4 ms·

> Same South Korea that suffers from one of the lowest fertility/birth rates in the world? I feel like the endgame of our "line goes up for the wealthy" system

> Same South Korea that suffers from one of the lowest fertility/birth rates in the world? I feel like the endgame of our "line goes up for the wealthy" system is - people abandoning making other humans. The amount of pressure on 20s/30s people is immense. A 9-month pregnancy, maternity, and parenthood has become so risky from a job/earnings perspective for an individual. There is zero stability. Even hunter/gatherer societies created stability for their pregnant women and children.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
blackhawkC17 2y ago
South Korea is an outlier even among wealthy countries. They have an extreme work culture (beginning from school in the early stages) that takes a toll on people . On one hand, we can say this work ethic/culture enabled them to go from third world to first in less than a century. But stretch it too much and the country suffers population collapse. I wonder if being bordered by a rabid enemy (North Korea) also plays a role in the low birth rates. Maybe people don’t want to give birth to kids that might end up fighting war in the long run.
joenot443 2y ago
Personally, I'd argue there's a _lot_ more stability for someone in the modern West than a hunter/gatherer living on the plains. I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies, my understanding is that they generally existed on the edge of subsistence and would be absolutely mind boggled by amount of excess we enjoy today.
- nine_zeros 2y ago
  > Personally, I'd argue there's a _lot_ more stability for someone in the modern West than a hunter/gatherer living on the plains. I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies, my understanding is that they generally existed on the edge of subsistence and would be absolutely mind boggled by amount of excess we enjoy today. The hunter or the gatherer was not abandoned from the tribe/laid off/thrown on a PIP during a pregnancy for not finding enough fruits for the tribe CEO.
- RestlessMind 2y ago
  > I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies While the absolute conditions of hunter gatherers were abysmal compared to modern western standards, they didn't suffer relative decline in the living conditions due to pregnancy and child rearing. Their tribe took care of their house, food, security and child rearing. In other words, they had a community. Today with the nuclear family mindset, if you don't have parental benefits, you will be hard pressed to figure out your rent, food or insurance and you will see a relative decline in your lifestyle. Humans have big aversion to relative declines even if their absolute lifestyle would still be better than their hunter gatherer ancestors.
- illiac786 2y ago
  I’d say stability is irrelevant in the face of the absence of contraception… no matter how hard life is, humans have and will copulate, like other animals, and produce babies – unless contraception.
caeril 2y ago
There's this social technology called "marriage" in which these risks are absorbed by the husband, and in which the husband is legally compelled to do so even if he doesn't want to, and compensate you for lost earnings potential if the marriage dissolves. So yes, there might be zero stability if your intention is to be a single mother. But I've heard that application of this novel idea could be helpful with these concerns. Maybe Koreans could look into this incredible new technology?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

blackhawkC17 2y ago

South Korea is an outlier even among wealthy countries. They have an extreme work culture (beginning from school in the early stages) that takes a toll on people . On one hand, we can say this work ethic/culture enabled them to go from third world to first in less than a century. But stretch it too much and the country suffers population collapse. I wonder if being bordered by a rabid enemy (North Korea) also plays a role in the low birth rates. Maybe people don’t want to give birth to kids that might end up fighting war in the long run.

joenot443 2y ago

Personally, I'd argue there's a _lot_ more stability for someone in the modern West than a hunter/gatherer living on the plains. I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies, my understanding is that they generally existed on the edge of subsistence and would be absolutely mind boggled by amount of excess we enjoy today.

nine_zeros 2y ago
> Personally, I'd argue there's a _lot_ more stability for someone in the modern West than a hunter/gatherer living on the plains. I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies, my understanding is that they generally existed on the edge of subsistence and would be absolutely mind boggled by amount of excess we enjoy today. The hunter or the gatherer was not abandoned from the tribe/laid off/thrown on a PIP during a pregnancy for not finding enough fruits for the tribe CEO.
RestlessMind 2y ago
> I'm not really sure what stability you're talking about in hunter gatherer societies While the absolute conditions of hunter gatherers were abysmal compared to modern western standards, they didn't suffer relative decline in the living conditions due to pregnancy and child rearing. Their tribe took care of their house, food, security and child rearing. In other words, they had a community. Today with the nuclear family mindset, if you don't have parental benefits, you will be hard pressed to figure out your rent, food or insurance and you will see a relative decline in your lifestyle. Humans have big aversion to relative declines even if their absolute lifestyle would still be better than their hunter gatherer ancestors.
illiac786 2y ago
I’d say stability is irrelevant in the face of the absence of contraception… no matter how hard life is, humans have and will copulate, like other animals, and produce babies – unless contraception.

caeril 2y ago

There's this social technology called "marriage" in which these risks are absorbed by the husband, and in which the husband is legally compelled to do so even if he doesn't want to, and compensate you for lost earnings potential if the marriage dissolves. So yes, there might be zero stability if your intention is to be a single mother. But I've heard that application of this novel idea could be helpful with these concerns. Maybe Koreans could look into this incredible new technology?