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

Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 432 posts

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#361

Post by stingraycharles »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #49
stingraycharles wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not, and it may be my lack of understanding, but I don’t think taking care of babies during a meeting is a good thing. Unless you and I have very different types of meetings, the ones I have are usually short and focused and I would be very annoyed if someone was constantly interrupted or distracted (just like I would be if someone is constantly checking their phone).

I guess the question is would you rather have this employee that is sometimes distracted or no one at all.

That’s a very good question actually, I didn’t think about it like that, and it changes my mind on the subject a bit. Thanks for that.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#362

Post by hirvi74 »

purpleblue wrote: post #233
dilap wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're breastfeeding, it's gotta be the woman. And ideally, you are breastfeeding. Beyond that, most women strongly want to be with their babies. There was a NYT article a few years back about the boom of internet baby monitors, and it was kind of heartbreaking -- a bunch of women sitting at their desks glued to their baby monitors wishing they could be with their babies. I think we've really fucked up as a societ…

Breastfeeding is overhyped. Both my sibling and I, along with my wife and her siblings were formula fed. My kids were 100% formula-fed as well, because my wife decided she didn't want to waste her time pumping. Both generations are perfectly normal and healthy. We all caught COVID with only minimal symptoms. Not having to breastfeed took an enormous amount of stress off my wife, and allowed us to split the work of ra…

> We all caught COVID with only minimal symptoms.

I find this to be a bizarre metric to use.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#363

Post by namecheapTA »

WalterBright wrote: post #359
namecheapTA wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I wouldn't call a miscommunication between a handshake deal with multiple people and departments involved and the next day the exact same as a "term sheet ruse" which implies there are games being played on the actual term sheet in front of you. I would say in many industries there are terms on the final documents that don't always exactly match what earlier communications, and yes it's important to make sure they…

I understand that clerical errors and miscommunication happen. I make those mistakes myself. But when they always err in favor of the dealer, I get suspicious. > I still wonder how you made it to the paperwork stage without seeing the car and noticing it wasn't exactly 'new new' I foolishly had not checked the odometer. I assumed that if the salesman said it was new, that it was new. Anyhow, on noticing the mileage o…

4. You said final paperwork previously.

I'm not going to bother responding to the rest as it's clear there's some misremembering or exaggeration going on here.

In my experience, the things you are describing are very rare, and even more rarely intentional. Why they keep happening to you, idk.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#364

Post by namecheapTA »

ethbr0 wrote: post #343
namecheapTA wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can buy any car in America using the Tesla model. Just call them, tell them you'll pay asking price (just like Tesla requires) and tell them you want it delivered to your house with the paperwork. I have done this countless times, even for people negotiating a discount.

Also, you can generally call any dealership and ask to speak to the internet sales / fleet department. They're usually (at least at Ford) compensated on volume-moved-above-minimum, not profit-per-vehicle.

They are definitely compensated via a gross profit commission split just like others at the dealership. They do have volume bonuses to make up for the fact that most of their deals will be low or no profit, but if you inquire on the internet about buying a rare model, it's not like they're going to discount it drastically and get a low commission... It's a rare model after all.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#365

Post by tsol »

klipt wrote: post #300
yamtaddle wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, in the US there are tax credits, SNAP, etc. None of these even come close to replacing the life income changes. Our three kids are gonna cost us at least half a million dollars by the time they're all 18, between lost income, daycare costs, higher housing costs (not just a bigger house to maintain a similar comfort level, but also one in a much more expensive area than we might otherwise live in, since we have…

> Kids are basically financial suicide unless you're crazy-rich. Or if you're very poor, then the more kids you have, the more you receive in benefits. Many poor people manage to have more kids than middle class people. The middle class parent thinks "if I have another kid how will I pay for their college?" The poor parent just sends their kids to community college or if they're amazingly brilliant and get into Harva…

The higher the financial class, the more resources in general are poured in to molding each child. It certainly helps to give them a better chance on average than their peers

