3 ms·
>It's society, not wealth and cost of living, that is causing the dip in children. Yes, people want to party and be free and not have to be tied down and spend
by Clubber 3y ago
>It's society, not wealth and cost of living, that is causing the dip in children.
Yes, people want to party and be free and not have to be tied down and spend money on raising kids. Having kids is a pretty fulfilling experience though. It's not something I understood until I had some. The people that don't have kids will really struggle when they get old and infirm with no one to take care of them.
- tasuki 3y ago> The people that don't have kids will really struggle when they get old and infirm with no one to take care of them. I often hear this, but it sounds like nonsense? Why obsess about what happens when you're old and infirm? It's going to suck regardless. One of my great aunts had no kids. She had a great life and lived to 95. As for avoiding struggling, I have a small kid and struggle. If you want to avoid struggle, having kids is a terrible idea.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoYour aunt’s quality of life probably depended on the labor supplied by a large working age population. Assuming the pace of automation cannot keep up with proportion of working age population declines (i.e. total supply of labor), then it makes sense to predict higher competition for labor, via higher labor AND higher taxes/lower benefits and the political fight for those.
- tasuki 3y agoYes of course. I was not talking society-scale but individual-scale.