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

We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 461 posts

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#21

Post by rocgf »

HenryKissinger wrote: post #7

This is a good thing. The carrying capacity of the planet is finite, and our large global population is largely responsible for the destruction of the environment and climate change. Further, the high standard of living of Americans places a significant burden on the resources used to sustain this lifestyle. 300k fewer Americans will have a much greater impact on the environment than 300k fewer people of any other co…

It is very hard to understand why your comment was downvoted this badly.

I thought everyone understands that the planet is overpopulated as it is and that bringing as many children into the world as possible is not a net positive.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#22

Post by shigawire »

andi999 wrote: post #19
Scandiravian wrote: post #3

I'm surprised by this, as I had expected the opposite. Couples are spending a lot of time together being confined to their home without much entertainment, so I'd expected that to result in more baby making I guess the stress from the uncertainty of the future and lack of personal space more than countered that Time for me to adjust my assumptions about the world... And probably check my privilege, since I'm massivel…

Actually how does one actually do that 'check your privilege'? Is it like a checklist for takeoff:'privilege on? check!'

You think about things from different socioeconomic perspectives. It should be pretty obvious that the pandemic is not a year long stay at home tea party for many people.

If you only consider you experience as a wealthy tech worker you might not understand this.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#23

Post by beaconstudios »

Scandiravian wrote: post #12
beaconstudios wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And probably check my privilege That's a weird way of putting it. Not having a good model of others' experience is a universal experience, and something that should be treated as a reason to not make assumptions about others, not a sign that you're privileged.

> should be treated as a reason to not make assumptions about others That's what checking ones privilege is. I'm in a position where my financial security, mental well-being, and future prospects would make it a good time for me to start a family if that was what I wanted. Same goes for many of my friends and colleagues, who have in many cases done exactly that I think this article shows that this security does not e…

But my point is that such a misunderstanding of other people is not a symptom of privilege, its a symptom of being human. You probably don't know how billionaires as a class (and generalising people by a demographic is overgeneralising too) are experiencing covid either, but that isn't a question of privilege.

I guess I just don't like the idea of taking a universal human experience and casting it in terms of privilege. You're not blinded by privilege, you're blinded by the lack of generalisability of the human experience (or the lack of omniscience).

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#24

Post by kmlx »

rocgf wrote: post #21
HenryKissinger wrote: post #7

This is a good thing. The carrying capacity of the planet is finite, and our large global population is largely responsible for the destruction of the environment and climate change. Further, the high standard of living of Americans places a significant burden on the resources used to sustain this lifestyle. 300k fewer Americans will have a much greater impact on the environment than 300k fewer people of any other co…

It is very hard to understand why your comment was downvoted this badly. I thought everyone understands that the planet is overpopulated as it is and that bringing as many children into the world as possible is not a net positive.

it's not overpopulated.

this is a myth that has been going on since the 1970s:

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/12/12/16766872/overpop...

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#25

Post by JeremyBanks »

rocgf wrote: post #21
HenryKissinger wrote: post #7

This is a good thing. The carrying capacity of the planet is finite, and our large global population is largely responsible for the destruction of the environment and climate change. Further, the high standard of living of Americans places a significant burden on the resources used to sustain this lifestyle. 300k fewer Americans will have a much greater impact on the environment than 300k fewer people of any other co…

It is very hard to understand why your comment was downvoted this badly. I thought everyone understands that the planet is overpopulated as it is and that bringing as many children into the world as possible is not a net positive.

My impression is that most people who talk about overpopulation are basing it on old trends before population growth rates dropped off so much.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#26

Post by mbg721 »

jasode wrote: post #17
Scandiravian wrote: post #3

I'm surprised by this, as I had expected the opposite. Couples are spending a lot of time together being confined to their home without much entertainment, so I'd expected that to result in more baby making I guess the stress from the uncertainty of the future and lack of personal space more than countered that Time for me to adjust my assumptions about the world... And probably check my privilege, since I'm massivel…

>Couples are spending a lot of time together [...], so I'd expected that to result in more baby making But a counteracting force is that some couples think 9 months ahead and are afraid of delivering their baby in a COVID-overloaded hospital. COVID makes the opportunities for conception easier but adds to the stress and uncertainties of delivery and postnatal care. (So maybe more sex activity but also more contra cep…

The uncertainty isn't just the COVID overload, but also no doulas/support people, and not knowing if the father is even going to be allowed in the building in case something unusual happens.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#27

Post by leesalminen »

saiya-jin wrote: post #15
Scandiravian wrote: post #3

I'm surprised by this, as I had expected the opposite. Couples are spending a lot of time together being confined to their home without much entertainment, so I'd expected that to result in more baby making I guess the stress from the uncertainty of the future and lack of personal space more than countered that Time for me to adjust my assumptions about the world... And probably check my privilege, since I'm massivel…

Having a kid in western society is massively more difficult/taxing on parents compared to the past, when folks managed to have 10-15 kids and they somehow survived and developed themselves with their siblings (and some died but that's another story). We all know that. Kids are more difficult to manage in age of ubiquitous screens and distractions. Now you have to put your kids to hobbies, take care of their developme…

> If I didn't have family on my own, being single during past year would be pretty miserable place to be

I feel super lucky to have had my first son born right before the covid outbreak in the US. The restrictions have basically forced me to spend every waking second with him (and my wife), and it’s been (mostly) great. I have thoroughly enjoyed getting to know my son, and am happy to have been able to support my wife as much as I have. Like you, I couldn’t imagine doing this last year as a single guy- it would’ve been very difficult for me. My brother, for example, who is in his 20s and single, has had a fairly rough time this past year. Most of the mechanisms he used to combat depression are gone.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#28

Post by boomboomsubban »

andi999 wrote: post #16
that_guy_iain wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people stopped dating, bars are closed, etc. I suspect the decrease in drunken sex is probably a large reason for the decrease.

Actually 300k birth due to drunken sex paints a very dark picture of society.

It's a social lubricant, even in healthy relationships wanting more children I'd bet many are conceived drunk.

Re: We Expect 300k Fewer Births Than Usual This Year in the US

#30

Post by kmlx »

chriskanan wrote: post #18
HenryKissinger wrote: post #7

This is a good thing. The carrying capacity of the planet is finite, and our large global population is largely responsible for the destruction of the environment and climate change. Further, the high standard of living of Americans places a significant burden on the resources used to sustain this lifestyle. 300k fewer Americans will have a much greater impact on the environment than 300k fewer people of any other co…

I highly recommend David Attenborough's 2020 Netflix documentary "A Life on Our Planet." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Attenborough:_A_Life_on_ ... https://www.netflix.com/title/80216393 It is his "witness statement" on how he has personally observed enormous environmental damage over his ~70 year career documenting wildlife throughout the world. He argues that the solution is to reduce our population growth wo…

on the other hand our planet has seen 5 mass extinction events.

at the same time, 56 millions years ago the planet was extremely hot: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hotte...

and, to top it off, all we're doing is prolonging the inevitable warming of the planet.

things aren't so clear as that documentary makes it unfortunately.

Post reply on HN