Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not a female, but I'm a dad who quit the industry a year ago so when my wife was pregnant with our first child. I think what you're missing is the fact raising a child is something that all human beings are biologically engineered to find overwhelmingly fulfilling, yet office environments are not designed with employee fulfillment (or even basic wellbeing) in mind. Once you become a parent, over time your viewpo…
> the fact raising a child is something that all human beings are biologically engineered to find overwhelmingly fulfilling This is very much not a fact, and I really wish society as a whole would stop pretending that absolutely everybody wants to be an actual parent. Then maybe the people who do find parenting fulfilling can do that while those of us that don't can make up for them instead of being pressured into a…
Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
741–750 of 770 posts
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#742Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wage stagnation has nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with the obscenely rich being permitted to get obscenely richer. It's disappointing that your friends have fallen for that lie.
Where are you getting this from? What you’re talking about is a symptom, not a cause. While the issue is still hotly debated, the biggest causes for inequality and wage stagnation since the 1980s in order of impact is: skill-biased technological change (tech favoring skilled workers and amplifying their output, network effects, winner take all economics), globalization and offshoring, and China. For comparison, the r…
> For comparison, the rise of China alone is believed to account for the loss of 20%+ of the manufacturing sector. Income taxes across the board are inequality decreasing in their effect
This narrative comes from people who have no understanding of manufacturing and don't take the time to check their predictions. An incredibly simple test is checking if decreases in american manufacturing employment coincide with increases in chinese and other overseas production (hint: they don't) or if american production decreased at the same imports grew (they didn't).
The main factor in manufacturing has been process changes which have dramatically increased worker productivity. For example, in 1920 it took 3 man-hours to produce 1 ton of steel in the US, now in the US 1 man hour produces 300 tons. And the improved productivity was not limited to developed countries with expensive labor markets - comparable changes were seen in countries like brazil and south africa over the same period.
People imagine such technological changes to be things like robots and machinery automating low skill tasks, and it's easy enough to see that's not happening. However people rarely appreciate where the real cost is in manufacturing. Take for example a plastic extruder: it takes a whole team of skilled people to get it started up, but a single unskilled person can easily operate it while it is running. Simple changes that allow you to run that extruder for longer without stopping, such as switching shift times and online maintenance, significantly reduce labor requirements even though no tasks are being automated.
The fact is americans are producing more, but they're not being compensated more. There aren't immigrants, foreigners, or robots doing the jobs cheaper, the jobs simply aren't being done because they are unnecessary now. Really, the issue is that the costs of these goods and services which are now so much easier to produce should have fallen but didn't (despite that 1000 fold increase in steel production per unit of labor, inflation adjusted the price of steel has remained constant over the same time period).
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#743Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Any culture that promotes less children, deliberate or otherwise, would eventually be replaced by a culture that does promote more children.
Except that cultures change over time. And, typically, when cultures evolve they tend to promote less children. For example, population growth in India is declining as the economic situation is improving (source: https://datacommons.org/place/country/IND?topic=Demographics )
The problem is that there is overshoot - when you watched half your siblings die young, you don't simply take the doctor's word for it that your kids are all going to grow up strong and healthy. It takes a few generations to adapt. During this period of time, you have excessive population growth, and then even if these people have children only at replacement rate, the population will still increase as the more populous younger cohorts replace the smaller previous cohorts.
Eventually people start having sub replacement rate children as there are just too many people. In theory this is good, but soo too here will there be overshoot. If you were an only child and your parents were only children, it's hard to start having large families. Even if you wanted to, you need to support a lot of older generations, which puts a severe strain on your ability to also have lots of kids. Eventually yes, things will turn around and the population won't go to zero, but decades of population shrinking and the associated economic issues will do a number on the population. India will have to deal with this problem in a century, much of the developed world will have to deal with it a lot sooner.
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#744Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another advantage is that a population that doesn't consist of clones is more resistant to diseases. With regards to "why separate sexes? why two?", the technical reason is mitochondria, the "cells" within our cells: you don't want the copies from one parent to fight with copies from another parent. The standard solution for the multicellular organisms is that only one parent provides mitochondria, the other does not…
Whoa, does this suggest something very sensitive, unstable, and delicate about mitochondria that their preservation must be highly conservative otherwise it could not be a steadily observed thing? How exactly would a fight ensue for the coding of a mitochondria? Are those organelles even created by ribosomes? How exactly are those things synthesized anyways?
So what happens when a cell wants to become two is that the cell nucleus will (command to) synthesize another copy of all other stuff, but mitochondria just create their own copies by splitting in two.
