So uh... how about that fertility crisis huh?

xKalisto · 2024-03-25T09:06:49+00:00

The first one doesn't work. I live in a country where I get 3 years of paid parental leave, it's not amazing money but it's good enough. On top of that the employer has to guarantee you your job back during that time.

People still don't have kids.

The cost of living and housing crisis are really failing families at the moment but people still don't have that many kids regardless because your QOL will go down with kids, and you can't compensate that with money.

relish5k · 2024-03-25T14:01:52+00:00

It's not about the money, it's about the culture. There's just too many options for a fun fulfilling life outside of having children. Children are a lot of work, and we don't have communities (as in whole neighborhoods), that are there to help share the joys and the burdens, it falls all on parents.

And children are a lot of work because we have decided as a culture that the best way to raise children is invest heavily in them, to make sure they are successful. This limits the amount of children and maximizes the effort that goes into each child. We have shamed parents into monitoring their children 24/7 and when they can't take it anymore the kids get put in front of a screen which is short term solution but is long term horrible for everyone.

The only WEIRD country with a replacement level birthrate among a secular population is Israel. They don't have the best benefits or incentives. What they have is a culture where childbearing is the norm, and people are shamed for not having children, and celebrated for having them.

Proudvow · 2024-03-25T08:00:39+00:00

Problem is poor people aren't the ones with low birth rates, so financial incentives don't really help unless you raise them to the point where the burden on the government outweighs the benefit.

toasterchild · 2024-03-25T15:15:59+00:00

The sales pitch just sucks. Sacrifice your own financial well being now to maybe possibly help the economy in the years to come. Oh and by the way it could all be pointless and the children you make could just suffer greatly if the world takes any number of bad turns. Educated people know that there is no recipe for a perfect future so they make the choices that are best for themselves. Come up with a better sales pitch...

Electric_Death_1349 · 2024-03-25T08:53:31+00:00

Societies that incentivise birth rates and force women into “traditional” roles tend not to be very pleasant ones (e.g. the Third Reich and the Soviet Union), so this is a future few of us will want.

ArtifactFan65 · 2024-03-25T11:35:45+00:00

Women no longer want to be fertilized by sub5 men, I don't think more money will solve much of anything.

DreaminInChocolate · 2024-03-25T14:21:31+00:00

We're having our 4th any day now and I would NEVER have kids with someone else or on my own. No amount of outside help replaces a parent. No amount of physical help or money replaces the emotional support of a partner who is giving 100% with you. It's more than costs or physical responsibility. There's no other person on the planet I can imagine sharing this journey with and most people will never find that person. Parenting properly is hard work. Being a good partner is hard work. You can't buy either of those things.

itm4l2000 · 2024-03-25T12:11:02+00:00

Think you missed a few email threads.

It's the part where immigration will replace citizen women giving child birth, the metrics have been weighed for skilled, unskilled labour.

It's not a fertility crisis, it's a cultural crisis. Importing more people who bring their own cultures to replace the dominant culture that is replacing itself.

I think this is where the email thread is up to date.

Gender dynamics has to move to do we or are we willing to replace our culture within two generations.

BlzzdSuxDix · 2024-03-25T12:57:02+00:00

The answer is to simply import the labour you need and forget about the native populace. As long as you make sure they’re clawing each other’s eyes out over random political bullshit, they wont give a fuck

HomeworkFew2187 · 2024-03-25T11:05:39+00:00

there is no fertility crisis.There is a lifestyle crisis.if anyone across the globe lived like Americans.Well...

https://youtu.be/A0yu7nP50rM?feature=shared

the economy is a ponzi scheme. it constantly needs more people, or the pyramid will decay.

an economy however despite what every government tries to push is not capable of infinity growth in finite world.

i think the modern lifestyle could be maintained very easily with less people.Maybe we don't need all that stuff.

TermAggravating8043 · 2024-03-25T08:33:22+00:00

Easy. Make childcare extremely affordable, and ensure childcare workers are paid properly. Ensure woman have free healthcare all throughout pregnancy, birth and aftercare. Ensure both parents get a year’s maternity and paternity leave so both parents can learn to work and handle family life. Have foster parents that get paid to take the child for sleepovers on a weekly/monthly basis.

