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

The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#781

Post by program_whiz »

tasuki wrote: post #771
program_whiz wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just want to chime in, for anyone else reading this: I can say I used to think this way. Having kids is 100% the best thing, would never trade them for anything, including all of the above and a 5x raise and early retirement. Absolutely nothing about single life is even close to the value you feel having a child. Of course this is "anecdata" but so is "the single life is so awesome" given most of the stats about ment…

> Absolutely nothing about single life is even close to the value you feel having a child. Funny how people always mention "value" or "meaning" rather than happiness. As a single parent (my kid's mom died when the kid was 1.5) my life is overflowing with meaning . But if anything, I'm (slightly) less happy than I used to be when I was single.

Sorry man, that's rough. Best wishes to you. Definitely agree there are some things you lose, but for me at least, when I have multiple days of time away (e.g. some trip or something) its refreshing momentarily, but then I remember how lonely and empty things felt much of the time.

It may not be that way for everyone, some people are probably very content just working, watching netflix, a few hobbies, and occasionally hanging out with ever shrinking groups or random strangers.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#782

Post by fleeting900 »

socalgal2 wrote: post #672
kraig911 wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just hard now. Before I had kids I had a network of friends and had a great social life. Now it's just me and my wife. If I want more friends I'll have to have more kids I guess? I have 4 now. One (my first) is severely autistic. Financially the cost? I pay about 6,000 a month in daycare. 2k a month in healthcare expenses. Then community wise. Every time I've gone to take them to the movies, or to a restaurant o…

I have plenty of friends with young kids that are super social. They invite people over, take their kids to restaurants and invite people to come, go to picniqs, festivals, and other things. We love their kids (or at least all the people that show up do). You have the agency to make it happen.

You and your love for and acceptance of their kids and willingness to show up to family-friendly activities are very likely the key to their ability to do this.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#783

Post by firstplacelast »

shipman05 wrote: post #555
mwillis wrote: post #503

I truly believe psychology is at the root of this. People start families when the optimism they feel about the future outweighs the pessimism. Even if this evaluation is done subconsciously. At some point, in first-world society - averaging across different societies and social support systems, and considering the numbers in aggregate - we flipped. Pessimism about the future outweighs optimism. Downstream of that fli…

Hard to believe that people who suffered the atrocities of the first half of the 20th Century were tremendously optimistic about the future, yet birthrates were MUCH higher across the world.

While acts of war separate couples and would confound the analysis a bit, I think there is typically a big spike in births following wars. Baby boomers most notably being born after WWII. Optimism is dynamic and not a set threshold, wrapping up wars leads to new found optimism about the future. How terrible the recent past was is not all that relevant as it is about the trajectory.

If anything having a terrible past may make the bar lower for experiencing optimism, as it's easier to expect a better future when the overall bar is lower. Hopefully explaining that well enough and it's certainly not the only issue, but I believe we see the same thing on the stock market when large class action settlements are reached with a corp and the stock then rises as it is forward looking and optimistic now that the 'awful past' is settled. First-gen immigrants tend to have larger families as the impetus to move countries is an optimistic endeavor itself.

And while a reach, I think through this lens you can make an argument as to why lower classes tend to have more children than middle classes (currently in the US). It's easier to expect better for your children when you are at the bottom of the barrel (no where to go but up), whereas the middle class is in an increasingly precarious position.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#784

Post by Seabiscuit »

As a (young, thus-far childless) woman, I feel it's important to add something that men may not fully grasp and I haven't seen much in the thread so far: what tips the scales in this decision is often not just daycare costs/career prospects, but also the potentially extreme side effects of pregnancy on the body.

Going through the process of being pregnant and giving birth is absolutely terrifying to me and most of my friends. How many tech bros do you know who do their blood labs on a yearly basis, or track their blood sugar daily? How many do sports physio to avoid the possibility of a minor training injury, or do any number of peptide interventions to micro-optimise some aspect of their health or physique?

If having babies, for them, was basically a coin toss re: possibly developing diabetes, ripping open their pelvic floor and becoming incontinent, adding 8 points to your BMI, or major sleeping problems, etc., would they still be as mystified about the low TFR? (Of course, many men go through physical hell when raising children too, and I don't want to diminish their contribution, but on average their physical symptoms are less extreme)

Sometimes the knee jerk 'just get a caesarean' and lower maternal mortality numbers mask the reality of how barbaric the process seems, at least from my vantage point as someone who might one day be involved in the process. The number of privileged women who choose the surrogate path alone should suggest how many women might opt out of the physical part of it, if they could; if having babies isn't a social obligation or a biological inevitability without birth control, there's quite a strong argument for putting it off just one more year...

