3 ms·

Honestly, I think you could adjust population growth in many western countries by just spending more on schools, providing generous parental leave and generally

by moomin 2y ago

Honestly, I think you could adjust population growth in many western countries by just spending more on schools, providing generous parental leave and generally making having kids less daunting. But it seems like everyone who wants this outcome is entirely comfortable with going full Nazi on the subject.

elzbardico 2y ago
No way, we need to pay interest to the boomers so they can buy Motorhomes, Boats, Harley Davidsons and travel across the world. Stop this school and health care nonsense! This is communism!
lotsofpulp 2y ago
The data says that the benefits provided by the Scandinavian and European countries are not enough, or that providing benefits is not going to lift TFR to replacement rate. And also TFR was declining a lot all the way back since the 1950s, when kids were not as daunting and real estate costs and schooling costs were lower and people were buying houses on single incomes. I have a suspicion that there is almost no amount of realistic benefits that can incentivize having sufficient kids to the level of replacement rate. The problem is that once sufficient women do not have 2 children, it is unrealistic to expect a sufficient amount of the remaining women to have 3+ children to offset those that have 0 or 1 child. The big change from 100 years ago is that being a couple is now completely optional with no social stigma for being single, so if 30% or even 20% opt out of the compromises required in a relationship (due to their financial independence and safety in society), then you're fighting a losing battle (to keep TFR at replacement rate).
- naijaboiler 2y ago
  I have longed come to the conclusion that we are social beings even more than we are economic beings. Reversing fertility drops will require social solutions in addition to economic solutions. I.e we need economic incentives but we also need to find ways to “make it cool” to have babies and have women in child bearing age be in close social circles with women having kids. And we have to all that while respecting all the gender equality gains we have made in the modern world. Not an easy solution That or make the economic incentives super huge
  - lazide 2y ago
    In general, in crisis, people aren’t going to go for the complex solution. They’ll go with the simple one. If addressed sooner, then it won’t be a crisis. Do you think that will happen?
naijaboiler 2y ago
This is going too get increasingly hard due to our political system. We have more older people and they have more political and economic capital, so the incentive is going you keep voting and allocating more societal resources towards the old and away from the young, which further skews the demographics, which then leads older people with more resources and power and ability to vote themselves more resources
lazide 2y ago
Eh, frankly that is like saying you could have a larger army if you paid your soldiers better and treated them well. Not wrong, especially in relative peacetime and when things are going well. But there is a reason the first thing Ukraine did when they got invaded was a draft.

by moomin 2y ago

elzbardico 2y ago

No way, we need to pay interest to the boomers so they can buy Motorhomes, Boats, Harley Davidsons and travel across the world. Stop this school and health care nonsense! This is communism!

lotsofpulp 2y ago

The data says that the benefits provided by the Scandinavian and European countries are not enough, or that providing benefits is not going to lift TFR to replacement rate. And also TFR was declining a lot all the way back since the 1950s, when kids were not as daunting and real estate costs and schooling costs were lower and people were buying houses on single incomes. I have a suspicion that there is almost no amount of realistic benefits that can incentivize having sufficient kids to the level of replacement rate. The problem is that once sufficient women do not have 2 children, it is unrealistic to expect a sufficient amount of the remaining women to have 3+ children to offset those that have 0 or 1 child. The big change from 100 years ago is that being a couple is now completely optional with no social stigma for being single, so if 30% or even 20% opt out of the compromises required in a relationship (due to their financial independence and safety in society), then you're fighting a losing battle (to keep TFR at replacement rate).

naijaboiler 2y ago
I have longed come to the conclusion that we are social beings even more than we are economic beings. Reversing fertility drops will require social solutions in addition to economic solutions. I.e we need economic incentives but we also need to find ways to “make it cool” to have babies and have women in child bearing age be in close social circles with women having kids. And we have to all that while respecting all the gender equality gains we have made in the modern world. Not an easy solution That or make the economic incentives super huge
- lazide 2y ago
  In general, in crisis, people aren’t going to go for the complex solution. They’ll go with the simple one. If addressed sooner, then it won’t be a crisis. Do you think that will happen?

naijaboiler 2y ago

This is going too get increasingly hard due to our political system. We have more older people and they have more political and economic capital, so the incentive is going you keep voting and allocating more societal resources towards the old and away from the young, which further skews the demographics, which then leads older people with more resources and power and ability to vote themselves more resources

lazide 2y ago

Eh, frankly that is like saying you could have a larger army if you paid your soldiers better and treated them well. Not wrong, especially in relative peacetime and when things are going well. But there is a reason the first thing Ukraine did when they got invaded was a draft.