Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood? • Hacker News Board

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#281

Post by lolinder » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:43 AM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #277

hmcq6 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're misconstruing what census.gov says. If you look into the "definitions" section it defines "Housing Unit. A housing unit is a house, an apartment, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters." and "Householder. The householder refers to the person (or one of the persons) in whose name the housing unit is owned or rented [...]" 49% of people aged 30-34 aren't…

> 49% of people aged 30-34 aren't homeowners, 49% of us are homeowners or renters. Wait, this is saying less than 50% of people aged 30-34 live in a home that is owned or rented by them (or their spouse)? I can't imagine a region where this is close to true, since probably near 100% where I live either own or rent. Is there a regional breakdown for this? And where do these people live? With their parents or in a shel…

They're wrong, they got confused because the header column on the data is labeled "age of householder". This is because the data is the ratio of householders who own their homes to total householders, broken down by the age of the householder.

The title of the tables I'm looking at are "Homeownership rates by Age of Householder", which makes it pretty clear what they mean.

https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/qtr423/tab7.xlsx

https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab19.xlsx

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#282

Post by anon84873628 » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:43 AM UTC

xyzelement wrote: post #185

dotnet00 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would only make sense if the issue was biological and not socioeconomic. No one's getting selected out when the issue isn't a biological predisposition to avoiding procreation.

I genuinely haven’t met anyone who deeply wanted children and then didn’t because of “socioeconomics”. I met plenty of ppl who talk about the climate or cost of housing as the reason for other ppl but I never knew of anyone making a decision this way. You know someone?

The people who "deeply want children" are going to do it anyway. I think the majority of people to whom this discussion apples, have vague ideas that kids "would be nice", but simply don't prioritize it enough to overcome the said socioeconomic hurdles. So inasmuch as they are just deciding not to accept the necessary tradeoffs (e.g. move somewhere cheaper and less appealing) it is a bit of a disingenuous excuse or self delusional. However I still think it is fair to point out that the higher cost floor on kids simply makes it lower ROI.

I think we should also recognize the the generation in question might have difficulty with relationships. Having kids means finding a partner bought into the idea too and taking the leap. It seems people aren't figuring that out until much later.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#283

Post by TFYS » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:44 AM UTC

dotnet00 wrote: post #182

xyzelement wrote: post #141

I was lucky that my wife convinced me to move close to her family (it would have never occurred to me.) Now we live just a few doors down from her brother who's got 4 kids, and we have 2. Watching the cousins intermingle is an amazing and unique experience. It's kinda sad but it's also obvious that people are majorly missing out. On having kids, on living close to family, on all of it. Ironically, this is evolution i…

That would only make sense if the issue was biological and not socioeconomic. No one's getting selected out when the issue isn't a biological predisposition to avoiding procreation.

It is biological. Before birth control the desire to have sex was enough to make sure enough kids were had. Socioeconomic circumstances didn't really matter. Unless you were on the brink of starvation, you wanted to have sex. Now that that's no longer enough to produce kids, we need a new biological reason to make kids. That could be resistance to birth control or a stronger natural desire to have kids, not just sex.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#284

Post by steve1977 » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:45 AM UTC

smallmancontrov wrote: post #100

beaned wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't a more difficult undertaking. It was never easy, we've just been raised softly and do not value children the same way previous generations did. An outlier in many places, but not most. Only in the Western first world is this now normal.

> Only in the Western first world is this now normal It ain't just us, my friend. Births Per Woman: 1.64 USA 1.34 Japan 1.28 China 0.84 Korea > we've just been raised softly and do not value children Now that women are part of the formal economy and everyone has options for entertainment other than unprotected sex, the mechanism by which the formal economy used to offload the entire cost of child rearing while reapin…

One could argue that women being part of the formal economy is also out of an exploitative playbook.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#285

Post by swells34 » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:45 AM UTC

dotnet00 wrote: post #219

xyzelement wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see. I didn’t mean literal genetic evolution. Cultural if you will. Parents who fail to instill love and desire of family into their kids won’t get to be grandparents. A few decades ago maybe you could take it for granted “everyone ends up having kids” now it obviously is a dead end unless you really help your kids through it. It feels to me like the next generation will have parents who will be intentional about t…

I don't think so, their kids are not robots that can be programmed, they will still choose based on if/when they think they're able to provide for kids. It'd take regression back to a society where women are considered to have no value outside of being child factories, for parents to be able to indoctrinate their kids into reproducing with no concern for how good of a life they can actually give those kids.

I'm seeing quite a few comments here that hint they'd like to see exactly that, a regression back to "the good old days".