Have a nurse/grandparent like figure to help oversea the family and ensure everyone is getting breaks and pulling their weight.

Lift_and_Lurk · 2024-03-25T12:59:33+00:00

What actually happens throughout history. The fewer competent people become such high demand that they start getting paid much higher wages. They use those eagles to buy bigger homes and can afford to pay for help. They then have bigger families which they can now afford. And the “crisis” end up being averted. In the meantime immigrants come and fill some of the void while technology and innovation make it so it takes much fewer workers to do the jobs than before.

Over and over and over again.

Clementinequeen95 · 2024-03-25T13:34:03+00:00

We don’t get healthcare to deliver our babies. We don’t get universal pre k. We don’t get maternity leave. Men don’t get paternity leave. Dogs are treated better after birth than women. Why would we have kids? There’s zero incentive

concretecannonball · 2024-03-25T07:47:54+00:00

You’re forgetting about immigration. Places like Canada and the EU are already combatting low birth rates with increased TFWs and immigrants from countries with high birth rates. The only financial incentives for people to have children would be tax incentives.

If you’re talking about policy in the States - no way will women ever just get money to have kids. Half the population votes against providing children lunch at school, against child tax cuts, and against financial and food assistance for mothers, you really think they’re going to want their tax dollars going towards rewarding the poors with cash for having babies?

There also, like, isn’t really a fertility crisis. There’s an affordability crisis. People will have children if they can afford to do so and still afford a civilized housing situation and childcare.

WilliamWyattD · 2024-03-25T08:10:50+00:00

Everyone and everything has a price. The issue with the 'pay mothers more' plan that everyone says 'can't work' is that society and potential mothers do not agree on price. Yes, subsidizing motherhood has been tried, but essentially women are saying 'Not enough.'

wtknight · 2024-03-25T12:05:07+00:00

We probably don’t need as many people as the climate changes for the worse and as automation and AI takes more jobs. Less people will probably be beneficial. The only issue will be taking care of those already born once they become elderly, and I think that there is enough economic productivity that policies can be changed for this to happen.

Solondthewookiee · 2024-03-25T12:41:39+00:00

How about just funding social services that would allow mothers to have kids and still work without having to catch their food?

You still have the issue of many women not wanting to date, but one step at a time.

CatholicChanner · 2024-03-25T07:58:24+00:00

Just fucking pay young people enough, have affordable housing (instead of like Canada where they import 1.5 million a year and only build 200k new housing units), and don't make them work insane hours, your fertility crisis will be solved and you won't have to replace your people with random foreigners and destroy your identity, culture, or in the worst case scenario have them actively fight against both and bomb you from time to time (Europe).

Sorry your real estate and stock speculation does justify destroying your civilization.

AidsVictim · 2024-03-25T08:29:28+00:00

Society can't really afford the first. We can't even afford to maintain existing Western lifestyles, this would be equivalent to a massive expansion of the welfare state. It also creates lots of "unintended" incentive structures and dysgenic trends - someone who is low IQ and low ambition will be much more incentivized to have lots of children while someone who is high IQ and used lots of societies resources in their education will have much less incentive to have children even with subsidization (as it's unlikely society will be able to compensate their potential earnings/career advancement relative to it's potential). This is already happening to an extent but these kind of incentives will push the trends into overdrive.

The second option is more likely/feasible although it's not necessarily because kids become economically "profitable" again, more likely that the culture of the religious will simply become a super majority after enough time since they're so much higher fertility and generally less fragile in social/societal collapse.

There is a "third option" however which restructuring economic systems so that having children and being married is a requirement for entering into the middle and upper middle class (i.e. the professional class). Want to go to college? It's free if you're married and have/planning to have kids, otherwise don't go or pay a lot to get in. Applying for a job? Guaranteed spots for married parents with kids (i.e. affirmative action for parents). Everyone else gets the "left over" spots.

Of course most people aren't very likely to agree to this.

