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

Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 411 posts

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#221

Post by giantg2 »

kube-system wrote: post #212
giantg2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what's the difference between a front seat without the airbag on and back seat? My guess is that it's really just automakers CYA so they don't have to treat it as a safety critical system. There's really no reason to have that sensor then.

It is part of a safety system, but the other way around. One of the purposes is to make an annoying dinging sound when the passenger does not put their seat belt on.

Eh, if one doesn't want to wear a seat belt, then don't. Pretty annoying feature if you're using it as a farm truck.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#222

Post by erichocean »

PopeDotNinja wrote: post #171
irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

> the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five I recently visited Pakistan for the first time, and was amazed to see a family of five riding around on a small Honda motorbike. The father was driving, a small child sat in front of the father, the was mother hanging on behind the father, and the oldest daughter sitting on the far back with both legs hanging off to the left while holding an inf…

I saw the same thing in India.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#223

Post by dmm »

sneak wrote: post #118
Analemma_ wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be very rarely enforced. I ride in Seattle without a helmet all the time and have never had a problem.

Out of curiosity: why do you ride without a helmet?

Do you wear a helmet while driving a car? Head injuries are a top cause of death in vehicle accidents something that helmets would significantly reduce.

The truth is that you never even considered wearing a helmet while drivi g because driving is an ordinary activity that doesn't seem to require special equipment. In places where cycling is an ordinary activity people feel the same.

It's not about statistics or the actual effectiveness of safety equipment. If it were you would start wearing a driving helmet tomorrow.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#224

Post by Wowfunhappy »

bobthepanda wrote: post #217
saagarjha wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it’s just a helmet. Sure, I lock it so you’d have to cut the strap to get it (thus rendering it largely useless without repair), but in general the theft rate of helmets is low enough that I can just eat the cost of buying a new one.

Not everyone lives in an area where that is true, nor can everyone just afford to replace $20 helmets on a regular basis. Compulsory helmets just for cyclists is a bit arbitrary too, since pedestrians and car occupants would also benefit from helmets, and at least pedestrians are likely to encounter the same exact crash scenarios which cyclists encounter where helmets are necessary (e.g. pedestrians can also get hit…

I realize I'm privileged in that I live in a low-crime city, but seriously, who is going to steal a $20 helmet which will have a broken strap?

It looks like new straps cost ~$8 on Amazon, so the helmet is worth at most $12. Which isn't nothing, but... unless you happen to need a helmet and the helmet just so happens to be the right size for your body, you'd need to sell it, and no one is going to pay full price for a used helmet. I'd be amazed if you got more than a couple dollars when all was said and done.

I suppose you could buy straps in bulk for much less money, but then you're basically setting up a helmet-stealing operation... it all just seems like so much work, for very little gain! If you're that desperate, wouldn't it make more sense to invest in wire cutters so you can steal the bikes themselves?

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#225

Post by michaelt »

sneak wrote: post #118
Analemma_ wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be very rarely enforced. I ride in Seattle without a helmet all the time and have never had a problem.

Out of curiosity: why do you ride without a helmet?

Philosophically, I believe that personal responsibility cannot exist without without the freedom to make bad decisions; and that freedom cannot exist without at least sometimes being exercised.

I think a person should have the right to cycle without a helmet regardless of the fact it may be inadvisable - just like they should have the right to take up skateboarding or skiing or boxing or cheerleading, even if that's even less advisable.

And because I think it's an important right I'm going to exercise it, because a right that exists in theory but not in practice is a right that does not exist.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#226

Post by giantg2 »

notsureaboutpg wrote: post #141
giantg2 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Multigenerational households where grandparents provide childcare are one solution around this problem that I've seen." Except many grandparents are still working, especially to cover healthcare costs.

In the US, elderly people have Medicare, so why is this happening?

Medicare isn't free. You still have copays for visits, procedures, and medications (deductible and premium costs vary too!).

The other point is that you would have to have pretty large generation gaps to have child care while the child is still young if depending on Medicare. Once they're older they generally can stay home alone for a bit. Medicare age is 65. So for example, the grandparent would need to give birth to the parent at age 32.5 and the parent would have to give birth to the child at age 32.5. That would be for the oldest child, so you would be giving birth even later in life for the other children. I believe pregnancy after age 34 is considered to be a geriatric pregnancy.

If you take the generational gap the other direction, then you could have great grandparents providing child care if the next generation starts at 22. Higher education and financial stability might be a barrier in this scenario.

Then if we are talking about raising the birth rate, how sustainable is this model when families have 3 or more children? Meaning 1 set of grandparents would be responsible for 3 sets of parents assuming this model is used on a wide enough scale to affect the birth rate. This is exasperated is using the great grandparent example.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#227

Post by hansvm »

1-6 wrote: post #155
irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

Let's not forget the expiration dates on Car Safety Seats. C'mon, really? Seats with Styrofoam may deteriorate eventually but I haven't heard of a casualties due to expired car seats.

Not quite the same thing (adult seats vs car seats, and it's possible they were just faulty from the factory rather than expired), but the last time I was rear-ended the seats snapped behind me. Quite the experience really -- to stop you from going forward you have seat belts, air bags, and all kinds of fancy engineering. Inertia is a cruel mistress when the car moves forward out from under you though, and the only things ensuring your forward motion are a couple of broken seats (thankfully there weren't any passengers or children in car seats for me to smash into) and the 2-ton metal projectile poking through the ass end of your car.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#228

Post by sdenton4 »

PopeDotNinja wrote: post #171
irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

> the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five I recently visited Pakistan for the first time, and was amazed to see a family of five riding around on a small Honda motorbike. The father was driving, a small child sat in front of the father, the was mother hanging on behind the father, and the oldest daughter sitting on the far back with both legs hanging off to the left while holding an inf…

I once saw a motorbike with two people and a cow in western Kenya. It wasn't a /big/ cow, but still.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#229

Post by sfa_aok »

irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

This is an even bigger problem to solve when you factor in that:

- Different countries have different standards, so car seats vary accordingly

- Models change over the years

So finding out if you can get three car seats into a car is a massive headache.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#230

Post by CinchWrench »

sdenton4 wrote: post #228
PopeDotNinja wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five I recently visited Pakistan for the first time, and was amazed to see a family of five riding around on a small Honda motorbike. The father was driving, a small child sat in front of the father, the was mother hanging on behind the father, and the oldest daughter sitting on the far back with both legs hanging off to the left while holding an inf…

I once saw a motorbike with two people and a cow in western Kenya. It wasn't a /big/ cow, but still.

I mostly go to /fit/ for lifting advice. I'll have to check out /big/ because i really just want to get cow-huge in 2021.
Post reply on HN