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

The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

econofact.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 286 posts

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#231

Post by CalRobert »

louwrentius wrote: post #221
CalRobert wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't said anything about "the wrong kind of people having babies" and have been pro-immigration in another comment so I don't see how this has anything to do with what I said. Would 15 billion people be too many? 20 billion? Are we to imagine that Earth could support an infinite number of people? Because that seems like magical thinking to me. Though a different lifestyle (vegan, low energy consumption, etc.) wo…

The world can sustain the current number of people many times over in terms of food supply. Indeed based on sustainable (vegetarian/vegan) food. Talking about how many people can be sustained by earth is talking about the wrong thing. It only leads and HAS only lead to the eugenetics part. Because it's always poor people in different countries who gets sterilised. The real topic is that capitalism and consumerism is…

I still don't see how my comment specifically relating to reductions in the birth rate in the US (a rich country) perhaps becoming a trend for all humans is remotely similar to sterilizing poor people in different countries.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#232

Post by r00fus »

hardware2win wrote: post #58
red_admiral wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* (sociologic) fear of climate change (will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time) or commitment to make a small positive impact on climate change by not having kids I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change") but it's definitely a sentiment I've encountered.

>will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way And dont get me wrong - we arent climate change deniers, just... pick your battles Why waste your life worrying about something you have tiny impact on?

> I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way

Do you happen to remember the global wildfires/rivers drying up/massive heat waves in 2020? About a few billion people worldwide / 100m Americans sure do. A larger and larger portion of them are starting to understanding what the cause to that is and are acting accordingly.

Every year, we keep hearing how even the most aggressive estimates for climate change were underestimated. That's terrifying and existential to a lot of people including me.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#233

Post by tivert »

lapcat wrote: post #103
mihaic wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That feels actually anti-rational, since if the people that care about the environment stop having children that means the people that are passing on their life outlook are mostly ignorant of the environment. It must be a US thing more though, as I haven't personally heard people say fear of environmental damage to keep them from having kids.

> That feels actually anti-rational, since if the people that care about the environment stop having children that means the people that are passing on their life outlook are mostly ignorant of the environment. This assumes that parents successfully pass on their life outlook to their children, but if that were true then society would have never changed. I don't share the life outlook of my parents.

> This assumes that parents successfully pass on their life outlook to their children, but if that were true then society would have never changed.

> I don't share the life outlook of my parents.

So the climate "birth strike" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35973163) strategy would necessarily have to have two parts to be successful: 1) refuse to have kids, 2) indoctrinate many of the ones that remain to reject their parent's outlook and adopt the strikers' outlook (e.g. through control of the school curriculum). I would expect the second point to result in scenes like this, where a kid comes home from school mad at his a parents for having him in a world with climate change: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35973070.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#234

Post by AnimalMuppet »

mschuster91 wrote: post #223
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, but go back. We had the Cuban Missile Crisis, which came dangerously close to causing a nuclear war. Even after surviving that, we still lived under the threat of sudden nuclear death until about 1990. We also had massive inflation in the 1970s, combined with economic stagnation. We had inflation at 14% in 1970 (IIRC). We had the hollowing-out of American manufacturing - it started back then. We had a wave of Isl…

> We also had massive inflation in the 1970s, combined with economic stagnation. We had inflation at 14% in 1970 (IIRC). We had the hollowing-out of American manufacturing - it started back then. We had a wave of Islamic terrorism, we had oil crises. We had conditions that were, maybe not worse, but didn't appear all that much better. And yet, despite all of that, a blue collar wage was enough to own a home, a car fo…

Mostly fair. But some comments:

I'm not sure a blue-collar job in the 1970s got you two cars; I'm pretty sure it didn't in the 1950s. I'm not sure it got your kids through college without working, either.

Afghanistan and Iraq were in response to a later wave of Islamic terrorism. The earlier one got handled... I forget all the details, but I think there was some hunting down and killing of the responsible parties, and a (non-carpet) bombing of Libya.

Today, I think you can get a "halfway decent job" - or even a pretty good one - with a degree that is less than a "top degree".