Freevoulous · 2024-03-25T11:49:28+00:00

your first solution is just guaranteed inflation. Giving people money is pointless because money is not worth, worth is worth. If we just give away extra money to moms, groceries will just go up i price on the same day, and nothing changes for the better.

KayRay1994 · 2024-03-25T14:14:44+00:00

Buddy I hate to break it to you but the economic crisis we are in right now is the very reason why people aren’t having children lol (as well as a ton of social reasons indicating social instability - either way, this isn’t a problem we can fix directly. We need to address the causes to this if we want to fix it)

Safinated · 2024-03-25T14:48:25+00:00

People who do something for the money never do it as well as those who don’t. Foster parenting, anyone ?

Intrepid-Rip-2280 · 2024-03-26T04:35:40+00:00

In the age when people are dating Eva AI sexting bot seriously there's no wonder we run into these issues.

MattPayneWrestler · 2024-03-27T19:58:53+00:00

Women in 1st world countries have had less and less kids for decades now. They’ve just been bringing in immigrants in to fill the workplace. EZ! Haven’t you noticed all the immigrants? They still be having tons of babies in the third world. The earths population keeps going up cuz of those third worlders. Theres no economic or fertility crisis, theres just gonna be a huge reduction in white people, haha.

That moment When white people think they dominated the world, but they just began the process of wiping out their own dna, oof!

mrsmariekje · 2024-03-25T13:02:01+00:00

Nobody ever seems to think things through when it comes to the fertility crisis. Say you got what you wanted and woman started having 2.5-3 children each. Maybe even 4 if it became financially beneficial. It would be an unmitigated disaster.

Those children all need houses. They need educating for 12 years. They need healthcare. They need facilities like swimming pools, sports facilities. They need childcare. Where the hell are all of those things going to come from? Many schools in the UK are already heavily oversubscribed with classes of 35 children being common place. You'd need schools every street over to educate all those children. And a small army of teachers. We don't have enough teachers now. There is no possible way we would have the infrastructure or the budget to support such a large generation. Don't even get me started on hospitals/doctors.

And whilst all this is going on, we're still having to take care of the boomer generation who are getting older and older and needing more care. So you've got a huge percentage of the population who are unable to contribute due to old age, and you lunatics think it would be a good idea to have a huge generation of children to look after simultaneously?

Less than a third of the population would be working age adults. Minus people with disabilities. Minus the unemployed. Minus 50% of the population you want to stay at home to care for all these children. 10-20% of society is going to pay taxes to support the other 80-90%?

It's laughably stupid. It cannot be done

We would be much better off abandoning pensions and the welfare state as a concept.

purplish_possum · 2024-03-25T14:35:51+00:00

Neither scenario is going to happen. The world will remain infested with homo sapiens for the foreseeable future.

That said my first ex-wife would have loved option #1. She really liked being pregnant and popped out kids with ease (the 2nd one came so fast the doctor didn't make it in time and the nurse had to deliver the baby). With the right incentives she'd have gladly had five or six more kids.

Something-bothersome · 2024-03-25T11:47:10+00:00

How about this option?

Currently there is a basic concept of separation of work life and family life. Under our strong profit driven system, I think there could be the possibility of merger of a lot of the heavy lifting of raising children and the need for increased birth rates picked up by the labour force and pitched as workplace benefits. It could streamline the process and get rid of a lot of the push/pull of work life balance and the vastly reduce costs of raising a family.

There are 3 primary factors involved in this concept - a global economy, women’s high performance in higher education, and the economy’s need for a new generation of workforce (children).

Basically as the market competes for attractive employees, work place packages are a viable way to stand out as an attractive employer. Increasingly those employees they wish to attract and retain are women due to their increased percentage in higher education. As business needs to respond to global markets and have multiple strategic branches around the world, being able to provide attractive incentives for employees to work and relocate as needed could become even more common and pitched as a lifestyle benefit.

It is not to much of a stretch to see where work place benefits could increasingly start of offer international housing opportunities, in-house childcare, international schooling systems all pitched to encouraged a “Corporate” family lifestyle that strongly encourages their employees to fit in a couple of kids along the way - one big happy family!

