The primary other way (besides housing/stocks) is investing in or starting a small business. New small business rates have declined in recent years. Housing is the only game in town for most people and what politicians spend 90% of focus on incentivizing in capital markets + culturally, but keep supply artificially limited. So if anything regressive policies which prevent competition/efficiency leads to less kids.