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

America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 443 posts

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#111

Post by d1zzy »

raducu wrote: post #16

Unpopular opinion I've held since before I became a parent: childless people should pay more taxes.

What's the argument for it?

Here are some counter arguments:

- having children means you will likely receive support in your older age that childless couples won't, how will you account for that?

- having children gives you purpose, realization and satisfaction and forcibly links you with younger generations, which childless people must try to find in other places (making it easier for the childless to be depressed, become disconnected from modern technology and society, etc)

- there's the ecological argument of course: as we increased in numbers the number of species has decreased, pollution, carbon output, destruction of habitats, etc has increased, it rather seems that having children should be taxed to account for these externalities (but arguably that's already done so through the additional costs associated with it)

And last but not least: it is very unlikely that you were forced to have children. As an adult you made a decision knowing fully well what it carries with it (and if you didn't know there's no excuse in the Internet age to not have been able to research it). You are fully responsible for the decision and it seems unfair to me that now after having committed to it, you want to change the game rules so it goes against those that have decided different from you.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#112

Post by rayiner »

> Okay, you might be thinking, but so what? Happy singles are no tragedy. Childlessness is no sin. There is no ethical duty to marry and mate until one’s fertility has exceeded the replacement rate. What’s the matter with a childless city?

It’s relatively recently that anyone would take these assertions as a given.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#113

Post by joebadmo »

rootusrootus wrote: post #94
jinushaun wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m raising a child in NYC right now. What is this dystopia you are describing? It’s the opposite of my personal experience. NYC is such a kid friendly place to raise kids: Museums, zoos, aquariums, free events for kids, concerts just for babies, parks, swimming pools, little league, soccer league, skate parks, etc… we have it all. I can’t fathom how people raise kids in the suburbs. They must be so bored… You have a…

> They must be so bored… Your preconceived notions of what suburban living is like are just as inaccurate as the perceptions of city life of the person you responded to.

I grew up in suburbs, and couldn't go anywhere without a car, so I was very bored and watched a lot of television (though I read a lot of books, too).

Currently raising two kids in an urban center, and I'm excited for them to have way more opportunities than I had.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#114

Post by voxl »

rayiner wrote: post #112

> Okay, you might be thinking, but so what? Happy singles are no tragedy. Childlessness is no sin. There is no ethical duty to marry and mate until one’s fertility has exceeded the replacement rate. What’s the matter with a childless city? It’s relatively recently that anyone would take these assertions as a given.

It's relatively recently that slavery was outlawed.

Recency has little to do with it.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#115

Post by [deleted] »

clay_the_ripper wrote: post #87
madhadron wrote: post #14

I look at it a little differently. The urban cores in the USA are actively hostile places for anyone to be. You step outside your door...into an empty hallway of doors. You take an elevator or stairs down to a place with a few mailboxes, then step outside. Outside, you have a narrow strip of concrete, possibly with a few trees, that you are allowed to inhabit. Beyond it is as asphalt with two ton steel contraptions w…

I currently live in SF and could not imagine having kids here. I’m sure some people do, and have a great time. But it’s not a life that I would want, nor would I want for my kids. This narrative captures pretty accurately why I would not want to raise kids in this city. Now, some other city? Maybe. Probably in Europe. US cities though are just hard places to be. Hard people. Aggressive homelessness. Dirty. Unfriendly…

[deleted]

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#116

Post by mrep »

jinushaun wrote: post #67
madhadron wrote: post #14

I look at it a little differently. The urban cores in the USA are actively hostile places for anyone to be. You step outside your door...into an empty hallway of doors. You take an elevator or stairs down to a place with a few mailboxes, then step outside. Outside, you have a narrow strip of concrete, possibly with a few trees, that you are allowed to inhabit. Beyond it is as asphalt with two ton steel contraptions w…

I’m raising a child in NYC right now. What is this dystopia you are describing? It’s the opposite of my personal experience. NYC is such a kid friendly place to raise kids: Museums, zoos, aquariums, free events for kids, concerts just for babies, parks, swimming pools, little league, soccer league, skate parks, etc… we have it all. I can’t fathom how people raise kids in the suburbs. They must be so bored… You have a…

> Museums, zoos, aquariums

I don't know about you, but those are things I'd go to at most once a year so taking the train/driving downtown for those rare events wasn't a big deal for me growing up.