It is also not too much of a stretch to see government policies strongly encourage this just as they did with maternity leave, breast feeding rooms and so on.

No-Weather-3140 · 2024-03-25T15:45:14+00:00

Wages have not increased enough to make being a single income couple super viable from a financial perspective. The government NEEDS to incentivize childbirth more than it does. Even if you don’t want/have children yourself, the societal benefits are endless.

noafrochamplusamurai · 2024-03-25T18:43:47+00:00

OP forgot to mention that military conflicts are also a byproduct of population decline. When you dig beneath all the layers. That's one of the principal reasons Vladdy daddy invaded Ukraine.

claratheresa · 2024-03-25T10:37:01+00:00

The elderly-boomers- ain’t doing shit for anybody in terms of day to day labor.

IF money is the issue- simply permit special visas for childcare workers and see if and how fast the situation changes.

We could bring tens of thousands of childcare workers from Philippines, central and South America, eastern europe, and sub saharan Africa at extremely low cost if we give them a pathway to green cards. Childcare costs would fall dramatically and women could still work.

We won’t do that, because the goal is to burden women and keep them out of competition for high paying jobs.

ISupposeImCorrect · 2024-03-25T17:11:29+00:00

Women do want kids, just with a select few small percentage of men.

The thing is, they know those men aren't going to commit to them and that whatever guy they're with isn't going to stay with them either if they have that top tier man's kid.

NoJackfruit2965 · 2024-03-25T07:39:29+00:00

It might become a way influence who creates children if the government is only willing to pay attractive or well educated couples to become parents.

-Shes-A-Carnival · 2024-03-25T16:00:11+00:00

where did you all get the idea that humans exist as cogs in "Society". TFR is not a problem, we will adapt and change like always

Fiendish · 2024-03-25T16:50:24+00:00

yes mothers should be paid for creating life and kids should be paid to go to school

Dertross · 2024-03-25T14:01:04+00:00

What is probably going to happen is society just slumps to death and gets replaced by people who are willing to reproduce...but the data on that doesn't not paint a pretty picture if you look at who is reproducing.

ConstanceVigilante · 2024-03-25T14:05:44+00:00

I’m not necessarily advocating this idea, but I will point out the fact that most people only talk about women when they address this issue.

“Women don’t want kids anymore these days.”

“We can incentivize women to have kids by paying them.”

“We need to make sure women can catch up in the workforce after their maternity leave is over.”

Why not men? I don’t have the data for this, but it does seem like men on the whole want kids more than women do these days.

Normalizing single fathers, making it easier for men to adopt kids, allowing paternity leave instead of maternity leave in the workforce (instead of, not along with) and encouraging men to be primary caregivers is also a solution to this problem.

Yes, women probably need ~6 months just to recover from the birth. But if moms take those first 6 months off work, followed by dads taking 2 years off, I think that more than balances out the situation.

Appropriate-Ad-8030 · 2024-03-25T13:17:31+00:00

How about a third option….cultures that value reproduction and passing on their legacy survive and those that don’t die out

So conservative cultures pass on their values to the next generation while those cultures that don’t have children don’t….get ready for a world where religion makes a fierce comeback

AutoModerator · 2024-03-25T07:27:25+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Paliant · 2024-03-25T10:22:43+00:00

I hate to tell you but your second scenario is a negative feedback loop. If goods and services become more expensive and less available, it might change the perception of having kids but it’s not going to actually make it physically easier.

John_Oakman · 2024-03-25T10:34:35+00:00

Surely more of the same factors that got countries into the demographic transition will get them out of it...

ThrowawayCactus6012 · 2024-03-25T13:27:41+00:00

.The economy suffers, we aren't able to make as much stuff, and we regress back into a poorer economy.

It doesn't take all the billions of people in the world to make all that stuff. The world's population has more than quadrupled over the past 100 years. Whether it's a poorer economy or a more affluent economy depends on one where one sits. The Western countries are still fairly comfortable, but it's hard to say how long that can last.

