Population shrinkage is not healthy for a society.
In our automation age, it is if you are labor seller and not capital owner.
The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
81–90 of 140 posts
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#82Exceptionally poor attempt to lie with statistics. Three or more is not an avg of 4 or more, and comparing women in their 40s to all mothers isn't equivalent.
There may be something to this, but the math is so intentionally misleading as to murder the credibility of the author.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#83I see the number of children a couple has as a vote on how many people should exist on earth. If you have 0 or 1 child as a couple, you are voting that there should be fewer people. If you have 2 children, you're voting that there should be about the same number of people. If you have more than 2 children as a couple, you're voting that there should be more people on earth. With that context, I can clearly see why no…
You're completely overlooking people who would want more children but don't feel they could afford them.
The number of people who are poor enough to choose to have fewwer kids, yet rich enough to maintain effective birth control, is a narrow sliver.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#84Population shrinkage is not healthy for a society.
Right because we should all emulate over populated India and China.
Keeping the population down allows for a better standard of living for those who are alive already, and allows for sustainable growth.
A population explosion is just not possible to deal with. Imagine more people trying to get into the top schools, thereby killing your chances.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually we know that intelligence is mostly genetic (especially at the high end), but even if it isn’t, the family environment provided by (most) intelligent parents is very conducive to raising intelligent children. It doesn’t matter the means (environment or genetic) as both will contribute to smart parents raising smart children (provided they have children).
Socioeconomic status is far, far more important than genes[1]. If you want more smart people, give people more money. 1. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/under-the-influence/...
Of you give dumb people more money, they will get swindled by smart people.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#86Population shrinkage is not healthy for a society.
Why?
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not tangential to me, and yes, I'm totally offended by both strands. I used to date the author of the "Darwin Awards" website and books, and I've spent a lot of time interacting with the general public about these concepts.
Why are you offended by people choosing to have children? Seems rather strange to me, but I guess the world is a big place.
I am not. I’m offended by eugenics, no matter how you phrase it. Having children is not eugenics.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#88You go raise three children. I can barely handle two.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually we know that intelligence is mostly genetic (especially at the high end), but even if it isn’t, the family environment provided by (most) intelligent parents is very conducive to raising intelligent children. It doesn’t matter the means (environment or genetic) as both will contribute to smart parents raising smart children (provided they have children).
Socioeconomic status is far, far more important than genes[1]. If you want more smart people, give people more money. 1. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/under-the-influence/...
That is not what the article says, nor what the science on this topic says either [0]. Read the section on Heritability and socioeconomic status.
Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you offended by people choosing to have children? Seems rather strange to me, but I guess the world is a big place.
I am not. I’m offended by eugenics, no matter how you phrase it. Having children is not eugenics.
You said you were offended by both positive and negative eugenics? Mind explaining how?