94 ms·

The economics theory is bogus when you realize that throughout history and around the world, the economics of raising kids have been far riskier, deadlier and m

The economics theory is bogus when you realize that throughout history and around the world, the economics of raising kids have been far riskier, deadlier and more meager than they are now. People have always had kids even in life or death situations. People have always been always making babies , even when the risk of starvation, death from the elements and murder were extreme. Even the wealthier eras were challenging, with families having 3-5 kids in cramped 1-bedroom apartments containing multiple generations even. I'm the first to admit that prosperity has declined over the past 50 years, but the circumstances for making babies are still among the best compared to history and to 95% of the current circumstances on earth. The actual reasoning will make people uncomfortable, hence the economics cope.

ImHereToVote 2y ago
Having kids often meant you have more free labour. Then it was just an affordable nice to have. Now it's a huge expense.
- tonymet 2y ago
  "kids are a huge expense" is not an economics issue it's a philosophical issue. If you fall into a river, it's a huge expense to send a helicopter . The decision to save your life is not economical, it's ethical.
  - ImHereToVote 2y ago
    So it's an ethical issue on what you want or don't want to do? Or is it an ethical issue of what you do actually do, regardless of your wants?
    - tonymet 2y ago
      It's about what the population values and how that influences their decision about having kids.
      - ImHereToVote 2y ago
        Sure, but you can't discount the financial incentives giving rise to huge birthrates in the countryside a hundred years ago.
        tonymet 2y ago
        they are insignificant compared to cultural factors when you look at the huge variation in means across history and in various locales. You have every variant of wealth and poverty leading to both increasing and decreasing birthrates so another culprit must be the factor. it just isn't true that people are primarily motivated by money.
        ImHereToVote 2y ago
        They are motivated by well being. If the value of your work depreciates at a constant rate and housing becomes more unaffordable, then this creates a scenario of an uncertain future. Having kids adds a multiplier to that uncertainty. This wasn't always the case.
flerchin 2y ago
Actual reasoning is widespread usage of birth control and family planning?
- tonymet 2y ago
  that's a component. there are likely 6+ core factors , and most of them would be controversial to mainstream journals & media.
  - flerchin 2y ago
    Don't be shy
    - tonymet 2y ago
      [flagged]
  - big-green-man 2y ago
    Since youre beating around the bush, allow me to start. I personally think affordability plays a role, but I think the driving factor, that applies to all developed countries and why we don't see people's pet ideas being common threads (socialized medicine will solve it! except in every developed nation with socialized medicine) comes down to hedonism, decadence and consumerism. People are living for comfort, entertainment, short term enjoyment, they're chasing shiny new things and they don't want to give that up to do something selfless like create good people. They don't want sticky hands ruining their new leather couch. Prices going up aren't the cause, they're interlocked intimately as a symptom in a feedback loop. People aren't having kids so they can eat Korean barbecue for lunch every Tuesday, and so they have all this money that they're not spending. Or were, because everybody figures they can squeeze a few extra bucks out of them, and that adds up. Prices are going up because people are childless and so are more flippant with their money. Prices and fertility rate are interlocked tightly and one does not simply cause the other. The only way out of course is that people accept a lower comfort level and buy only long lasting things that they actually need. But that's not going to happen, and that has a systemic cause too. I'd love it if you replied with your thoughts on what I've said, your 6+ factors, no matter how hard to swallow. I know for a fact most people reading this aren't going to like my premise that they are not having kids because they'd rather encase themselves in a constantly 73°F expensive memory foam ball, complete with genital stimulation and endless scrolling goggles. Scare some people off with me?
droopyEyelids 2y ago
Mostly agree- Economic reasons are do not _fully_ explain falling birthrates. I think two of the more uncomfortable reasons that don't get discussed might be: 1. The allure/requirements of the modern lifestyle (both people working then limited leisure time) reduce the 'space' for childrearing 2. Depression, a negative outlook about the future, and awareness of the environmental impacts of more people mean adults consciously abstain from having children.
- tonymet 2y ago
  I agree with both points, and put more weight on #2, with a social variation. People are depressed on a social scale. Few people have a real passion for life and reason to live. Even our "leaders" are milquetoast technocratic caretakers -- not very inspiring. People generally follow the crowd, and the crowd is busy with hedonistic pursuits.
- gspencley 2y ago
  Add: 3. Religion and Culture - atheism has grown rapidly among western cultures over the past few decades. It is possible that western atheists have made a personal choice in service of their individual lives here on this earth, while someone who is guided more by religion or ideology is making a decision for what they view as a higher calling or purpose. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that first generation immigrants to the west tend to have higher birthdates vs those who were born in the west, as well by how common it is see modern religious and social conservatives in the west push for "tradlife."