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#785

Post by tuesdaynight »

pino83 wrote: post #770
tasuki wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if it turns out that these friends have no desire to spend time with _me_ anymore - without any kids involved See the problem is the kids. You can't quite make them go away that easily. My guess would be your friends would love to spend some time with you but can't, because logistics. > where do I profit from that friendship?? It often gets quite asymmetrical and boring. Friendships are not for profit. If you w…

> See the problem is the kids. You can't quite make them go away that easily. You can't, sure. You shouldn't at least. But what does it mean to me? It leads to the fact that the friendship is pointless. So why should I take a lot of initiative, when I don't get anything back anymore? For a reason that they've actively decided for (typically), btw. > Friendships are not for profit. If you want profit, start a business…

I understand why they do it, but I cannot ignore that you lose the incentive of visiting your friends and their kids when they always take that visit as a way to treat you like a babysitter. Yes, I accept sometimes looking at your kid while you take a nap, just don't make that the usual experience for years on end, though. I'm lucky, as my friends always understood when I pointed that out to them, but I'm aware that this may not be the common reaction.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#786

Post by Night_Thastus »

kgwxd wrote: post #702
Night_Thastus wrote: post #336

This is happening everywhere , including nations with great social systems/healthcare/parental leave/etc. And it happens even when nations try throwing money at the problem. While economic concerns may be worsening the issue - I don't think they're the root cause as many would like to say. I think the root cause is that we have outsmarted our biology. Once you give people education on the risks of sex and pregnancy,…

Everyone is talking about it like a problem that need correcting. Why? Less people seems like it could be better for everyone and everything already here, assuming "great social systems" are in place.

If there's no force that pushes it towards stabilization - then the eventual conclusion is extinction. And so far, it definitely seems like it doesn't trend towards equilibrium. People aren't like animals that reproduce based on availability of resources or predators. If the population drops, nothing forces it back up again.

And lower birth rate -> smaller young population -> higher ratio of retirees to taxpayers -> less free money to invest in new businesses/infrastructure/etc. That means a worse quality of life for everyone. Worse pay, higher taxes, less city/state/federal investment.

That's called a death spiral and eventually ends a civilization, if it goes uncorrected. There's no fancy monetary trickery that magically fixes it either. The only real hope is alleviating the burden completely - via something like incredibly advanced robots powered by real AI (not LLM garbage).

That would free up the resources to allow each new generation to do new things, instead of being less and less able to just maintain status quo.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#787

Post by xyzelement »

tayo42 wrote: post #629
xyzelement wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a dad of 3 I have huge respect for your 4 and I doubt there is much I can offer you in terms of information but I think I would have more complaints similar to yours had my wife not been a lot wiser and more proactive than me, so I'll share. First is where you live. I would have picked based on access to nature and cost, she made us pick based on where other families live and proximity to family. In my town everyo…

Do you live in the US?

To add to my previous comment. There's nothing about "the US" that makes precludes any of this. Lots of people chose to remain (or move back to) close to their families especially when they have kids on their own.

EG when we bought the house because it was closer to the in-laws, the previous owners were moving to SC to be closer to their family. It's just a decision you make or not bother to make.

And then to make an extreme point - before this I used to live in Hell's Kitchen in NYC. When I visit my old hood now, it's basically one continuous giant Grindr date going on. That was totally fine when I lived there as a single person but as a family person it would be a tough situation (e.g. businesses not geared to kids, most neighbors aren't parents - eg there was no kids in my old building). Now I live maybe 30 miles away and it's all parents all around me. The idea of "go where parents are" and "go where other young families are" is relevant to absolutely anyone in the world, so I don't understand why whether I live in the US is even a question?

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#788

Post by kraig911 »

dh2022 wrote: post #455
kraig911 wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just hard now. Before I had kids I had a network of friends and had a great social life. Now it's just me and my wife. If I want more friends I'll have to have more kids I guess? I have 4 now. One (my first) is severely autistic. Financially the cost? I pay about 6,000 a month in daycare. 2k a month in healthcare expenses. Then community wise. Every time I've gone to take them to the movies, or to a restaurant o…

$6,000 / month in daycare for 4 kids? You have a sweet deal my friend. At the daycare in my neighborhood this does not cover even 2 kids : https://www.kidspaceseattle.org/enrollment - click on Tuition link at the bottom and weep.

Only two are in daycare. LOL I wish it was for all 4. My autistic girls insurance cost I hit the OOP max in 2 months but still.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#789

Post by kraig911 »

yandie wrote: post #545
somenameforme wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I read things like this I find it confusing in so many ways. I've been out of the US for a while now so perhaps there's some contemporary issues I'm just not considering? For $6k a month, why not hire a private nanny? You could also work with other parents in your area to setup something for a bit more socializing depending on their age. Similarly, I find it practically impossible not to meet people literally ev…

My childcare cost is $52k/year for two kids. To hire a private nanny for TWO kids, it'll be at least $35/hour with benefits (insurance, paid time off etc) in my area. That'll be around $80k/year for a private nanny. And once the kids are older, the value of a nanny isn't as good IMO since they don't provide the variety of social challenges that a daycare can provide (group working, relationship building, conflict res…

I wish I could accord private nanny. Do you know of good resources to find this? Esp in the USA I'm in texas.

Re: The US is flirting with its first-ever population decline

#790

Post by swat535 »

Seabiscuit wrote: post #784

As a (young, thus-far childless) woman, I feel it's important to add something that men may not fully grasp and I haven't seen much in the thread so far: what tips the scales in this decision is often not just daycare costs/career prospects, but also the potentially extreme side effects of pregnancy on the body. Going through the process of being pregnant and giving birth is absolutely terrifying to me and most of my…

Not to take away from your fear but women have been having children since the dawn of time.

Especially with modern medical care and support, it's relatively low risk (assuming you are of an healthy young age without prior conditions).

Pregnancy is not classified as a disease and within a year the body recovers quickly (Tokophobia exists however).

Post reply on HN