3 ms·
> There are two futures, both bad. "Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant", or "Will the last one to leave please turn out the lights." One data point against this di
by slibhb 2y ago
> There are two futures, both bad. "Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant", or "Will the last one to leave please turn out the lights."
One data point against this dichotomy is that most women in the West generally report wanting more children than they have.
A different view is that, in the first world, men and women have become more neurotic and risk averse. E.g. "we can't afford kids with this market"
- jajko 2y ago> "we can't afford kids with this market" This seems like a gross simplification. In western world, the pressure is to raise kids well rather than just so-so, since one can easily see how much this helps them with rest of modern complex life. For example emotional stability, maturity and resilience is not something that comes automatically regardless of quality (and quantity) of parenting. This aspect alone is enough to make or break literally any conceivable talent or wealth under our sun. And raising kids well these days is... hard, very hard. If it would be just question of money, rich folks would be all having 10-15 kids yet even those who are pretty horrible parents via ignoring their kids most of the time (with corresponding results later in life) very rarely do so, and if they do its normally the result of their instabilities and mental issues rather than part of a bigger plan.
- mschuster91 2y ago> If it would be just question of money, rich folks would be all having 10-15 kids Well, Musk certainly does... the thing is, for the really rich, more kids means more complex inheritance schemes and the risk of their wealth going down the drain in inheritance fights. Here in Germany for example, there was a ridiculous multi year fight in the empire of the Albrecht clan (the ones behind Aldi, I think in the US it's Trader Joe's?).
- lotsofpulp 2y agoThe number of kids a man has is irrelevant for population statistics because it simply offsets another man’s child. That’s why total fertility rate only takes into account how many children a woman has, since they are the rate limiting factor.
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y agoDepends on your point of view, and which statistics, I guess? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Jacob_Meijer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Jacob_Meijer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg_family_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg_family_tree https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/distinctive-habsburg-jaw-was-likely-result-royal-familys-inbreeding-180973688/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/distinctive-habsbu...
- lotsofpulp 2y agoI don’t see how this math could depend on a point of view. You can have 100 men and 1 woman, and predicting future population will have nothing to do with how many men there are (as long as there is at least 1 fertile man). But if you have even just 1 man, having 10 women versus 100 women makes an enormous difference in potential future population.
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y agoBut those asymmetries are artificial, made up.
- lotsofpulp 2y agoThe only other way I can explain this is that to project population, all you need to know is the the number of women now and the rate at which women are giving birth (assuming births are 50/50 male/female). At least, those are the more direct parameters to use than the number of men or the rate at which men impregnate women.
- michaelcampbell 2y agoThere are Aldi's in the US also.
- mistrial9 2y agosource? here is recent Pew Research data in the US family relationships - parenting report Jul 25, 2024 The Experiences of U.S. Adults Who Don’t Have Children The U.S. fertility rate reached a historic low in 2023, with a growing share of women ages 25 to 44 having never given birth.