They’re selling nudes of imaginary women on Reddit • Hacker News Board

Re: They’re selling nudes of imaginary women on Reddit

#51

Post by comte7092 » Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 10:48 PM UTC

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #50

comte7092 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But then wouldn’t making jobs higher paying and life better make the issue worse? Yes, which is what we see in the data. People with higher incomes have fewer children than those with lower incomes. https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam...

Okay that would make sense, but that does support my original comment, which was: “Jobs getting harder or bot paying well is a odd explanation of low birth rates.”

Jobs getting harder and paying well means that if you are going to invest time in having and raising a child, you are going to have to make a significant career sacrifice in order to do so.

Harder/more demanding job => can’t dedicate proper time to job and child at the same time.

Better paying job => giving up job means giving up significantly more wealth.

It still tracks.

Re: They’re selling nudes of imaginary women on Reddit

#52

Post by tennisflyi » Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 11:38 PM UTC

Porn should fetch a premium if you can prove it's "real" then.

Re: They’re selling nudes of imaginary women on Reddit

#53

Post by mr_00ff00 » Wed, Apr 12, 2023, 12:37 PM UTC

comte7092 wrote: post #51

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay that would make sense, but that does support my original comment, which was: “Jobs getting harder or bot paying well is a odd explanation of low birth rates.”

Jobs getting harder and paying well means that if you are going to invest time in having and raising a child, you are going to have to make a significant career sacrifice in order to do so. Harder/more demanding job => can’t dedicate proper time to job and child at the same time. Better paying job => giving up job means giving up significantly more wealth. It still tracks.

Again, going back to what I said,

worst paying job == less kids

Does not track. People had tons of kids 100 years ago when quality of life is worse.

If you are saying that’s because life has gotten better and so we have less kids then fine, but then you need to acknowledge that the difference is because of better quality of life, so less would not have a negative effect on birth rates.

Re: They’re selling nudes of imaginary women on Reddit

#54

Post by mr_00ff00 » Wed, Apr 12, 2023, 12:39 PM UTC

bediger4000 wrote: post #22

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs getting harder or bot paying well is a odd explanation of low birth rates. After all, quality of life is way better than 100 years ago, and 100 years ago people would have 8 children at like 25.

Those folks in the past had children because the children paid for themselves beginning about age 7 or 8, and were an ongoing source of labor, quality of life or not.

This is a fair point except it would imply only the poor had more kids. The rich (who didn’t use them as a source of labor) also had much higher birth rates.