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

What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

derekthompson.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 927 posts

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#161

Post by itake »

My $0.02 is being a mom sucks.

In modern relationships, men just want to work and come home to a cooked meal and clean house, but their wives are working just as many hours the men are. Having kids means tension in relationship, unpaid labor by the woman, and stress parenting kids. Even if the husband steps up, he still can't breast feed for 3 hours per day.

Pregnancy is really terrible on the woman's body. Post-partem disorders, child birth problems, its just not nice.

Then when you finally get back to your career after 3 months - 5 years, you're passed on promotions, you're n-months behind your peers, and you just don't have the time to hustle for a promotion if you're time is consumed raising kids.

Or if you choose not to have kids, you get financially rewarded for your time. You get more professional responsibility and career development. You get external validation for your hard work (bonuses, promotions, etc). You get full control of your own money, without needing to negotiate spending your partner's money. You get to live in a better location, because smaller places are more affordable near your work. You don't have a 1+ hour commute to your job.

Being a mom just sucks.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#162

Post by Der_Einzige »

qq66 wrote: post #154
supportengineer wrote: post #141

I have two teenagers and they are wonderful. But the world is NOT the same anymore. In the current moment, I would really think twice before bringing any more kids into this world. I feel sorry for everyone coming of age at this time. The world got very bad very quickly. There's no jobs, no one can afford a house, healthcare, or retirement, and the climate is toast.

Of the 110 billion people to have ever been born, maybe 2 billion have been born into more comfortable circumstances than the median child born in the United States today.

That’s an argument for antinatalism, not an argument for how good it is today.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#163

Post by Animats »

Well, let's see how it works for Russia. Russia has a 1.41 fertility rate (2.1 is breakeven). Plus Russia has lost somewhere around a million soldiers so far in Ukraine. Deaths outnumber births by 1.6 to 1. They need fresh meat for the grinder.[1]

Current steps being taken include:

- Emphasizing family values via the Russian Orthodox Church

- Restricting abortion, which was cheap and easy in the USSR days

- Encourage teenage pregnancy (there's a "Pregnant at 15" TV show)

- Encouraging immigration

So far, it's not working much.

[1] https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/russia-might-be-losing-1...

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#164

Post by floren »

triceratops wrote: post #158
bpbp-mango wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a ridiculous attitude. The world will always have problems you cannot control. People have been having babies in all sorts of adversity for all of history.

> People have been having babies in all sorts of adversity for all of history But they didn't know how screwed they were.

I think literal chattel slaves knew they were pretty bad off but they still had kids.

(If you implied sarcasm I apologize, it's extremely hard to tell when dealing with HN posters)

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#165

Post by yumlogic »

Relative stability, focus on family, growth, men as head of household, minimal single parent families, women spending time with their kids.

Raising kids is a full time job. I am doing both as a father and also as a founder. My wife does not work, does minimal contribution here and there. I dont know where she spends time but she is unavailable. I would rather do it myself than keep fighting.

I think from population front we are not going to have baby boom anytime in next 30 years. Technology will create more isolation than ever. Laws never favor men.

India, most populous country, recently dropped birth rates below replacement level. That is probably most fertile land (for food and reproduction) and yet they are falling behind.

I think unless we see dramatic change in policies worldwide (not going to happen) that puts men and families as center of policy making, it will be all doom from here.

Come back in 30-50 years when new generation is in charge and thinking patterns change.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#166

Post by endtime »

mcoliver wrote: post #50

Having children younger. This builds villages and generates the community flywheel. The problem now is that it's close to impossible for the vast majority of younger people to buy a home with a single income. So the choice becomes dual income and farm out the raising of your children (requires even more money and negates the benefits of enjoying your children which is part of the reason to have them in the first plac…

In terms of incentives, Hungary has attempted this with tax policy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_policy_in_Hungary

Seems to be working!

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#167

Post by Der_Einzige »

Aurornis wrote: post #45
bdavbdav wrote: post #19

(Purely anecdotally, my own and my peers experience) We’re seeing educated people waiting longer in life to have children. Fertility drops, assistance from older generations drops, the village has gone, nursery and care prices are ridiculously high, support from the government (UK) is a bit of a farce if you’re earning anything more than a living wage in cities, the opportunity cost of a parent putting a (more develo…

> this, however people know what the sacrifices are, and very understandably don’t want to make them. My anecdote: As a parent, when I talk to people my same age or younger without children they often greatly overestimate the sacrifices necessary to have children. I can’t tell you how many times I've heard people (who don’t have children) make wild claims like having children means you won’t have good sleep for the n…

The parents might be fine but the kids aren’t. I got my great programmer job entirely because of anger that my family was and continues to be in relatively bottom feeder jobs. The trauma associated with living in even relative poverty compared to your peers is hard to overstate.

Being a parent is a selfish decision - full stop. Antinatalism becoming socially acceptable is entirely due to an authentic ethic of compassion that the older generation and parents have abjectly failed to embody.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#168

Post by louwrentius »

t1234s wrote: post #31

You would need an economy where the average man can work and provide a life for his stay-at-home wife to raise the 3-4 kids at a decent living standard.

We really don’t need this kind of sexist attitude on HN in 2025.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#169

Post by PakistaniDenzel »

itake wrote: post #161

My $0.02 is being a mom sucks. In modern relationships, men just want to work and come home to a cooked meal and clean house, but their wives are working just as many hours the men are. Having kids means tension in relationship, unpaid labor by the woman, and stress parenting kids. Even if the husband steps up, he still can't breast feed for 3 hours per day. Pregnancy is really terrible on the woman's body. Post-part…

No - being a mom and having to work full time sucks. Being a full time mom probably isn't that bad.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#170

Post by MisterTea »

0_____0 wrote: post #29
bdavbdav wrote: post #19

(Purely anecdotally, my own and my peers experience) We’re seeing educated people waiting longer in life to have children. Fertility drops, assistance from older generations drops, the village has gone, nursery and care prices are ridiculously high, support from the government (UK) is a bit of a farce if you’re earning anything more than a living wage in cities, the opportunity cost of a parent putting a (more develo…

Costs $2500-4000/mo for infant care where I am. On top of a $3000/mo mortgage. NE USA. When I see a family of 5 my first thought is "holy fuck they must be loaded." Either that or they have one parent who cannot be employed outside the home.

> Costs $2500-4000/mo for infant care where I am.

That's what grandparents are for. Growing up my immediate family lived in the same neighborhood. My mother's parents lived two blocks away and walked over. My fathers parents lived ~15 minutes away. Everyone worked locally. Baby sitters were always named grandma :-)

Now you have to move across the country for a lucrative tech job, leaving behind your support network. You either plan for these things or deal with the consequences. Though I have a feeling many young tech oriented people starting their careers dont have family on their minds...

And lastly, it depends on where you live. An ex military friend moved to a shitty town in PA to be near his mother and sister and bought a hose using the GI bill. He has a federal job, five kids and a stay at home wife. Pretty wild to have a family of seven these days but he is happy and doing good. Family support helps big time.

Post reply on HN