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

The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

econofact.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 286 posts

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#91

Post by mschuster91 »

hardware2win wrote: post #58
red_admiral wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* (sociologic) fear of climate change (will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time) or commitment to make a small positive impact on climate change by not having kids I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change") but it's definitely a sentiment I've encountered.

>will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way And dont get me wrong - we arent climate change deniers, just... pick your battles Why waste your life worrying about something you have tiny impact on?

> I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way

In 20 years not, but it's reasonable to believe for anyone outside America and Central Europe that wide swaths of the planet - particularly the entirety of Africa and lots of Asia - will be unable to support human life.

Hell, we're already seeing issues with water supply even in Central Europe, with France restricting water consumptions because of drought [2], and Germany's water reserves are dwindling as well. India is suffering from a massive heat wave [1], and last year's devastation in Australia should still be in living memory.

Anyone who is not worried about the future of the planet is either ridiculously ignorant to reality or completely incompetent. And the worst thing is, politicians in power play down climate change, act like future technology (anything from nuclear fusion to desalination plants) will save us, or deny it entirely - and wide swaths to outright majorities of people believe that.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/17/weather-...

[2] https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/05/10/southern-france-re...

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#92

Post by another_story »

gsich wrote: post #16
CalRobert wrote: post #10

Hopefully we can do this for the species as a whole and gradually find equilibrium at a more sustainable population.

Overpopulation is currently not a problem for humanity.

Overconsumption certainly is, and that's tied to population.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#93

Post by pjc50 »

somenameforme wrote: post #77

As an interesting contrast China (which is also suffering fertility issues) just launched a new pro family/fertility campaign [1]. It's so weird how little coverage this issue receives in the West. Fertility will be one of the biggest factors in shaping our future, to say nothing of its more immediate impact on economic factors, retirement, and general social stability. I think the big issue is that we live so much l…

The formal end of the "one child policy" in China was only 2016.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#94

Post by hardware2win »

crooked-v wrote: post #67
hardware2win wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time I dont know anyone that is seriously worried about this in such a way And dont get me wrong - we arent climate change deniers, just... pick your battles Why waste your life worrying about something you have tiny impact on?

It's anecdotal, of course, but I've definitely seen a number of posts online that amount to 'my spouse and I have decided not to have children, because we don't want to inflict them with the terrible state of the planet in 30 or 40 or 50 years'.

Ive seen crazy stuff on the internet too!

But until I or you manage to meet at least one person with such approach, then I do recommend to do not take it seriously

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#95

Post by tonyedgecombe »

mihaic wrote: post #72
red_admiral wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* (sociologic) fear of climate change (will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time) or commitment to make a small positive impact on climate change by not having kids I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change") but it's definitely a sentiment I've encountered.

That feels actually anti-rational, since if the people that care about the environment stop having children that means the people that are passing on their life outlook are mostly ignorant of the environment. It must be a US thing more though, as I haven't personally heard people say fear of environmental damage to keep them from having kids.

>if the people that care about the environment stop having children that means the people that are passing on their life outlook are mostly ignorant of the environment.

That argument seems rather doubtful to me.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#96

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #33
pjc50 wrote: post #12

The other day someone was complaining about too many people in the housing thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35962521 The two are linked. Having children is at least partly an economic choice. People have spent decades working against "teen moms" and "single parents" and "welfare queens". Everyone is very clear that you must not have children unless you can comfortably afford to do so. And not just now, th…

Having children requires an element of hope, of faith in a bright the future. If you're convinced of nothing but dark days ahead, bringing children into the world would be a cruelty. Media messaging, especially on social media, has gotten extremely dark and catastrophic. Looking at the screen you'd think the sky was falling several times every day. If global warming isn't doing us in, the nazis are literally back for…

Many people are living genuinely precarious lives. Some are well aware of it, others haven't quite realised it yet or are firmly in denial about it.

Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so.

I see no mystery here.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#97

Post by mschuster91 »

Ekaros wrote: post #71
throwaw12 wrote: post #23

> This decline cannot be explained by demographic, economic, or policy changes. I disagree with this statement. Put yourself in the shoes of 25 years old and ask why don't you want to have kids? * (economic) difficult to manage finances * (economic) can't buy house, too expensive * (economic) to compete with others in the workplace, I need to work >12 hours/day, can't do with kids or will be laid off. * (sociologic)…

Would there also be effect that long term relationships are hard and pairing up has been disturbed by dating apps. If you aren't living together with regular partner taking next step of getting kid rarely happens.

> If you aren't living together with regular partner taking next step of getting kid rarely happens.

Hard to live together with your partner if you're living with roommates (or worse, parents) because you can't make rent or can barely afford a 20 m² micro apartment.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#98

Post by krona »

red_admiral wrote: post #46
throwaw12 wrote: post #23

> This decline cannot be explained by demographic, economic, or policy changes. I disagree with this statement. Put yourself in the shoes of 25 years old and ask why don't you want to have kids? * (economic) difficult to manage finances * (economic) can't buy house, too expensive * (economic) to compete with others in the workplace, I need to work >12 hours/day, can't do with kids or will be laid off. * (sociologic)…

* (sociologic) fear of climate change (will the world still be habitable in 20 years' time) or commitment to make a small positive impact on climate change by not having kids I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change") but it's definitely a sentiment I've encountered.

If we're talking about mortality salience, then there's quite a lot of evidence that mortality salience predicts a greater desire to have children, which is the opposite to what you're suggesting.

From an evolutionary point of view, this seems plausible. Obviously not having children because 'life is hard' is almost certainly dysgenic.

Re: The U.S. birth rate has fallen by 20% since 2007

#99

Post by loxs »

lynx23 wrote: post #76
loxs wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* (policy) - If things don't work out, your wife will divorce you, take half of what you have and enslave you to pay her support for the next 15 years. Actually, she might do that just because she needs more passion while you are hard at work.

Whenever I hear "wedding" I wonder why the male is going for that risk. The obvious unfairness and non-equality during a divorce is the main reason why I never would get married. Its just illogical to put yourself that much at risk.

Marriage is only worse, but having kids without marriage comes with most of the same risks and inequalities. Like what are the chances that the father gets custody?
Post reply on HN