>the strong cultural pressure to do so anyway that used to be there is gone (there's still some pressure, but a far cry from what it used to be). These days, t

>the strong cultural pressure to do so anyway that used to be there is gone (there's still some pressure, but a far cry from what it used to be). These days, the cultural pressure is to have 1-2 kids, not a whole bunch. So, with the people who do sign up for this "world's second worst job" only having 1-2 (occasionally 3), and a bunch of others refusing, we end up with birthrates between 1.2 and 1.8, roughly, which isn't enough to sustain the population (this would require a rate of 2.1). People still want to have kids, but how many people want to repeat all the worst parts of childrearing 3-8 times? Most couples do it once or twice and they've had enough. >you could implement subsidies to the point where having kids had a net zero impact on your finances, Honestly, I don't see how this is possible without severely taxing people who don't have any kids, and that's not going to go over well (plus it would screw over all the people who haven't had kids yet, so they're unable to save any money for when they do). I think the ultimate solution to this is going to look like the novel Brave New World: we're going to have to resort to raising the next generation in institutions.