The only thing that will raise fertility rates is to make it more affordable to have a child. Most people are simply too poor to both have a child and ensure that it is consistently as happy or happier than they were as a child. People in developed countries do not want to have children who they know will have poor childhoods from not being able to afford things they need, such as school, rent in a place with a room for them, childcare while working (as it is very difficult to survive on just a single person’s income, practically impossible for 3!!!! people to do so) and other necessities.
The problem isn’t culture (unless you think blindly producing children who will suffer is a good thing) or status or any of these made up problems, people literally just cannot afford to start families.
This comment too is not fit for this site. What is going on with y’all? Why is fertility such a weirdly mindkilling issue? Please don’t presume your theory to be true, try to highlight cruxes, try to summon up at least a bit of curiosity about your interlocutors, all the usual things.
Like, it’s fine to have a personally confident take on the causes of low fertility in western countries, but man, you can’t just treat your personal confidence as shared and obvious with everyone else, at least in this way.
Why is fertility such a weirdly mindkilling issue?
I guess because it touches so many hot issues in culture wars: feminism, economy (salaries, demographic crisis), immigration (if you compare fertility of different groups), race, iq… everything seems related.
The assumption of your argument (that many can’t afford to support children) is debated at least, and a crux for many. Nor is it so obvious as to be assumed to be true in this discussion. Since you did not argue for this, and instead made the trivial observation that if most people can’t afford to support children, then most people won’t have children regardless of how high status it is, your argument is worthless.
As worthless as you think it is, it’s quite literally the thing that is happening in the real world. Theory is cool and all but reality is the way it is.
Also, yeah, people not being able to afford to support their kids is obvious. It’s literally happening. I know this site leans heavily middle-upper/upper class SF/CA, but the majority of (the US) lives paycheck to paycheck and cannot support a child without serious compromised to QOL, both for themselves and the child.
In order to convince people and make your comments worthwhile to read, you need a better argument than “it is literally happening” (I don’t think anyone misinterpreted you and thought your comment was a metaphor and this was only figuratively happening). You may think people are foolish for not believing you, but nevertheless, they don’t believe you, and you need to make some argument to convince them.
I don’t want to elevate just stay at home motherhood. I want to elevate stay at home parenting.
I hope we can make it cool to be a stay at home father or mother. I think this will raise fertility rates.
The only thing that will raise fertility rates is to make it more affordable to have a child. Most people are simply too poor to both have a child and ensure that it is consistently as happy or happier than they were as a child. People in developed countries do not want to have children who they know will have poor childhoods from not being able to afford things they need, such as school, rent in a place with a room for them, childcare while working (as it is very difficult to survive on just a single person’s income, practically impossible for 3!!!! people to do so) and other necessities.
The problem isn’t culture (unless you think blindly producing children who will suffer is a good thing) or status or any of these made up problems, people literally just cannot afford to start families.
This comment too is not fit for this site. What is going on with y’all? Why is fertility such a weirdly mindkilling issue? Please don’t presume your theory to be true, try to highlight cruxes, try to summon up at least a bit of curiosity about your interlocutors, all the usual things.
Like, it’s fine to have a personally confident take on the causes of low fertility in western countries, but man, you can’t just treat your personal confidence as shared and obvious with everyone else, at least in this way.
I guess because it touches so many hot issues in culture wars: feminism, economy (salaries, demographic crisis), immigration (if you compare fertility of different groups), race, iq… everything seems related.
The assumption of your argument (that many can’t afford to support children) is debated at least, and a crux for many. Nor is it so obvious as to be assumed to be true in this discussion. Since you did not argue for this, and instead made the trivial observation that if most people can’t afford to support children, then most people won’t have children regardless of how high status it is, your argument is worthless.
As worthless as you think it is, it’s quite literally the thing that is happening in the real world. Theory is cool and all but reality is the way it is.
Also, yeah, people not being able to afford to support their kids is obvious. It’s literally happening. I know this site leans heavily middle-upper/upper class SF/CA, but the majority of (the US) lives paycheck to paycheck and cannot support a child without serious compromised to QOL, both for themselves and the child.
In order to convince people and make your comments worthwhile to read, you need a better argument than “it is literally happening” (I don’t think anyone misinterpreted you and thought your comment was a metaphor and this was only figuratively happening). You may think people are foolish for not believing you, but nevertheless, they don’t believe you, and you need to make some argument to convince them.