3 ms·

I assume GP is implying some type of cultural messaging around kids being undesirable. I don't think this is true, and even if it is, the primary reason is the

I assume GP is implying some type of cultural messaging around kids being undesirable. I don't think this is true, and even if it is, the primary reason is the decline in living conditions (inflation-adjusted wages) for the average person in western countries for the past 50 years. Especially housing. Without stable and cheap housing it is hard to raise kids well.

ineedaj0b 2y ago
no. it's memetic, child having is low status in developed countries and countries closer to poverty have more children.
jdietrich 2y ago
Your hypothesis is completely unmoored from reality. The only durable correlation between birth rates and living standards is negative - wealthier people consistently have fewer kids. https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate
anon291 2y ago
I gave my anecdote elsewhere, but I will recount it again. I felt embarrassed at age 23 to purchase a pregnancy test with my wife. This is simply due to cultural messaging saying babies are bad. Despite having been married for a year, making well above median wage and having enough for a down payment, etc, I was worried what others would think of me! And I come from a family that is very pro-child and pro-natalist for lack of better word. I can only imagine what my peers would have been feeling. I think in many people, it takes into their 30s for this feeling to go away, but if they wait that long to have children, they're having 1 or 2 max on average. EDIT: I think many on here don't believe that there's anti-child cultural messaging, because they're in their 30s-40s where this pressure starts to go the other way. But if you start having kids at that age, on average, you will never have enough to hit replacement. To hit replacement TFR, the pro-child messaging must start at 18 or younger.
- rconti 2y ago
  Yeah, I _do_ think I would have been embarrassed to be buying a pregnancy test a year out of college, because statistically speaking that would be an unexpected pregnancy. I'd say by 26-28 it would be more likely to be a socially acceptable post-college, in wedlock marriage. I don't see that being anti-child though.

ineedaj0b 2y ago

no. it's memetic, child having is low status in developed countries and countries closer to poverty have more children.

jdietrich 2y ago

Your hypothesis is completely unmoored from reality. The only durable correlation between birth rates and living standards is negative - wealthier people consistently have fewer kids. https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate

anon291 2y ago

I gave my anecdote elsewhere, but I will recount it again. I felt embarrassed at age 23 to purchase a pregnancy test with my wife. This is simply due to cultural messaging saying babies are bad. Despite having been married for a year, making well above median wage and having enough for a down payment, etc, I was worried what others would think of me! And I come from a family that is very pro-child and pro-natalist for lack of better word. I can only imagine what my peers would have been feeling. I think in many people, it takes into their 30s for this feeling to go away, but if they wait that long to have children, they're having 1 or 2 max on average. EDIT: I think many on here don't believe that there's anti-child cultural messaging, because they're in their 30s-40s where this pressure starts to go the other way. But if you start having kids at that age, on average, you will never have enough to hit replacement. To hit replacement TFR, the pro-child messaging must start at 18 or younger.

rconti 2y ago
Yeah, I _do_ think I would have been embarrassed to be buying a pregnancy test a year out of college, because statistically speaking that would be an unexpected pregnancy. I'd say by 26-28 it would be more likely to be a socially acceptable post-college, in wedlock marriage. I don't see that being anti-child though.