4 ms·

it's pretty easy to have children in France, like you have typically 25 + 9 paid days off per year (I personally can't use so many, being a company drone. So I

it's pretty easy to have children in France, like you have typically 25 + 9 paid days off per year (I personally can't use so many, being a company drone. So I have to take days off to see friends and family) And it's ok to leave work on time to take care of your children _your coworkers understand that they are more important to you, and they make you happy. You get a lot of assistance and encouragement from both the local governments and the social fabric. Like there are a lot of clubs to have children to do sports. They're managed by all the parents, by cities, schools,... So finding a hobby for your children isn't so hard. middle class and low income families can get a lot of subsidies to help them pay for a lot of stuff for their children (including the (in)famous allocations familiales, and 'allocation de rentrée scolaire', that are just spent of flat screens according to right wing ppl) And you can leave your children at some kindergarten or at they grandparents when you need. So you can have children without being crazy rich like in the USA, or without being a Rabenmutter like in Germany, and you have time to take care of them.

kasey_junk 4y ago
In the US (and probably the rest of the world) number of children per household is inversely correlated with income[1]. Every time a discussion of birthdates comes up people claim it’s too expensive to have children, but the actual evidence suggests that isn’t a factor. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam...
- medvezhenok 4y ago
  It's the opportunity cost (how much income are you giving up by having kids), not the absolute income. Also, people at lower incomes have subsidies, so cost of children can be different. For example - in VT, if your income < 150% FPL (federal poverty level), you pay $0 towards child care (versus some people paying > $2000/month in places like NY) https://outside.vermont.gov/dept/DCF/Shared%20Documents/Benefits/CCFAP-Income-Guidelines-Effective-2.26.2023.pdf https://outside.vermont.gov/dept/DCF/Shared%20Documents/Bene... If you calculate opportunity cost, the cost of a child increases dramatically as you go up the income ladder. From tens of thousands of dollars to hundreds (in income missed) or even millions (if you take time off + pay for your kid's schooling in private academies)
- Agingcoder 4y ago
  Inverse correlation in the US doesn't necessarily mean it's not a factor. You could say for example, that less educated people and therefore statistically poorer have more children because less access to contraception/abortion, and richer people want to be sure they can afford to send their kids to university (all of this needs to be backed by actual figures, I'm just making random claims) so will have fewer kids. I'd say you need a different kind of measure to say this, at least by comparing people within the same social and economic strata.

kasey_junk 4y ago

In the US (and probably the rest of the world) number of children per household is inversely correlated with income[1]. Every time a discussion of birthdates comes up people claim it’s too expensive to have children, but the actual evidence suggests that isn’t a factor. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam...

medvezhenok 4y ago
It's the opportunity cost (how much income are you giving up by having kids), not the absolute income. Also, people at lower incomes have subsidies, so cost of children can be different. For example - in VT, if your income < 150% FPL (federal poverty level), you pay $0 towards child care (versus some people paying > $2000/month in places like NY) https://outside.vermont.gov/dept/DCF/Shared%20Documents/Benefits/CCFAP-Income-Guidelines-Effective-2.26.2023.pdf https://outside.vermont.gov/dept/DCF/Shared%20Documents/Bene... If you calculate opportunity cost, the cost of a child increases dramatically as you go up the income ladder. From tens of thousands of dollars to hundreds (in income missed) or even millions (if you take time off + pay for your kid's schooling in private academies)
Agingcoder 4y ago
Inverse correlation in the US doesn't necessarily mean it's not a factor. You could say for example, that less educated people and therefore statistically poorer have more children because less access to contraception/abortion, and richer people want to be sure they can afford to send their kids to university (all of this needs to be backed by actual figures, I'm just making random claims) so will have fewer kids. I'd say you need a different kind of measure to say this, at least by comparing people within the same social and economic strata.