> we are (rightfully, I believe) far less willing to let children die young or get maimed. I don't think it matters at all. Of course, we are, but there is a h

> we are (rightfully, I believe) far less willing to let children die young or get maimed. I don't think it matters at all. Of course, we are, but there is a huge gap between "not let children die young or get maimed" and what is happening with child raising now. > but in most of Europe and the USA bottom 50+% of young couples would have zero problems to support even 20 children per couple. How do I know it? Because in other parts of the world other people easily support like 5+ kids on 10+ times less amount of resources than this bottom 50% of young couples in the Europe and the USA have. So it is purely cultural phenomenon. > were raised by grandparents, neighbors, their older siblings etc. No, they (generally) weren't raised that way. Historically, "raised by grandparents, neighbors, their older siblings etc" mean that they were like 5% of the time "raising by grandparents, neighbors, their older siblings", and other 95% of the time raising by themselves (and maybe by neighbor's dog, best case scenario) > Even when they were away from adults, they'd be roaming near the village in groups with older children. I mean right now there is zero problems to raise 20 children per couple this way in the cities. Except for the cultural perception.