Oli_love90 · 2024-03-25T18:59:56+00:00

Where does ai fit into these scenarios? While it’s not enough NOW to do certain tasks it will at some point eliminate certain jobs. Maybe that’ll play a major factor in slightly mitigating the fertility crisis in that a population decrease won’t mean millions are out of a job. (Idk that could be dumb)

I couldnt imagine the government agreeing to pay anyone a full salary to have kids, there will be just as much opposition as there is support. I can imagine society getting worse because it’s already getting worse anyway.

Baezil · 2024-03-25T19:38:03+00:00

I think we will fix it with technology like we fix so many of our problems.

Whether that will turn out to be a net positive for humanity though is a whole other thing...

metasekvoia · 2024-03-25T19:39:36+00:00

Amazing how quickly we went from overpopulation crisis to underpopulation crisis.

Silver_Past2313 · 2024-03-25T19:54:51+00:00

What fertility crisis? Global TFR is 2.3

TopEntertainment4781 · 2024-03-25T20:59:07+00:00

Ezra Klein has done two great pods on this recently. Yes he’s liberal but it’s backed up with a ton of evidence. He directly addresses why places with a lot of family welfare support still don’t have a lot of kids.

empireofadhd · 2024-03-25T22:28:18+00:00

When people talk about falling birth rates in the western world they tend to forget about men. Conservatives talk about contraceptives and feminists fight back.

Look at Finland as an extreme example. Great maternity and paternity leave, women are killing it in education and labour market. Recently there are now more women in employment then men as an example which has not happened before.

At the same time men are neets and flunking out of school. Among poor men the childlessness rate is 45%.

In Sweden, childless single men make up the largest portion of social welfare receivers at about 35%. It’s similar in Finland. Single parents make up about 12% in think.

Finland has a birth rate similar to Japan currently.

I think by uplifting men in education, income and social upwards mobility and the rest will follow.

OrangeCrush0x00 · 2024-03-26T01:33:20+00:00

I'm hoping that longer term the solution is that medical advances make it so that humans live a lot longer and thus the need to reproduce in the first place is reduced.

eli_ashe · 2024-03-26T04:34:25+00:00

Push second option. It destroys the current causes of the ills.

Luckily the first option doesn't work towards the stated aims. People do not generally have kids to make money. But, they might avoid having kids due to money. I just doubt that will make much of a dint in the 'problem' because there are too many other factors involved for why folks have or don't have kids. However, option one does work towards the improvement of the quality of lives of people. We all children at some point, having a stay at home parent is a good sort of thing, it is real labor, and insofar as we using money to handle shite, pay 'em. Its exceedingly dumb that we don't.

There are also the usual folks making the 'its my life not living it for someone else' kind of claim in the comments. Which gives folks a sense that there are other reasons for the fertility crisis. Tho to their point, having and raising babies is not a hardship, it is a joy. Regardless, I think y'all seriously missing the point that living one's life for others is kind of a huge part of life. It is what makes life a good instead of a shitshow.

Hosj_Karp · 2024-03-26T06:07:33+00:00

Most likely, we eventually revert to producing babies in artificial wombs. They'll be raised by corporations and/or states.

The alternative is economic collapse or the rollback of women's rights, neither of which either the general population or the elites will tolerate.

Dankutoo · 2024-03-26T09:49:46+00:00

The planet is overpopulated. If there’s a fertility crisis maybe that’s a good thing? It’s like our genes saying “now is really not a good time to keep forever-expanding the human population”….?

Bloodstaffel · 2024-03-26T10:10:45+00:00

People don't realise how big of an issue, the macro issue— that developed countries and educated/enlightened women and men don't have children. Worldwide, everywhere with the exception of israel (hyper orthodox).

There is no "good" solution here.

1) Immigration is a) Bad since "developed" countries and races are facing the same issue so youd be importing fools, negative EV.

b)When the immigrants( if they can) become "developed" they run into the same issue.

c)Runs every single good race into extinction (hereditary intelligence is real)

...

2)Welfare doesn't work, atleast not enough to reliably boost TFR

The core of the issue is.... that absent a spiritual/religious duty to have children. Rational entities, with other avenues of purpose will eventually reason away having children due to difficult socio-dynamic interactions and opportunity cost. NOTHING will convince them otherwise.

