Live data from Hacker News

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

derekthompson.org

501–510 of 927 posts

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

#501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortions will happen regardless, they will just cause more deaths, look at the era where Romania banned abortion. Doesn’t seem like the winning solution is to apply policies that directly reduce the amount of people that _can_ give birth

abortion kills women who will give birth in the future. It's not just one killing is potential killing of many future people who don't get to exist.

Correct, so the further up the tree of parenthood you go, the higher the impact, which is why it’s important to have safe access to abortion.

Romania’s abortion policy killed north of 200,000 women that died to at home abortions going wrong

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

#502

The tiny period of time that allowed some men in the wealthiest parts of the world to purchase property and support a family of 4+ on a single salary was an anomaly. It was a macroeconomic fluke, forever lost to the specific place and time that allowed it to briefly flourish. There's a chance a highly-automated future could reduce our neccesary working hours to those boomtime levels. But the one thing that will absol…

Saying it was a fluke discounts the hard work and sacrifice it took. It didn’t happen accidentally. It took raw will and courage to wrestle the social fabric into something more equitable. And without continued effort from those who came later it’s being unwound.

Hard work had little to do with it. A unique set of factors generated a historic economic boom that was briefly able to sustain a uniquely prosperous lifestyle for some Westerners. It came unwound because it was never sustainable.

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

#503
The current US TFR would be more than enough to grow the population if the female to male ratio of births were sufficiently skewed. In the limit of a mostly female population, a TFR of just above 1 is enough to sustain the population.

So perhaps the problem isn't increasing the number of births per woman, but rather increasing the fraction of the population that are women. Women already do better than men in college; perhaps if women are perceived as having better economic prospects, and if technical means of choosing the sex of children were available, parents would tend to choose female children.

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

#504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s strange to see that anecdote so highly upvoted when it’s so trivial to look at birth rates by parental age. Reduced teen pregnancies are not the driving factor in recent fertility rate declines at all. It is interesting how an appeal to emotion with a difficult story can lead so many to overlook the obvious shortcomings in that explanation. Honestly this entire comment section has a lot of people making guesses…

> Honestly this entire comment section has a lot of people making guesses or putting forth their own theories without having even skimmed the article. its a microcosm of our entire political discourse as of late imo: everyone is talking anecdotes and feels and barely anyone is bringing the receipts (and if they do its barely noticed)

But people's anecdotes are part of their life experience. I trust my personal life experience over anything I read, and if I trust a person, I value theirs over anything I read too.

That's just how humans are.

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

#505

Why not pay women a competitive (not $10/hr) salary for raising a child, collected from taxes from people who don't have children under 18? To make building a family more profitable than working a job. It seems that politicians (calling for ban of abortions) want to have a cake and not pay for it.

For example, a Russian millionaire, Pavel Durov has 5 children, although it seems that they are raised by his ex-girlfriends. Once there is enough money, problem is solved.

> has 5 children

You forgot a couple of 0s

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c77v4x8g7pro

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

#506
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…

I like being a parent much more than being a breadwinner. Working in an office, commuting, sitting in front of a computer, climbing the ladder, meetings, deadlines, office politics, fighting for promotions and raises and bonuses, OKRs and KPIs, insane pivots to chase fads, the constant fear of layoffs hanging over your head... It sucks. The only rewarding part is coming home to my partner and child.

I much prefer cooking, cleaning, and parenting. I would choose being a full-time parent in a heartbeat over my career if I had the option. But due to my particular skills, my earning potential is much higher than my partner's. It wouldn't make much sense for us. So I slog it out so we can afford what we need. She works too, but not full-time.

But so much of what you talk about is foreign to me. My partner and I have no concept of "my own money" vs "my partner's money"; it all goes into a joint account that we both control and we trust each other to spend wisely. And yeah of course we both share the housework and childraising (because that's table stakes for an egalitarian relationship). I don't just come home from work and play video games or something. Seeing my kid grow, play, and copy me is the biggest external validation I could ask for.

If you value your income more than your kids, then you either shouldn't have kids, or you should marry someone who prioritizes domestic work and parenting over their career. But then don't think they're not pulling their weight just because they earn less than you.

That said, I think if the government wants to encourage more babies, it should pay a basic income to stay-at-home parents, something perhaps comparable to the cost of daycare. Then maybe people like you won't consider it unpaid labor anymore and it will become a more respected option.

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

#507
post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Underrated comment right here. When the baseline belief in society goes from “make it work” to “better to end the pregnancy” it shouldn’t be surprising that overall the number of birth goes way down.

The US sees about 20K teen pregnancy abortions. That's probably not why the number of births is way down. Number of births in the US are ~3.6M right now. We also have 1M abortions per year. That's - if abortions were the sole problem - 4.6M births / 330M people. Except... It was 4.3M births / 177M people in 1960. Double the current rate. It dropped off sharply right after the 1960s. Not coincidentally right when the…

No telling what contraceptives have contributed.

We didn't really use contraceptives and we had three "oopses". Those three oopses are pretty awesome.

Nothing like a kid to help you get your head out of your ass. Probably why people report feeling happier, because you can't think about the stupid stuff you used to worry about.

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

#508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly this entire comment section has a lot of people making guesses or putting forth their own theories without having even skimmed the article. its a microcosm of our entire political discourse as of late imo: everyone is talking anecdotes and feels and barely anyone is bringing the receipts (and if they do its barely noticed)

But people's anecdotes are part of their life experience. I trust my personal life experience over anything I read, and if I trust a person, I value theirs over anything I read too. That's just how humans are.

I get it, you like stories of individuals. We should figure out a way you can listen to more stories, so you can form an even better opinion! Perhaps we write them out, shorten them a bit. Or perhaps group them by similarity. And then if we count the types of story per category… and boom, we’ve invented statistics!

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

#509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying it was a fluke discounts the hard work and sacrifice it took. It didn’t happen accidentally. It took raw will and courage to wrestle the social fabric into something more equitable. And without continued effort from those who came later it’s being unwound.

Hard work had little to do with it. A unique set of factors generated a historic economic boom that was briefly able to sustain a uniquely prosperous lifestyle for some Westerners. It came unwound because it was never sustainable.

The cause and effect might be the other way around. When capital relaxes its grip on your neck a bit and when it loosens its fingers just a bit, people naturally produce more and there's more surplus for everyone. The economy is just human sweat and no one wants to sweat just to see their output go overwhelmingly to people who, basically by fluke and moral flexibility, control capital.

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

#510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were really selfish, then they'd stop being parents. It's not selfish to say that something you're going through is hard or sucks if you're still putting in the work.

I think there's a strong argument to be made that people choosing to not have children far less selfish as far as ecological damage is concerned. The thing with the most impact to climate and environment is without a doubt, people. People having kids are selfish.

The answer is not for there to be less people--less youth and vitality in the world--or to deny anyone the right to have children (within limits. You can't just be plopping out 5 kids if you're a broke fuckwit).
Post reply on HN