ImHereToVote 2y ago

Having kids often meant you have more free labour. Then it was just an affordable nice to have. Now it's a huge expense.

tonymet 2y ago
"kids are a huge expense" is not an economics issue it's a philosophical issue. If you fall into a river, it's a huge expense to send a helicopter . The decision to save your life is not economical, it's ethical.
- ImHereToVote 2y ago
  So it's an ethical issue on what you want or don't want to do? Or is it an ethical issue of what you do actually do, regardless of your wants?
  - tonymet 2y ago
    It's about what the population values and how that influences their decision about having kids.
    - ImHereToVote 2y ago
      Sure, but you can't discount the financial incentives giving rise to huge birthrates in the countryside a hundred years ago.
      - tonymet 2y ago
        they are insignificant compared to cultural factors when you look at the huge variation in means across history and in various locales. You have every variant of wealth and poverty leading to both increasing and decreasing birthrates so another culprit must be the factor. it just isn't true that people are primarily motivated by money.
        ImHereToVote 2y ago
        They are motivated by well being. If the value of your work depreciates at a constant rate and housing becomes more unaffordable, then this creates a scenario of an uncertain future. Having kids adds a multiplier to that uncertainty. This wasn't always the case.

flerchin 2y ago

Actual reasoning is widespread usage of birth control and family planning?

tonymet 2y ago
that's a component. there are likely 6+ core factors , and most of them would be controversial to mainstream journals & media.
- flerchin 2y ago
  Don't be shy
  - tonymet 2y ago
    [flagged]
- big-green-man 2y ago
  Since youre beating around the bush, allow me to start. I personally think affordability plays a role, but I think the driving factor, that applies to all developed countries and why we don't see people's pet ideas being common threads (socialized medicine will solve it! except in every developed nation with socialized medicine) comes down to hedonism, decadence and consumerism. People are living for comfort, entertainment, short term enjoyment, they're chasing shiny new things and they don't want to give that up to do something selfless like create good people. They don't want sticky hands ruining their new leather couch. Prices going up aren't the cause, they're interlocked intimately as a symptom in a feedback loop. People aren't having kids so they can eat Korean barbecue for lunch every Tuesday, and so they have all this money that they're not spending. Or were, because everybody figures they can squeeze a few extra bucks out of them, and that adds up. Prices are going up because people are childless and so are more flippant with their money. Prices and fertility rate are interlocked tightly and one does not simply cause the other. The only way out of course is that people accept a lower comfort level and buy only long lasting things that they actually need. But that's not going to happen, and that has a systemic cause too. I'd love it if you replied with your thoughts on what I've said, your 6+ factors, no matter how hard to swallow. I know for a fact most people reading this aren't going to like my premise that they are not having kids because they'd rather encase themselves in a constantly 73°F expensive memory foam ball, complete with genital stimulation and endless scrolling goggles. Scare some people off with me?

droopyEyelids 2y ago

Mostly agree- Economic reasons are do not _fully_ explain falling birthrates. I think two of the more uncomfortable reasons that don't get discussed might be: 1. The allure/requirements of the modern lifestyle (both people working then limited leisure time) reduce the 'space' for childrearing 2. Depression, a negative outlook about the future, and awareness of the environmental impacts of more people mean adults consciously abstain from having children.

tonymet 2y ago
I agree with both points, and put more weight on #2, with a social variation. People are depressed on a social scale. Few people have a real passion for life and reason to live. Even our "leaders" are milquetoast technocratic caretakers -- not very inspiring. People generally follow the crowd, and the crowd is busy with hedonistic pursuits.
gspencley 2y ago
Add: 3. Religion and Culture - atheism has grown rapidly among western cultures over the past few decades. It is possible that western atheists have made a personal choice in service of their individual lives here on this earth, while someone who is guided more by religion or ideology is making a decision for what they view as a higher calling or purpose. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that first generation immigrants to the west tend to have higher birthdates vs those who were born in the west, as well by how common it is see modern religious and social conservatives in the west push for "tradlife."