Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

thecut.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#111

Post by kypro »

curun1r wrote: post #98
bhouston wrote: post #78

Population shrinkage is not healthy for a society.

Breeding under the replacement rate does not imply population shrinkage. It's a better strategy for a rich nation state to have lower birth rates and poach the best and brightest from other countries. That increases the wealth of native-born citizens as well as improving the lives of those who immigrate whereas overbreeding disperses accumulated inherited wealth.

But I thought we need immigrants to do the low paid jobs we don't want to do, not the hard well paid ones? /s

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#112

Post by moises_silva »

sarnu wrote: post #97
Illniyar wrote: post #88

You go raise three children. I can barely handle two.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Me and my wife decided for a second child (he's 2 months old now). I'm curious what you feel is hard about raising a single child? before deciding for the second, we were close to staying with one. If anything we feared it'd be hard for our first son growing all alone. Is that what you meant? hard for the kid not for the parents?

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#113

Post by sarnu »

moises_silva wrote: post #112
sarnu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Me and my wife decided for a second child (he's 2 months old now). I'm curious what you feel is hard about raising a single child? before deciding for the second, we were close to staying with one. If anything we feared it'd be hard for our first son growing all alone. Is that what you meant? hard for the kid not for the parents?

Both for the kid and for the parents. For example, with single childs, you have to arrange play dates. If you have more than one, chances are, they play together. Another thing: with a single child, this one child has to fulfill all of the expectations of the parents. So it is quite a burden for the child. And another thing is, with more than one child you see that your education has a limited effect on the character of a child. Assuming that you treat your kids in a similar way, you can notice a big variety in character between them.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#114

Post by wccrawford »

dqpb wrote: post #76

Technically, isn't it the youngest child going extinct and the middle child left to take on the role of the youngest?

Whenever a couple has any kids at all, there is always a youngest child and an oldest child. Sometimes, they are the same child.

There is not always a "middle child" because that requires at least 2 other children to exist.

You're trying to say that the "third child" is going extinct, which matches what the article is saying in a different way.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#115

Post by Scarblac »

Fnoord wrote: post #108
HaoZeke wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Hong Kong's density is an excellent example of how it could look. For America though, there's enough room but for certain metropoles throughout the world as well as The Netherlands... no, they're pretty much full.

The Netherlands doesn't feel very full compared to many huge metropoles though. I mean I'd prefer the population size to stay the way it is, but I don't think it's close to some theoretical limit at all.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#116

Post by Scarblac »

phamilton wrote: post #29
handbanana wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain/expand on why you think it’s natural selection?

I think he meant more that natural selection is essentially summarized as how many children various groups have. And for some weird reason, natural selection is biasing away from "smart people".

Not just how many children the groups have, but also how many of those make it to healthy adulthood to reproduce themselves, etc.

"Smart people" have fewer children but they're more likely to be successful.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#117

Post by Fnoord »

Scarblac wrote: post #115
Fnoord wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hong Kong's density is an excellent example of how it could look. For America though, there's enough room but for certain metropoles throughout the world as well as The Netherlands... no, they're pretty much full.

The Netherlands doesn't feel very full compared to many huge metropoles though. I mean I'd prefer the population size to stay the way it is, but I don't think it's close to some theoretical limit at all.

Not compared to Hong Kong, of course. There's still some rural areas, farms, etc. The cities are full though, unless you are OK going vertically or buying (read: stealing) land from the peasants.

For reference see population density statistics here [1]

Either way, the housing market is troubled in The Netherlands. It has been the past decennia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#118

Post by ido »

kypro wrote: post #111
curun1r wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breeding under the replacement rate does not imply population shrinkage. It's a better strategy for a rich nation state to have lower birth rates and poach the best and brightest from other countries. That increases the wealth of native-born citizens as well as improving the lives of those who immigrate whereas overbreeding disperses accumulated inherited wealth.

But I thought we need immigrants to do the low paid jobs we don't want to do, not the hard well paid ones? /s

it can indeed be both (no sarcasm intended - the menial jobs nobody else wants and the high-skill ones not enough people are capable of doing).

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#119

Post by carlmr »

sarnu wrote: post #97
Illniyar wrote: post #88

You go raise three children. I can barely handle two.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Yeah, this rings true from experiencing two kids at my home and visiting single children and multi-children families as a kid.

The single children where very demanding on their parents. The only source of attention and entertainment is the parents, so this makes sense.

Two children entertain themselves a bit more, but like in duopolic situations you have the most extreme competition. This leads to a lot of fights over shared resources.

With 3+ children fights over resources between 2 children don't lead to zero sum gains, so that the competition actually becomes less. Cooperation becomes more important. And the kids almost always entertain themselves.

I'd definitely say the 3+ children parents were usually the least stressed, but maybe that was just my impression. The older siblings at some point functioned as quasi parents to the younger siblings.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#120

Post by entropy_ »

moises_silva wrote: post #112
sarnu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Me and my wife decided for a second child (he's 2 months old now). I'm curious what you feel is hard about raising a single child? before deciding for the second, we were close to staying with one. If anything we feared it'd be hard for our first son growing all alone. Is that what you meant? hard for the kid not for the parents?

I come from a family of 4 children, but there was a single child nonetheless because we're 3 boys close to each other in age, then a large gap, then a girl. My parents say that in the case of my sister some things were a lot harder because she'd be a lot more prone to being bored and needing entertainment or to being driven over to one of her friends' place. Whereas in the case of us boys all they'd have to do is set us loose in the backyard with a ball(or teach us a boardgame, etc...) and enjoy their peace and quiet until the next meal time.

I'm now experiencing this with my own children to some extent. We have 2 kids so far, a 4 year old boy and a 1 year(and a couple months) old girl. They both wake up around 6:30 in the morning. And whereas before that meant that I'd never get to sleep in past that time, now our son just gathers a bunch of toys, climbs into his sister's crib, and they play until like 8am before they finally get bored and start calling for us. So at least as far as mornings go, 2 kids has proven easier than 1(after that initial 6 months from hell period where you don't get any sleep at all that is)

Post reply on HN