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#286

Post by skissane » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:45 AM UTC

NoPicklez wrote: post #253

lolinder wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unnecessarily confrontational and inaccurate. According to census.gov, the current national homeownership rate is hovering at about 66%, which is about the same rate that it's been (+/- 3%) since they started tracking in 1964 [0][1]. This isn't restricted to old people either: 49% of 30 to 34 year olds and 58% of 35 to 39 year olds owned a home in Q4 2023 [2]. There are certainly regional differences in housi…

Whilst I don't disagree with you. That doesn't mean those with mortgages aren't struggling to pay. Also if true, that is insane that the average american lives in a home that they own by the time they're 35. That is so far and wide not the case here in Australia. Here in Australia, we don't have fixed rate mortgages for the life of the mortgage we have variable and fixed upto around 1-5 years. Our interest rates have…

> Here in Australia

Australia has made a bunch of home-ownership-unfriendly decisions which the US hasn't – e.g. in the US you get a mortgage interest deduction on your primary residence, in Australia you only get it on investment properties (joint filing for married couples, which the US has but Australia doesn't, also helps here); in the US owner-occupier mortgages are normally no-recourse, in Australia they are almost always full recourse; US government policy encourages long-term fixed interest mortgages, the Australian government has no comparable policy

Some of it is also geography – Australia is very centralised, with most people living on the coast. Each state has its population dominated by a single metro area which also serves as the state capital – quite unlike the US where majority of the time the state capital is outside the state's largest metro area.

Australia's comparative lack of rainfall inland is a factor, but political culture, and hence decisions by politicians, also plays a big part – suppose NSW moved its capital to (say) Dubbo or Bathurst? Many government jobs would leave Sydney, followed by many consulting/etc jobs which provide services to the government - right now, central and western NSW has plenty of affordable housing, but a big shortage of jobs providing incomes to pay for that housing. Never going to happen: it would require a degree of originality and thinking outside the box of which Australian politicians are constitutionally incapable.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#287

Post by petersellers » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:47 AM UTC

bruhbruh78 wrote: post #86

bongodongobob wrote: post #75

You're baffled people aren't having kids? What bubble do you live in? People straight up can't afford housing much less children. The avg American is completely priced out of owning a home right now. Edit: the replies - y'all are out of touch. Visit an average family in the Midwest with a household income of < $100k/yr that doesn't own a home yet.

[flagged]

Let's put aside for a moment your extremely broad characterization of the behavior of "all parents".

Do you not think that society should have an interest in ensuring that children are properly nurtured, educated, cared for, etc.?

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#288

Post by nyokodo » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:48 AM UTC

remarkEon wrote: post #265

voidfunc wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't have any interest in kids. They're expensive and they require a ton of sacrifice. I'd rather travel, golf, do hobbies and generally enjoy my life. The only people that seem to want me to have babies are my parents so they can have grand kids... too which I've told them "Thank you for having me, but that's not a valid reason for me to sacrifice my life". I don't really care about the preservation of the h…

Whenever I encounter this attitude I like to remind that person that they should have no voice, whatsoever, in what happens in government and politics anymore. I don't want people who are self-selecting themselves out of the future having any say in what happens for my children. It's fine that you don't want kids, enjoy the golf course I guess. But in general I will discount your opinions to zero on anything else of…

> I will discount your opinions to zero on anything else of consequence

I’d settle for a much higher tax rate for the voluntarily childless to very inadequately offset the lack of contributing to the next generation. Probably the best way to implement this is that the child tax credit should be much bigger.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#289

Post by kenjackson » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:48 AM UTC

voidfunc wrote: post #199

atomicnumber3 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm baffled my peers , who absolutely could afford to, still have no interest. These are people making 150-200k (and at my prior job, 200-400k).

I just don't have any interest in kids. They're expensive and they require a ton of sacrifice. I'd rather travel, golf, do hobbies and generally enjoy my life. The only people that seem to want me to have babies are my parents so they can have grand kids... too which I've told them "Thank you for having me, but that's not a valid reason for me to sacrifice my life". I don't really care about the preservation of the h…

Thank you for not having kids!

That said, while they do require some sacrifice, at least for myself -- it has been by far the most enjoyable part of my life so far.

Re: Cousins are disappearing. Is this reshaping the experience of childhood?

#290

Post by vundercind » Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:49 AM UTC

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #257

vundercind wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kids aren't expensive. They're a distraction from dopamine and career advancement. They really are. You can pay for some of it by letting your and their quality of life suffer, instead of with money (cram 3 kids into the 2-bedroom you already own; don’t worry that the schools are bad and dangerous and that’s why the place was cheap; that kind of thing) but not all of it, and most people don’t find making those comp…

> They really are. I'm 50 this year. I've been an avid reader all my life, and back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, I'd read the newspapers my grandfather would bring home. I would've still been in highschool (at the latest), so call this 1990 +/- 1 year. Even then I remember the classic newspaper article, claiming how much it'd cost to raise a child to age 18. I think back then they were calling that number $250,…

I have three kids. I reckon the first cost more than $200,000 by age 5. No major medical problems (kids are also a reverse lottery ticket, in that regard—sometimes they just take all your money indefinitely because they’ve got a serious chronic illness). And we were far from extravagant in our spending. The bulk of it was in the three categories I listed.

[edit] I agree with you, actually, that there are a lot of dumb ways to spend extra money on kids. Dressers? Used. Clothes? Cheap, garage sales and thrift stores. Toys? Ditto. Half the “new parent” shit is useless. Changing table? ROFLMAO you have a floor, unless you’re infirm in some way that makes it hard to get down there, just throw a little blanket down and use that—they can’t roll off the floor!