> free events for kids, concerts just for babies,

more details?

> parks

My friends and I used to play basketball, american football, and ultimate frisbee all the time growing up. Now I live downtown and the parks I walk past never have enough free space to play those kind of sports. Not to mention the walking parks and playgrounds in the suburbs are usually way bigger and less crowded.

> swimming pools

Suburbs have these too and one of my friends growing up even had their own backyard pool where we would play sharks and minnows, use the pool basketball hoop to play 21, or use the diving board. Playing the former 2 are much harder in a packed city pool then a suburban pool due to crowds, let alone a private backyard one.

> little league, soccer league, skate parks,

Had all these in the suburbs when i grew up and again, those require a lot of space which is in short supply in the city so there's almost always more available options to do these in the suburbs.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#117

Post by rayiner »

voxl wrote: post #114
rayiner wrote: post #112

> Okay, you might be thinking, but so what? Happy singles are no tragedy. Childlessness is no sin. There is no ethical duty to marry and mate until one’s fertility has exceeded the replacement rate. What’s the matter with a childless city? It’s relatively recently that anyone would take these assertions as a given.

It's relatively recently that slavery was outlawed. Recency has little to do with it.

I’m just surprised to see the assertion in print. I’m not that old, and I don’t think you would’ve seen it stated so matter of factly when I was a kid.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#118

Post by aikinai »

magduf wrote: post #49
madhadron wrote: post #14

I look at it a little differently. The urban cores in the USA are actively hostile places for anyone to be. You step outside your door...into an empty hallway of doors. You take an elevator or stairs down to a place with a few mailboxes, then step outside. Outside, you have a narrow strip of concrete, possibly with a few trees, that you are allowed to inhabit. Beyond it is as asphalt with two ton steel contraptions w…

You don't need "low rise cohousing communities" to have families in cities. Japanese cities are extremely dense, yet people raise families there just fine. On my trip to Japan, I was really struck by how many children I saw in the middles of cities (moreso in some districts than others, of course), whereas I never see children in downtown American cities. Of course, Japanese cities don't have enormous parking lots, e…

Exactly. My family moved from an American city core to a Japanese city core specifically because we don’t want to live in our cars but American cities aren’t suited for children. Japanese cities are dense and walkable but wonderful places for families and children.

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#119

Post by jonknee »

Birthrates are also declining outside of cities at similar rates [1]. It may be a little more apparent in expensive cities because childless people tend to not like suburbs and choose density if they can afford it, but I don't think cities are the root cause.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2018/10/19/us-fertilit...

Re: America’s urban rebirth is missing actual births

#120

Post by bobthechef »

rayiner wrote: post #112

> Okay, you might be thinking, but so what? Happy singles are no tragedy. Childlessness is no sin. There is no ethical duty to marry and mate until one’s fertility has exceeded the replacement rate. What’s the matter with a childless city? It’s relatively recently that anyone would take these assertions as a given.

There is no moral obligation for everyone to have children, but for the species to continue, someone has to and that means most people. I wouldn't use that to determine whether you should, only that human nature naturally moves us to have children and the few who choose not to marry can legitimately say they have not done so for the sake of a higher purpose, thus making it a sacrifice. Refusing to have children because it would take time away from indulging in vacuous consumerist pastimes is not a sacrifice, just a sign of developmental immaturity. Quite an accusation since I do not think all of our ancestors were the most mature of people.

Part of the reason we have a difficult time seeing this is because of contraception. We've essentially divorced the procreative end of sexual intercourse from the pleasure. But the pleasure is an incentive to procreate and bond, not an end in itself. Even bonding vis-a-vis marriage versus non-martial friendship is ordered toward procreation. We've unmoored sex from its purposes and engage in little more than mutual masturbation.

Post reply on HN