Do you all realize what this means? This isn't a bottleneck for USA or Europe but of any civilization that reaches this level of progress that isn't hyper religious (eventually fades).

The problem with falling birthrates isn't just economic stagnation but the earth being filled with less "developed" (low intelligence) people in a post-war world where even attempting to get rid of these cretins would be controversial if not impossible due to nuclear powers.

The only hope is for artificial wombs to be a thing or.... handmaid's tale.

Willowgirl2 · 2024-03-26T13:21:26+00:00

I find it amusing that people are simultaneously screeching that AI will take all the jerbs and that the population is crashing.

Prestigious-Delay759 · 2024-03-26T13:47:56+00:00

Impoverished nations are still dealing with populations that are spiraling out of control. I assure you there will still be a surplus of people as long as you allow immigration. Not to mention this whole quote unquote crisis doesn't account for the fact that supposedly we're all going to lose our jobs to robots so there will be a surplus population from that as well.

apresonly · 2024-03-26T14:54:50+00:00

> being a mother/parent is considered a legitimate career choice to be worth getting paid fo

AS IT SHOULD BE

(spoken as a childfree woman who would never be part of this group, i just appreciate the valuable work these women do, and how important it is for society to have children who are well parented and turn into good adults who contribute)

also the real thing thats going to happen is they are just going to penalize not being a baby factory

rapists are very unlikely to face any consequences for rape, abortion illegal, divorce illegal, living with roommates illegal, high cost of living to make it prohibitively expensive to not marry, well see what happens with birth control next.

BeReasonable90 · 2024-03-26T18:02:45+00:00

There is no good solution to this issue. We would basically need to revert back to the 50s and make it women’s job to have kids again.

Train men and women to fill their gender roles, make sex only for babies again, etc.

Ofc, that sucks and requires people to be molded from birth to be good cogs. Those that have enough kids have been trained well enough to be sufficient cogs or are super privileged to the point others pay for there kids.

But that is the only real solution that will work outside of artificial wombs or something else that does not have the tech to do yet.

RedditAlt999 · 2024-03-27T19:33:17+00:00

"Well, I kind of do want a baby, and ill get paid money to do so, so that makes it worth it to me. Ill take some time off from my other job to do it." I also envision some women who really want to be mothers as saying "You want to pay me for being a mother and I get to retire at 65 without actually having worked in traditional employment? Thats my ideal job! Has 7 kids."

I would protest this ridiculous idea until my dying breath if this somehow was suggested in the US legislation system.

Ppdebatesomental · 2024-03-28T14:08:39+00:00

As long as people can have sex and not have children, the vast majority of both men and women will avail themselves of this option at some point. It happens everywhere, all over the world, where healthcare and reproductive options are available.

People don’t have children because they don’t want them. Back before welfare reform, it was an economically viable financial path to have extra kids for an easy welfare check. Didn’t work out very well.

Read-Moishe-Postone · 2024-03-28T19:27:13+00:00

In the first scenario, do single moms also get paid?

_Chaos_And_Horny_ · 2024-03-29T02:44:27+00:00

Poor people have children. It was never about the money.

Creation_Soul · 2024-03-25T07:45:51+00:00

how many children must a woman have for it to be considered a "legitimate career choice"?

Love-Is-Selfish · 2024-03-25T07:44:31+00:00

You persuade people to choose their flourishing over their death, including to use evidence-based reasoning to identify what’s necessary for them to flourish. They move the government towards one conducive for their own flourishing, so quality of life improves and gets easier. This will lead to a more positive vision for the future as well. People will get their lives together more quickly. You also explain to them the real benefits to their own flourishing of having children.

Independent-Mail-227 · 2024-03-25T10:08:18+00:00

The problem is a cultural one so is basically unfixable. Enjoy the decline and die young because.

Legitimate_Type_1324 · 2024-03-25T11:18:36+00:00

We're going to get fucked per scenario two and relearn how to society

Apotheosis_of_Steel · 2024-03-26T01:14:26+00:00

We already have the technology to produce babies in artificial bags, we just don't use it due to ethical concerns.

