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

Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

nber.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 102 posts

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#91

Post by swat535 »

epihelix wrote: post #32
pestatije wrote: post #3

this comes to show that sex is just entertainment and it is being crowded out from all sides

In this modern world where highly effective birth control is cheap and straightforward, we really need to stop equating fertility rates with levels of sexual activity. You can have plenty of sex and not have a child; you can have very little sex and have a substantial number of children. It's fascinating to me how personal choice never seems to enter into these discussions, even in relatively highly educated, first-w…

Unless you have surgically implemented birth control (such as vasectomy), the pregnancy chance logically increases with higher rate of sexual activity with multiple partners.

Mistakes happen. Birth control is not 100% effective.. condoms break, women forget to take the pill, etc.

Of course it goes without saying you have a much higher chance of pregnancy if you're not using any form of birth control.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#92

Post by Forgeties79 »

trhway wrote: post #78
Forgeties79 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t set these numbers, the other dude did then you backed it up even going so far as to lecture me about how 20k isn’t enough to raise a kid. I completely agree that this is meaningless, but I’m also not going to let 1.2mill suddenly equal 20k/yr raising a kid!

>going so far as to lecture me about how 20k isn’t enough to raise a kid. i expressed my opinion. You may have different one. Expressing an opinion different than yours isn't "lecturing". >I’m also not going to let 1.2mill suddenly equal 20k/yr raising a kid! using S&P500 as the opportunity cost evaluator the 20k/yr results in even more than $1.2M. I don't see what you're arguing about. Do you have a better opportuni…

I don’t even know what you’re trying to say anymore mate. Have a good weekend.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#93

Post by frollogaston »

cubefox wrote: post #87
frollogaston wrote: post #67

Here's an anecdote that today's kids are too young to have experienced, but their parents also weren't around for it. I was in middle school when the iPhone became popular. It was pretty sudden, so the social effect was obvious. Their parents probably bought them iPhones because they were addicted too, but it's different when you're in school. Since then have been hoping for a day when this gets undone.

> It was pretty sudden, so the social effect was obvious. What was this social effect like, according to your memory?

Kids stopped socializing. School bus was suddenly very orderly, cause everyone was playing with their iPhones. And it wasn't only an initial shock that went away, but kept settled in as iPhones got better over time.

Sometimes I hear today that kids without phones get ostracized because social circles have moved online. That wasn't a thing yet, I guess because it was an awkward period for messaging. AIM group chats were kinda popular before, but iPhones didn't support that well, and group texts either didn't exist (pre-MMS) or were really bad. Facebook was popular but wasn't really used for messaging.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#94

Post by trhway »

Qem wrote: post #85
trhway wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually raising a child costs more than $1.2M - just $20K/year invested in S&P500 over the last 20 years would have grown to more than $1.2M. Or those $20K/year could be spend on the child. And $20K/year is pretty low.

> Actually raising a child costs more than $1.2M - just $20K/year invested in S&P500 over the last 20 years would have grown to more than $1.2M. The future markets of a shrinking world, with consumer and worker cohorts dwindling year after year, will be very different from the last 20. This is paradoxal reasoning. Your're counting on going childless, while the market remains the same, other people keep having childre…

alternatively, the things can go very opposite to what you're saying as robots/AI will make many jobs more productive requiring less people thus driving the economy even more profitable than the last 20 years. The society wouldn't need those very expensive children for the jobs where robots would do.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#95

Post by Forgeties79 »

throw93930 wrote: post #39
Forgeties79 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re just making up numbers

Well, lets buy a house, car.. wife should stay at home for couple of years, education, health care...

>wife should stay at home for couple of years

That’s awfully presumptuous and gendered.

>buy a car

Assuming you don’t already have one and live somewhere where a car is needed. Plenty of parents with no cars or who had 1 and continue to live with 1.

>buy a house

Plenty of people do that with or without kids and plenty of parents rent.

>education

Plenty of people go to public school.

>healthcare

Valid but also people’s situations vary wildly here.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#96

Post by cubefox »

frollogaston wrote: post #93
cubefox wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was pretty sudden, so the social effect was obvious. What was this social effect like, according to your memory?

Kids stopped socializing. School bus was suddenly very orderly, cause everyone was playing with their iPhones. And it wasn't only an initial shock that went away, but kept settled in as iPhones got better over time. Sometimes I hear today that kids without phones get ostracized because social circles have moved online. That wasn't a thing yet, I guess because it was an awkward period for messaging. AIM group chats we…

I think the social effect on adults might have been similar, although more gradual, since I didn't really notice it at the time.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#97

Post by jojobas »

saghm wrote: post #88
jojobas wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before political correctness hit this area, doctors' observations led to classifying any first pregnancy past 25yo as geriatric. Healthcare progresses in some areas, some (like DS) are rigid to socially defined trends.

Okay? My parents had me at 35 in the 90s, and I'm sure you've met plenty of people who had similarly aged parents. It's not like there's one perfect age for everyone to have kids, and my point is that if some people realize at 25 that waiting five years puts them in a better position to raise kids, what's the problem with that?

Biologically there is an age range for all. Various complication risks raise pretty much continuously from about 20, for both the mother and the child. Say Down Syndrome is 5x more likely at 35 than at 20.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#99

Post by hahahaa »

frollogaston wrote: post #58
vachina wrote: post #23

Porn became easier to access. Men became less horny.

The men part doesn't really matter because birth rates are determined more by women's behaviors than anything else. And the paper does focus on women. Overall, the diffusion of the iPhone explains 33–52% of the decline in the general fertility rate among women aged 15–44.

Citation pls because common sense says it takes two to tango.

Re: Is the iPhone birth control? Causal evidence from AT&T's 2007-2011 monopoly [pdf]

#100

Post by littlecranky67 »

Qem wrote: post #83
littlecranky67 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have children to inherit your fortune to, you can retire with full exhaustion of capital - that will yield way more than 4k$/month. Plus, if you don't have children there is not much holding you in the US - you can look at 2nd world countries. I.e. That money buys you a good retirement lifestyle in Mexiko, Brazil, Argentina etc. Or Vietnam, Thailand etc. if you are more into asia.

> If you don't have children to inherit your fortune to, you can retire with full exhaustion of capital - that will yield way more than 4k$/month. As a lone elderly person you're likely to be scammed and lose a lot of that capital near the end, without close people that like and support you. Elders are incredibly vulnerable to financial scams, specially those enabled by technologic means they are not familiar with.

> As a lone elderly person you're likely to be scammed

That is just utter BS. Yes, it is usally the elderly who got scammed, but saying that because you are elderly you are likely to be scammed is reverse causation. Especially if you manage to accumulate 1.2m$ in your life, you are financially literate and far less likely to fall into a money scam.

Post reply on HN