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#366

Post by tsol »

magicink81 wrote: post #310
rajin444 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> women have stepped up for their families often to the detriment of their own careers Forcing 2 household incomes was/is awful for a healthy society. Women are the only humans that can produce children and they have to do it during a relatively short time window - especially if we want to reproduce at replacement level. Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because th…

On this topic, Gabor Mate and Gordon Neufeld wrote the book I wish I had read before our daughter was born: Hold Onto Your Kids [1]. Thesis: Strong attachment to a parent or caretaker is foundational for human development - neurological, physiological, and psychological - the whole body, mind, and spirit. The impacts of years 0-5 cannot be overstated. Based on the findings presented in the book, if both parents want…

>Be comfortable that your child will be more attached to this person, and love them at least a little bit more, than they love you.

People want to have their cake and eat it too, and I suspect by the animosity a lot of younger people have for the older generation that it isn't working out as well as they'd hoped.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#367

Post by tsol »

thefz wrote: post #282
rajin444 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> women have stepped up for their families often to the detriment of their own careers Forcing 2 household incomes was/is awful for a healthy society. Women are the only humans that can produce children and they have to do it during a relatively short time window - especially if we want to reproduce at replacement level. Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because th…

> Forcing 2 household incomes was/is awful for a healthy society. This is as backwards as saying that women should not work and care for the house. If a woman wants to work and build a career let her, and if a couple wants to DINK, let them. Replacement level is a myth and a danger in a world choking up with our waste. > Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because th…

>This is as backwards as saying that women should not work and care for the house. If a woman wants to work and build a career let her, and if a couple wants to DINK, let them.

And if a woman wants to be a homemaker and focus on molding the next generation?

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#368

Post by hirvi74 »

sangnoir wrote: post #354
klipt wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kids are basically financial suicide unless you're crazy-rich. Or if you're very poor, then the more kids you have, the more you receive in benefits. Many poor people manage to have more kids than middle class people. The middle class parent thinks "if I have another kid how will I pay for their college?" The poor parent just sends their kids to community college or if they're amazingly brilliant and get into Harva…

Maybe more middle class parents should be sending kids to community college?

A few years back, my state made CC free for all people with high school educations excluding those with degrees and perhaps other minor variables as well.

https://www.tbr.edu/initiatives/tn-promise

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#369

Post by 1123581321 »

watwut wrote: post #293
dilap wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could go even further: You don't need the mother at all; you can always just raise the baby on formula. But that doesn't change that the mother-child bond is a unique and special thing, and that there are real benefits to breast-feeding, straight from the breast. And beyond, the simple fact is that many women really want to be with their babies. It's misguided to pretend that there aren't biological realities unde…

>But that doesn't change that the mother-child bond is a unique and special thing, and that there are real benefits to breast-feeding, straight from the breast. Dad, when he actually spends time with kid is exactly the same bond. Really. I have seen that. There is nothing magical about mother-child bond. It is something that was unique in social setting where men are penalized for spending too much time with their ki…

Typically the parents conducting this experiment can't tell the difference, but people can who know them but not well enough to be emotionally invested in that family succeeding.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#370

Post by tsol »

rayiner wrote: post #203
poulsbohemian wrote: post #72

It's election season and I've been out talking to voters, who share their life stories... what I would say is that there are many women who are choosing WFH because they either can't afford or can't find day care, which may lead to deciding that hey, they might as well have another baby if they are now committed to this employment model. I've spoken to several women who were over-qualified for the jobs they had taken…

That’s part of the story. The other part is that many women don’t want to be in the workforce. Among women with children under 18, the majority (50-45) would prefer a “homemaker role.” https://news.gallup.com/poll/267737/record-high-women-prefer... . Among women without a college degree, whether or not they have kids, it’s 44%. The pandemic also coincides with a few years of strong wage growth among working class hou…

>Among women with children under 18, the majority (50-45) would prefer a “homemaker role.”

Weird, I never hear this. I never see discussions of about women wanting to be homemakers, especially as much as the opposite(women wanting to enter the workforce). I wonder if people with these opinions just find it more easily.

Post reply on HN