The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007 • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by generic92034 » Wed, May 17, 2023, 7:08 PM UTC

tivert wrote: post #255

generic92034 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so. I do not think this is a generally true notion. There are so many people living in precarious circumstances in large parts of Africa, Asia and South America. But the highest population growth is right there. Maybe there is some truth to the notion in developed countries.

>> Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so. > I do not think this is a generally true notion. There are so many people living in precarious circumstances in large parts of Africa, Asia and South America. But the highest population growth is right there. Yes, but wealthy technological society enables it, because moder…

Birth control, yes, but also the existence of credible pension plans. If your survival in your old age solely depends on the family you probably tend to make sure there are several candidates for sustaining you.

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

#262

Post by taylodl » Wed, May 17, 2023, 7:12 PM UTC

colpabar wrote: post #259

taylodl wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they all Republican? No. Mostly Republican? Very likely, based off what we know and observe.

> what we know and observe We're getting pretty in the weeds on this tangent here, so I will just say that it's obvious that "we" "know and observe" different things which is why "we" disagree on certain things. You're not "right", you just believe you are, just like everyone else. Including me! "what we know and observe" is completely subjective and meaningless on its own.

> You're not "right", you just believe you are, just like everyone else. Including me!

Well then, we're both right! :)

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

#263

Post by bryanlarsen » Wed, May 17, 2023, 7:31 PM UTC

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.

The "same people" probably want lots of immigration to staff their factories with cheap labor, but they want the Republicans in power because they want lower taxes et al. And the way to keep the Republicans in power is through racist xenophobia.

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

#264

Post by louwrentius » Wed, May 17, 2023, 8:30 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #231

louwrentius wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> and gradually find equilibrium at a more sustainable population.

You talk about "sustainable population", there's nothing not to understand about this. Sustainable implies it's now unsustainable, but that notion isn't true.

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

#265

Post by mytailorisrich » Wed, May 17, 2023, 8:32 PM UTC

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…

If we must all become vegeterian/vegan then to me that proves that the planet is currently overpopulated. In my view a sustainable population level is one that does not require drastic measures because ultimately we want the best quality of life we can have and not live like in a dystopian movie.

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

#266

Post by revelio » Wed, May 17, 2023, 8:56 PM UTC

withinboredom wrote: post #257

revelio wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what were these "lots of things" that led to him concluding the world is now ruined by you, his parent? Cuz I definitely don't recall anything like that being on the curriculum when I was a kid. No, pretty sure he concluded exactly what his teachers wanted him to conclude. Nine year olds are not famous for their critical thinking and deep research skills.

> Nine year olds are not famous for their critical thinking and deep research skills. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35975422 > No, pretty sure he concluded exactly what his teachers wanted him to conclude. Do you know us IRL or something?

The whole thing hangs on (2) which he isn't in any position to critically evaluate. No kid would be.

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

#267

Post by revelio » Wed, May 17, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

tivert wrote: post #256

revelio wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't ringfence pension payments if by ringfence you mean just store them in a savings account. Inflation would destroy the saved money completely, so the funds have to be invested. In turn those investments have to yield enough to cover both inflation and expected investment losses, whilst still yielding enough to pay out reliably over the average expected lifespan post retirement. Unfortunately if you do the nu…

> You can't ringfence pension payments if by ringfence you mean just store them in a savings account. Inflation would destroy the saved money completely, so the funds have to be invested. In turn those investments have to yield enough to cover both inflation and expected investment losses, whilst still yielding enough to pay out reliably over the average expected lifespan post retirement. Or just cut to the chase, an…

That's a much better way to phrase it, yes.

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

#268

Post by theironhammer » Wed, May 17, 2023, 9:22 PM UTC

DonsDiscountGas wrote: post #181

pjc50 wrote: post #12

The other day someone was complaining about too many people in the housing thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35962521 The two are linked. Having children is at least partly an economic choice. People have spent decades working against "teen moms" and "single parents" and "welfare queens". Everyone is very clear that you must not have children unless you can comfortably afford to do so. And not just now, th…

It's not necessary to pay for other peoples housing, all that is necessary is to repeal absurd zoning laws and ridiculous bureaucracy that makes building such things 100x more expensive (if it's even possible) than they need to be.

Those houses will just get snapped up by investors.

By all means build but you also need laws to prevent houses from being snapped up by those who don't intend to live them.

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

#269

Post by than3 » Wed, May 17, 2023, 10:34 PM UTC

berberous wrote: post #153

than3 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't forget education is expensive, and quite a few have received funding in predatory lending ways where the debt cannot be discharged in bankruptcy without even receiving the degree. you need to marry, be debt free, and have a down payment (20% of 700k is 140k down) for a house to have kids. Kids need to happen before 35 for your wife; mortality increases greatly after that. You need 2 with modern medicine, or 4 c…

You think you need two children for one to make it to 18?

Yes, its not a belief, its simple risk management perspective.

You need at least two with modern medicine. You have a limited time period to have children, after which you can't have more without significant consequence, and you won't know ahead of time about the risks or need.

There are increasing mortality rates, and increasing unmanageable risks (i.e. regulation, and other aspects of government working against parents).

If you want your family line to continue and survive, you need at least 2 children, if not 4 or more. 4 is better.

There is cost, but that's what needs to be possible that no one talks about. That actuarial all death discrepancy during the pandemic is most likely attributed to lack of general availability of medical care during that time. The risks change without notice. During the pandemic, in my role supporting our IT support staff (System Engineers helping overflows) I heard from people across the country.

Some families were nearly wiped out, imagine if 3/4 of your family died and it was a large family. One man I spoke with was just crazy with grief, he had to help with funeral arrangements for eight of his family members in the span of a few weeks.

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

#270

Post by caeril » Wed, May 17, 2023, 11:43 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #218

abenga wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, the probability of dying while a child in the US is minuscule (about 35 in 100,000 from the first source cited)? Hardly enough to have an additional child to make the expected number out of the two at 19 to be 1 child.

It's still way too high - once a week there's some sort of shooting incident in the US [1], and that doesn't include all the other mass shooting incidents in general society [2], nor the shooting incidents that don't kill multiple people. Frankly, for me as an European, these numbers are insane - and the worst thing is, even after outright massacres nothing changes. It's one thing if society learns something from inc…

School shootings are a rounding error in the youth homicide statistics, but they definitely make for good cable news coverage.

The elephant in the room is inner-city, largely gang-related violence. Stopping those kids from obtaining firearms by restricting legal purchases makes about as much sense as keeping criminals away from encryption by restricting E2E encryption on WhatsApp.

For some reason, Hacker News thinks the former is absolutely possible, despite knowing the latter is not. Weird.