So, overall you have at least something of a point. Leadership seemed a lot more competent then, and infighting was a lot less of an obstacle. But you're also looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses, and at the present with gloom-tinted ones.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#235

Post by tivert »

red_admiral wrote: post #46
throwaw12 wrote: post #23

> This decline cannot be explained by demographic, economic, or policy changes. I disagree with this statement. Put yourself in the shoes of 25 years old and ask why don't you want to have kids? * (economic) difficult to manage finances * (economic) can't buy house, too expensive * (economic) to compete with others in the workplace, I need to work >12 hours/day, can't do with kids or will be laid off. * (sociologic)…

* (sociologic) fear of climate change (will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time) or commitment to make a small positive impact on climate change by not having kids I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change") but it's definitely a sentiment I've encountered.

> I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change")

I would not use the "rationalist" community as a measure of what is rational.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#236

Post by r00fus »

throwaw12 wrote: post #30
throwaw12 wrote: post #23

> This decline cannot be explained by demographic, economic, or policy changes. I disagree with this statement. Put yourself in the shoes of 25 years old and ask why don't you want to have kids? * (economic) difficult to manage finances * (economic) can't buy house, too expensive * (economic) to compete with others in the workplace, I need to work >12 hours/day, can't do with kids or will be laid off. * (sociologic)…

* (sociologic) no trust in your partner (which is partly related to social networks and porn in some ways). they can divorce anytime, because it is easier to divorce than trying to resolve issues in the relationship, which will leave you as a single care taker of the kid, which creates 2 issues: (1) do you want to raise alone, making kid feel half family (2) can you actually raise alone with current demand at workpla…

> * (political) do politicians want to and policies support having kids? Like helping with healthcare when needed or should you spend 10k$ for simple things per kid?

They (conservative ones) seem to want to force births (against abortion & in some extreme cases, even contraception). But the followup on supporting kids is, like you said, not there.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#237

Post by crooked-v »

themaninthedark wrote: post #209
CalRobert wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had pretty stable temperatures from the dawn of civilization (the end of the last ice age) until about 30 years ago.

From 1300 ~ about 1700 there was a "little" ice age that cuased widespread famine and cultural disruption. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age Yes, the current temperature shift now is greater but it has been ongoing for a much shorter period of time.

> but it has been ongoing for a much shorter period of time

That's worse, not better! https://xkcd.com/1732/

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#238

Post by david38 »

taylodl wrote: post #226
colpabar wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increased/unlimited immigration seems like their preferred solution to the labor shortage problem. So what if a country's population are refusing to work, just bring in people who are used to worse and pay them less than those pesky citizens.

Then why do these same people complain so much about being "invaded" from the Southern border? Seeing as how I see them as both xenophobic and racist I see their real fear is the precipitous drop in white women having children. They want labor, and they want it to be white. American, at a minimum.

Because people want to do many of these jobs, but at a livable wage?

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#239

Post by david38 »

withinboredom wrote: post #74
hardware2win wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way And dont get me wrong - we arent climate change deniers, just... pick your battles Why waste your life worrying about something you have tiny impact on?

Before having a child, it was something I thought about and my wife and I would occasionally discuss. Now my son asks, "How can you do this to me? You've screwed up our planet and there is nothing I can do for at least ten years," (direct quote after coming home from school yesterday -- he's 9). Our kids are worried about it, more so than our generation, that's for sure.

If your son is talking like that, it’s a strong signal you haven’t properly put things in perspective for him. The world has always been horrible in one way or another. Go ahead. Pick a time.

This is a 100% attitude and filtering issue.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#240

Post by revelio »

withinboredom wrote: post #74
hardware2win wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way And dont get me wrong - we arent climate change deniers, just... pick your battles Why waste your life worrying about something you have tiny impact on?

Before having a child, it was something I thought about and my wife and I would occasionally discuss. Now my son asks, "How can you do this to me? You've screwed up our planet and there is nothing I can do for at least ten years," (direct quote after coming home from school yesterday -- he's 9). Our kids are worried about it, more so than our generation, that's for sure.

That's clearly ideological brainwashing and you should take it up with the head teacher. It's not only factual nonsense to believe what your son is saying, but also dangerous. You definitely don't want him to be added to the ranks of the "i killed myself to save the planet" brigade.
Post reply on HN