If our population starts suffering, we'll start using this tech.

Our destiny as a species is not to remain in these leaking flesh sacks.

abaxeron · 2024-03-25T09:46:48+00:00

For the first option, I ran the numbers some time ago, and it turns out that if a woman wants $1million for every baby (and they do because "SWEATY ITS A FULL TIME JEEERRRRB"), then JUST to cover this cost, we'll have to double the worldwide GDP and do absolutely nothing else economically. Just pay women. Double the worldwide GDP. No buying, no selling, no paying for goods and services, just earning and giving it all to women for giving birth just as they do now. Things are less catastrophic when we limit the scope to the US (we land at something like +30% GDP), but still.

Things are looking better technology-wise, actually.

What I mean is that we're having, for the first time in... three? centuries, certain economic incentives against living in cities.

Several countries have already passed micro-generation laws allowing people to sell solar power into the grid. With certain limitations, as is always the case, but still. It's not an option for an individual in a big city, but it is in rural area.

I believe that as we master scaling-down of certain technologies even better, more and more of such options will arise, allowing people to make a living without locking themselves up in a city-style wage-slavery. Will this incentive shift happen quickly enough, is another question, but thus far things look nice. I believe cities will go past their saturation point and start rolling back to their historically normal function - as a usually temporary place of residence for studying, trade, research, or temporary employment in heavy industry.

And then, they'll move into rural area and have a normal-sized family.

It's always good to remember that evolution has no morals. Whatever really happens is the right outcome.

gntlbastard · 2024-03-25T13:02:36+00:00

Funny how a woman retroactively decides to have kids and somehow the expectation is that the rest of us need to now chip in a help her with a choice the rest of us had no hand or input in.

wolfloveyes · 2024-03-25T09:39:21+00:00

Why will US do anything about this?

We can get high IQ skilled men and women from other countries?

America will spend nothing if they allow high skilled immigrants, their native countries spend on their education, childhood, etc... and US will only repeat benefit without any expense.

Why will country take chance on random kids who may or may not turn out to be meeting the requirements of industries in place?

MyLastBestChance · 2024-03-25T23:29:06+00:00

Ok, so with the understanding that dual income households are a necessity for most families, and taking as fact the idea that reducing the population is a bad thing (not a fact, but just for the sake of argument):

The “issue” seems to be mostly a topic of conversation by men and targeted almost exclusively towards women.

I have never seen any of these men suggest that, in order to facilitate a higher birth rate, men should overwhelmingly and enthusiastically embrace the responsibility of being the default parent and the default home manager for their family when both parents work.

Women have been doing so while working full time jobs and are tired.

Nobody ever tells men that they need to choose between professional success and parenting. Maybe that needs to change.

Maybe men need to find a way to succeed while also being flexible and close enough to home to able to take off on snow days and for dentist appointments and when the school nurse calls etc. etc.

Maybe men should proactively address and own responsibility for the minutiae of managing schedules and holidays and homework and activities and developmental milestones and extended family relationships and school clothes and permission slips and making sure there’s toothpaste and extra shoestrings and the soccer uniform is clean and in the backpack and there are enough valentines for everyone in the class and the birthday cupcakes are in the shape of the right transformer and are peanut free etc etc etc etc etc

Obviously there are more issues impacting the birth rate, but somehow men taking on these responsibilities never gets considered🤔

As a side benefit, men would have a much better custody outcome in the case of divorce.

So uh... how about that fertility crisis huh?

Comments

but as only a minority of women are concerned, their births increase the French fertility rate by just 0.1 children, from 1.8 to 1.9 children per woman in 2017.

Title	So uh... how about that fertility crisis huh?
Author	Commercial-Way-1011
Upvotes	14
Comments	429
Date	March 25, 2024 7:27 AM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1bn7rj3/so_uh_how_about_that_fertility_crisis_huh/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/so-uh-how-about-that-fertility-crisis-huh.1513084 https://theredarchive.com/post/1513084