5 ms·

The article makes an interesting case for the possibility that South Korea's military dictatorship intentionally created low-fertility policies that can't be re

The article makes an interesting case for the possibility that South Korea's military dictatorship intentionally created low-fertility policies that can't be reversed. But reading the description of what's going on, I can't help be reminded of John B. Calhoun's work on the "behavioral sink" [1], where he basically created a utopia where rats had everything they needed for survival, they multiplied exponentially, but once they reached a certain critical population density, they ceased to be interested in reproduction and instead exhibited a bunch of socially pathological behaviors. Within 3 generations, no further rats were born. South Korea is a densely populated country, as is Japan (another country often cited as having an aging, low-fertility population). And people tend to move out of dense metropolises like Manhattan or SF to have children. Maybe there's something inborn to humans that causes us to seek space and resources, and if those are not available, to not have kids? [1] https://vocal.media/geeks/the-true-history-behind-the-secret-of-nimh https://vocal.media/geeks/the-true-history-behind-the-secret...

djtango 4y ago
Lack a source but for many this will be the first generation in a long time where today's new parents will be unable to provide an equal or better quality of life to their children - especially in big urban centers which have seen the full effects of stratification. Space and resources are big weights in a "QoL" function.
- Teknoman117 4y ago
  It's nutty. I make more than my dad did when he retired, yet, if I were to have kids today I could not provide the lifestyle to them that I had as a kid. And he certainly didn't make what he did at retirement when I was a child. If I had a dual income household, there would be the money to do it, but the kids would lose out on something that I considered a crucial part of my upbringing - a full time parent. But, the perspective here is that I (and many of the people on this site) work in one of the few remaining well paying professions, whereas my dad was in a "well paying" but not "top paying" field. It just can't be sustainable...
pm90 4y ago
I don’t believe its density as much as costs and impact on lifestyle. Make daycare, child health services and great schools universally available and cheap/free. Make it feasible and safe to get kids around dense cities quickly (excellent transit options). I suspect under these circumstances more people would be open to the idea of children. As it stands today, having children places an unbearably high social and financial strain on people. Suburbs have been just one solution to the problem but there are others.
- dmm 4y ago
  > Make daycare, child health services and great schools universally available and cheap/free. That is probably a good idea but there are places where daycare is free and there's no evidence it makes a difference.
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    The childcare is free, but what about the rent?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- ertian 4y ago
  This might be affecting the number of children a couple has (probably is, in fact), but I doubt people factor it in to their decision to have a kid or not. I had absolutely no idea what day care or diapers cost before I had a kid. It's hard for me to picture a young couple approaching it that way.
- bluGill 4y ago
  > As it stands today, having children places an unbearably high social and financial strain on people. Suburbs have been just one solution to the problem but there are others. Yet Suburbs are the only ones I see that work. If you are thinking about having kids in the US move to the suburbs soon. Cities are not setup for you. Schools in the city are considered bad for a reason. Even if you can afford private schools, the parks are more sculpre gardens instead of swing sets. Everyone talks about the theator scene in the cities, but most of the shows wouldn't interest a child (most are not X rated). Many cities lack cheap places to eat - $40/person isn't too bad for one person, but when you have a few kids with you that price is not affordable often. How many places don't allow kids at all - not many in the suburbs, but somewhat common in the city. In the suburb you just buy a bigger car and everyone gets around - the big car won't fit in the city well, and your other options is paying a lot more on public transit because odds are there isn't a family pass, so the big car is probably cheaper. The above is US specific (probably Canada too). I know there are a number of people from not US reading this who will tell me how it works in their city. I hope city residents read those replies and make changes before they need them.
gilmore606 4y ago
Calhoun's rat paradise experiment doesn't replicate, as Gwern helpfully discovered for us: https://www.gwern.net/Mouse-Utopia https://www.gwern.net/Mouse-Utopia
Euphorbium 4y ago
Stop quoting behavioral sink, it has been thoroughly debunked. https://gwern.net/mouse-utopia https://gwern.net/mouse-utopia

djtango 4y ago

Lack a source but for many this will be the first generation in a long time where today's new parents will be unable to provide an equal or better quality of life to their children - especially in big urban centers which have seen the full effects of stratification. Space and resources are big weights in a "QoL" function.

Teknoman117 4y ago
It's nutty. I make more than my dad did when he retired, yet, if I were to have kids today I could not provide the lifestyle to them that I had as a kid. And he certainly didn't make what he did at retirement when I was a child. If I had a dual income household, there would be the money to do it, but the kids would lose out on something that I considered a crucial part of my upbringing - a full time parent. But, the perspective here is that I (and many of the people on this site) work in one of the few remaining well paying professions, whereas my dad was in a "well paying" but not "top paying" field. It just can't be sustainable...

pm90 4y ago

I don’t believe its density as much as costs and impact on lifestyle. Make daycare, child health services and great schools universally available and cheap/free. Make it feasible and safe to get kids around dense cities quickly (excellent transit options). I suspect under these circumstances more people would be open to the idea of children. As it stands today, having children places an unbearably high social and financial strain on people. Suburbs have been just one solution to the problem but there are others.

dmm 4y ago
> Make daycare, child health services and great schools universally available and cheap/free. That is probably a good idea but there are places where daycare is free and there's no evidence it makes a difference.
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  The childcare is free, but what about the rent?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
ertian 4y ago
This might be affecting the number of children a couple has (probably is, in fact), but I doubt people factor it in to their decision to have a kid or not. I had absolutely no idea what day care or diapers cost before I had a kid. It's hard for me to picture a young couple approaching it that way.
bluGill 4y ago
> As it stands today, having children places an unbearably high social and financial strain on people. Suburbs have been just one solution to the problem but there are others. Yet Suburbs are the only ones I see that work. If you are thinking about having kids in the US move to the suburbs soon. Cities are not setup for you. Schools in the city are considered bad for a reason. Even if you can afford private schools, the parks are more sculpre gardens instead of swing sets. Everyone talks about the theator scene in the cities, but most of the shows wouldn't interest a child (most are not X rated). Many cities lack cheap places to eat - $40/person isn't too bad for one person, but when you have a few kids with you that price is not affordable often. How many places don't allow kids at all - not many in the suburbs, but somewhat common in the city. In the suburb you just buy a bigger car and everyone gets around - the big car won't fit in the city well, and your other options is paying a lot more on public transit because odds are there isn't a family pass, so the big car is probably cheaper. The above is US specific (probably Canada too). I know there are a number of people from not US reading this who will tell me how it works in their city. I hope city residents read those replies and make changes before they need them.

gilmore606 4y ago

Calhoun's rat paradise experiment doesn't replicate, as Gwern helpfully discovered for us: https://www.gwern.net/Mouse-Utopia https://www.gwern.net/Mouse-Utopia

Euphorbium 4y ago

Stop quoting behavioral sink, it has been thoroughly debunked. https://gwern.net/mouse-utopia https://gwern.net/mouse-utopia