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

Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 209 posts

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#161

Post by watwut »

trollbridge wrote: post #88
api wrote: post #29

Seattle, meaning the city, right? When people get married and think about settling down and maybe having kids, they usually leave high cost of living cities. They want stability, something they can own or rent long term, and usually more space, especially if kids are coming. Sometimes they move to the suburbs, sometimes across the country. The only people who stay tend to be rich people who can actually afford to get…

Of course, this pattern of human settlement is silly. Cities used to be hospitable to families, often with multiple generations living in them. Instead of needing a daycare and lots of miles in a car, grandparents and relatives were nearby to help with young children. On the other hand, forcing people outside of the city to afford a family means more GDP from building roads, selling tyres, replacing cars, petrol sale…

I read an article just today about how parents today expect a lot more childcare from their grandmoms then they used to be. Where grand parents in the past were expected to yell at kids here and there when those misbehaved or be their friends, they were not expected to be full caregiver the way they are now. They used to have their own things to do - whether work or fun. Grandparents as a complete replacement of a daycare where she (it is gendered) has to do all of it was not a thing. And the expectations on childcare were much smaller then today.

Grandparent to take care of a kid an afternoon a week or so was a thing. Grandparent watching a kid every day whole day, not really.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#162

Post by longdustytrail »

euroderf wrote: post #127
jandrewrogers wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ~$21/hr minimum wage, 1:2 staffing ratio, etc required by law in Seattle puts a very high floor on the cheapest possible daycare. Just being a bare minimum legal daycare business has a cost floor of at least $2k/month per infant.

1:2 adults:kids ? That's crazy.

Also not accurate. I have a 2 year old in daycare in Seattle and the ratio is 8:1. I believe it’s 6:1 or maybe 4:1 for infants. I’ve never heard of 2:1 that would be absurd

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#163

Post by justonenote »

siffl wrote: post #129
pfdietz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to a conclusion that the solution may be somewhat radical. If coupling is reduced, it should become the norm for women to have and raise children alone, or at least without a male partner. This increases the burden on women, so at the same time the number of children they must support would have to decrease. This could be achieved technologically, by filtering sperm to remove Y chromosome carrying gametes.…

Perhaps even more interesting in the near-future is the prospect of creating sperm, through technological means, from female cells. The research to do this seems to be close to succeeding - see e.g. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11601-bone-stem-cells... When researchers perfect this technique for humans, which they almost certainly will eventually, there will be no need for men at all. Women will be able to…

gawd this is so misogynistic, some women like having men around, for whatever reason. perhaps we can keep a few around for women into that.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#164

Post by justonenote »

pfdietz wrote: post #50
inglor_cz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See also "The Global Collapse of Coupling and Fertility" https://www.ggd.world/p/the-global-collapse-of-coupling-and I wonder if the ultimate cost (in lives never born) of technologies like smartphones and Tinder will be. If a significant part of the entire youth cohort never learns to interact with the other sex in the real world, we might be looking at a pandemics of loneliness - and at subsequent global birth defi…

I've come to a conclusion that the solution may be somewhat radical. If coupling is reduced, it should become the norm for women to have and raise children alone, or at least without a male partner. This increases the burden on women, so at the same time the number of children they must support would have to decrease. This could be achieved technologically, by filtering sperm to remove Y chromosome carrying gametes.…

cool idea. once we have mandated ivf as the only way of conception we can probably start selecting sperm from populations with higher than average iq too.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#165

Post by longdustytrail »

whateveracct wrote: post #132
TriangleEdge wrote: post #54

I live in Seattle now, am married, and have an infant. I find Seattle not friendly towards families at all. The going rate for a daycare here is 3.5k per month for an infant. My wife and I are both ~7%ers? individually and we can barely afford our home (a tall skinny townhouse with no yard) and the cost of 1 baby. Having a family is hard here... Also, I don't find Seattle safe for infants and toddlers, or anybody rea…

Seattle is crazy expensive. It's why I moved to Tacoma half a decade ago. I was already working remotely anyways. Less money to own a 3k sqft home in a nice neighborhood (under $600k), and I can do a 45min or so reverse commute to Seattle for entertainment on weekdays. And Tacoma has a lot of great restaurants, bars, and entertainment itself too. I'm guessing there are lots of similar choices around Seattle. Or were…

Tacoma has gotten much much nicer over the past 20ish years and the aroma jokes are mostly vestigial at this point.

My best friend moved down there a few years ago (a family member sold them their house under-market and the price was too good to pass up). We all made our jokes but I’ve been down a lot and I actually really like it. It’s not that much harder to get to than west Seattle

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#166

Post by anal_reactor »

The biggest change is that for the first time in history it's easier to live alone than in a family. 100 years ago good luck trying to grow anything on a farm without any help, and most children were free labor that would later convert into free retirement care. Nowadays you don't need others for basic survival, and children are a huge liability. With a little bit of creativity you can live in a city yet go a month without talking to anyone, and still have your biological needs taken care of. So many people choose not to, because truth is, most people don't like each other, it's just that in the past they'd either somehow get along together, or die. Nowadays they don't have to.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#167

Post by anal_reactor »

siffl wrote: post #129
pfdietz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to a conclusion that the solution may be somewhat radical. If coupling is reduced, it should become the norm for women to have and raise children alone, or at least without a male partner. This increases the burden on women, so at the same time the number of children they must support would have to decrease. This could be achieved technologically, by filtering sperm to remove Y chromosome carrying gametes.…

Perhaps even more interesting in the near-future is the prospect of creating sperm, through technological means, from female cells. The research to do this seems to be close to succeeding - see e.g. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11601-bone-stem-cells... When researchers perfect this technique for humans, which they almost certainly will eventually, there will be no need for men at all. Women will be able to…

It's amazing that we'd rather consider eugenics than change our social norms

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#168

Post by missedthecue »

pfdietz wrote: post #21

Patrick Boyle has looked at causes of decline in the total fertility rate around the world and concluded reduction in the formation of couples (married or not) is a major cause. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ispyUPqqL1c

In 12,000+ years of anthropological record, there are zero advanced civilizations (defined as having written language, urban centers, and some form of state apparatus) that didn't have the institution of marriage. Zero.

I'm worried a lot about the declining rates of marriage and family formation. I don't see a lot of good that can come from it.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#169

Post by UtopiaPunk »

We're talking about Seattle because it is in the headline (the source is the Seattle Times). But there are 10 cities in the USA that have a higher percentage of "never-married single men." So this is a trend that is not unique to Seattle.

I just wanted to call that out since many of the comments seem focused on diagnosing what it is about Seattle specifically to lead to this trend.

IMO, it is mostly a housing issue. It seems like most new construction goes towards apartment complexes where the units are all 1-2 bedrooms, or else they go to more "luxury" big houses. I personally would love a 5 bedroom apartment in a dense, walkable city, but good luck finding it.

So I'm currently in the suburbs with my kids, even though I hate the suburbs.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#170

Post by pfdietz »

BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #140
pfdietz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to a conclusion that the solution may be somewhat radical. If coupling is reduced, it should become the norm for women to have and raise children alone, or at least without a male partner. This increases the burden on women, so at the same time the number of children they must support would have to decrease. This could be achieved technologically, by filtering sperm to remove Y chromosome carrying gametes.…

But like… why?

I don't want the human population to asymptotically go to zero.
Post reply on HN