3 ms·

It’s not socioeconomics https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate

• rtpg 4y ago
  Absolutely wild that you link “income goes up, children goes down” as an argument that it’s not socioeconomics! Income is part of socioeconomics! That graph obviously does not agree with my explanation, but it’s an argument against a biological component.
• chaostheory 4y ago
  Replying to myself since your comment is dead. I mentioned income because of your comment regarding “the lack of money as the main cause of declining birthrates” If you look at Canada, its birthrate started going down when its economy was good and housing was cheap during the 1950s, which was before the sexual revolution. Theirs also started and progressed later eg abortion there wasn’t even legal until 1988. If you look at other countries, birthrates are going down even in countries where the sexual revolution never occurred Edit: you also can’t ignore BPA, a synthetic estrogen, that is everywhere especially in food products which use plastic containers. PFAS chems aka Teflon are also everywhere and now they’re even finding traces of gore Tex inside human bodies The root causes are not socioeconomic