Now what would happen in sexual reproduction if each gamete would bring their own mitochondria? The "outer cell" would benefit from them living together peacefully, but if a mitochondrion would attack its competitors instead, it would be an evolutionary advantage. Even if it would reduce the probability of the whole cell surviving, as long as the chance of the cell surviving is greater than 50%, it is profitable for a mitochondrion to attack its competitors, because it will leave twice as many descendants if it wins. This would lead to arms race between mitochondria, and the cell would pay the costs.
Except, there is this neat trick when the cell creates two types of gametes: those with mitochondria (i.e. female) and those without (i.e. male). Then there is no internal battle after joining.
A few plants tried it with more than two sexes, where the rule was generally "any two individuals from different sexes can reproduce", and for each combination of sexes they knew which one provides the mitochondria and which does not. But most of nature settled on two sexes.
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#745Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you’re really that into high pressure job and grinding the ladder why would you be so attracted to raising a family as a sahm ? You can’t do everything at once. No one is stopping you from raising children but yourself. Many don’t go for the business route and that’s a respectable choice but of course you can’t have it all. If in the end your fertility is more important than your career then have kids without ma…
Steady states are the exception in nature, not the rule. It's quite normal to have a population that increases exponentially, hits resource limits, and then decreases rapidly. (This was like literally 1/3 of my calculus class - it's a pretty classic example for coupled partial differential equations.) Eventually the population declines enough that the resource limits no longer apply, and people start having babies ag…
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#746Earlier quoted context omitted.
Steady states are the exception in nature, not the rule. It's quite normal to have a population that increases exponentially, hits resource limits, and then decreases rapidly. (This was like literally 1/3 of my calculus class - it's a pretty classic example for coupled partial differential equations.) Eventually the population declines enough that the resource limits no longer apply, and people start having babies ag…
Human populations (and pretty much all populations of complex life where predation is not a significant cause of death) follow logistic growth trends. Sudden population collapses are not normal in nature.
We have some additional complexities in that a lot of those growth limits are because of the interplay between economics and population. There's plenty more room for humans on earth; there's not more room within major metropolises without triggering our "It's too crowded; better not breed" instincts. But economic forces needed to sustain those high populations promote concentration and crowding.
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#747Earlier quoted context omitted.
The claim that I think is "extraordinary" is that a focus on specifically income is found in "every culture on the planet." Is this really true of the Sentinelese, an indigenous culture in the Indian ocean? Maybe if we define "income" in some funny way. There's a long history of "big man" cultures in anthropology, wherein authority and persuasion are more important that direct "income." But, then, "income" is so tied…
"Income" is just a proxy for providing resources. It's simply unreasonable to assume that the Sentinelese men who are best at procuring food/resources/etc aren't more desirable than their peers. Social status is likely a factor as well. Authority is often derived in tribal cultures from being the best hunter/warrior, or being the son of the best fighter if the tribe has a monarchal structure of leadership transfer. N…
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#748Earlier quoted context omitted.
There has been various research about Earth's carrying capacity. The numbers are controversial but it shouldn't be controversial that there is _some_ limit. I think we are going to have to adapt to a post-growth world. Or maybe things will grow in other ways. I am not worried about declining birth rates. It's not like we are heading for a "Children of Men" scenario. The population will stabilize before it goes to zer…
> I think we are going to have to adapt to a post-growth world. Or maybe things will grow in other ways. I am not worried about declining birth rates. It's not like we are heading for a "Children of Men" scenario. I'm not talking about endless growth. I'm talking about simply maintaining existing societies. The fertility rate in South Korea is now below 1. That's a society that's basically gone within three generatio…
Elon Musk used to be bald. Now he’s not.
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#749Earlier quoted context omitted.
There has been various research about Earth's carrying capacity. The numbers are controversial but it shouldn't be controversial that there is _some_ limit. I think we are going to have to adapt to a post-growth world. Or maybe things will grow in other ways. I am not worried about declining birth rates. It's not like we are heading for a "Children of Men" scenario. The population will stabilize before it goes to zer…
> Or maybe we will just grow people in vats. Who will raise the people who were made in vats? Which is the real problem here, not who reproduces.
Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility
#750Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that cultures change over time. And, typically, when cultures evolve they tend to promote less children. For example, population growth in India is declining as the economic situation is improving (source: https://datacommons.org/place/country/IND?topic=Demographics )
All cultures tend towards replacement rate. But replacement rate for pre-industrial societies with significantly higher infant mortality are much higher. The problem is that there is overshoot - when you watched half your siblings die young, you don't simply take the doctor's word for it that your kids are all going to grow up strong and healthy. It takes a few generations to adapt. During this period of time, you ha…
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109051381...
The heritability of fertility makes world population stabilization unlikely