Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Me? It’s cost of children AND education. Workers not wanting more than manual labor jobs to support themselves. Thus can't meet price requirements for kids.
It will be funny watching brown babies take over America. I’m all in GAG. Keep the MyTakes on anti immigration. Lol
Well, actually, neither proposed answer really covers it. In fact, as economies modernize and industrialize, birthrates tend to drop. That is pretty much the historical norm.
The reasons for this are complex. Leaving aside questions of religion - religious cultures tend to have higher birthrates and then, as secularization sets in, the imperative to "be fruitful and multiply" loses its' sociological/cultural force.
Further, in more primitive economies where farming and mercantile trade is the norm, the need for more children to "help in the fields" and such tends to result in higher birthrates. Not to mention that in such primitive cultures, the medical technologies tended to spur on higher birthrates.
This both because people tend to have more babies because the lifespan of newborn children tended to be shorter. Also, because the technology of birth control was not as advanced.
Then, as economies modernize and industrialize, the need for large families declines while the cost of such families tends to rise. Throw in then, too, that mortality rates decline and lifespans increase. So people tend to have fewer children, but they children they have live longer and are able to take care of their parents as their parents age.
Presently, the nations with the lowest birthrates are all heavily industrialized and modernized quickly. Japan has, in demographic terms, the oldest population on Earth. Italy the second. This because not only are these countries heavily industrialized, but they did so quickly.
Interestingly, the nation with the third oldest population on Earth is China. This because China experienced its' industrial revolution and economic modernization - and thanks to communism, its' secularization - relatively quickly by historical standards and then aggravated it with deliberate social engineering in the form of the "one child policy." A policy it enforced with vicious brutality.
Ironically, China has been rushing to reverse the decline in birthrates as it now realizes that such a decline has its' own negative effects. Yet, they have discovered that it is easier to prevent the birth of children than it is to re-start the machine, so to speak.
As to the USA, it has, by the standard of industrialized societies, a relatively high birthrate and young population. To be sure, the former is declining and the later aging, but by the norms of the industrialized world, the USA is relatively young in demographic terms - though aging for sure. This, in part, because of the relatively high rates of immigration from more Third World countries and also because religion remains more of a cultural and social force than in the rest of the industrialized world.
Thus, while the USA is experiencing the normal demographic patterns of the industrialized world, it is doing so at a relatively slower rate. This giving the USA a modest economic advantage.
Well, every now and then you can hit me in a terse mood.
As to polling explaining it - or not - you are right. It is pretty much a sociological and even evolutionary phenomenon. As to feminism and liberals, no, they can't be blamed, but they do augment it. Though I would argue that they are more symptom than cause.
As to worrying, actually, although there is probably - as China has learned in both directions - not much that can be done, it does have worrying implications. The societies that grew up in times of high birthrates and such will now face lower economic growth rates - fewer consumers to purchase goods and services. A shrinking labor force to make those products and therefore a shrinking tax base, meaning higher national debt and an increasing strain on the welfare state.
Suffice to say, those are things to worry about. Indeed, although the public is only - at best - dimly aware of it, the demographic shrinkage is already having political implications. Also national security implications as defense budget shrinks and the pool of military age manpower is also declining.
Sorry for the long answer, but as I note, the aging population will have - and is already having - all sorts of political, social, cultural and economic impacts.
Society has largely changed since 1950. For starters women are having children later in life like after 30. If you notice the way it generally works now in the west women will go to college and graduate and establish a career for 8 years before deciding to settle down with their long term fiancee after nearly 10 years of saving and within the first year of marraige have a kid or two and return to their career as they've a 30 year mortgage to pay. Of course it doesn't work out exactly to this plan for a lot of women and they struggle to have even one kid moving into their 40s.
Of course you are right that ilegal immigration does drive down wages so that supporting a family is very difficult.
If you want the birth rate to rise then western women are going to have to start marrying younger again and having kids again in their teens and twenties and at least four kids.
The day is too short for a woman who has to work full time job, taking care over household and taking care of kids. Not everyone has grand parents who can take care of children for 12 hours a day. I think kindergartens and elementary schools should take care for children for at least 12 hours 6 days per week when they want that women who have to work give birth to new system slaves. Maybe they will make some clones in the future because they slowly realize replacement immigration doesn't work. If third wordlers, they still import could create prosperous societies they would do that and wouldn't need to emigrate.
There was a time in my life when I thought I wanted kids. Then after I couldn't seem to find the right guy I looked around and saw how much families struggled. At a certain point I couldn't really see that much incentive to have children. I would eventually like to settle down with someone but beyond that having kids just seems to expensive and impractical.
Opinion
17Opinion
It's the responsibility of caring for kids. Most adults now are so fucking irresponsible they can barely care for themselves so how are they gonna care for a kid that will be totally dependent on them. Lack of basic skills including managing their finances so yes some is cost in that way.
Well, now that's impressive, Odd, a rant that exemplifies your racism, arrogance, and stupidity all in one place.
Since you can't have kids, you don't realize that 1) childcare is very expensive, 2) housing in a good school district is very expensive, 3) it's not easy finding the right person to have kids with, 4) raising kids requires a lot of self-sacrifice, something a lot of people, including many parents, aren't up for, and 5) there is a significant amount of economic instability for a lot of people. All of that is applicable to college graduates as well, especially ones with student loan debt.
Yet our far more impoverished Ancestors, and currently more impoverished population all over the world who can't afford a fraction of all theses services still breed like Rabits as long as they remain impoverish.
It is precisely the cultures that can afford theses things most that breed the least and point to the affordability of said things as an excuse. How is it then @Avicenna that we don't concluded it is precisely those expectations/requirements that are the problem? At least how spoiled we have become by these services as to declare them soo required?
The City corrupts and spoils its residents by these means and has been since the beginning. As we even noted by Adam Smith in the "Wealth of Nations". Perhaps one of the single most important books to modern civilization of all times as it is one of the closest things we have to capitalism what the "communist manifesto" was to communism.
@Avicenna Although the ability to support a family in today's world is a major problem. I was trying to point out that the historic evidence is that it is not the only or even original problem.
Rich families living in cities were not having kids hundreds of years ago.
Indeed there is evidence even the Romans suffered from said problem leading to the collapse of their empire when finally their fanatic ability to assimilate could not replace their losses fast enough, and their armies became more German than roman.
We can blame roman problems on other problems like lead condemnation just as we can point to similar issues with modern urban life. But we are looking at a problem that specifically effects the most successful people in each time.
That is why as the anti-human leftist @WhiteSteve and others like Bill pointed out the human population being too big misses the real problem here.
Even thou we don't agree that there are too many humans. The specific traits of human we are breeding out in each and every industrialized culture are the specific humans traits we need most to survive and solve these future problems.
The cost problem can otherwise be solved just like the parenting problem by reintegrating the full family. (having grandparents live with the kids again). Something the collapsible of the welfare state and its retirement schemes for lack of children will force.
education? you think colleges say "have less kids".
just kuz people go to college, two things at the same time are not a cause.
a cause is a cause.
like messing with genetics using r. n. a. vax that is a genetic cause.
but easier to fool people then for them to admit we were fooled.
it is also important to consider long term trends for the past 30 years less children born each year and even the rate lessened but then an ACCELERATION after the rna vax... and the need for "projection to predict increased growth" against the trend...
means the rna was intended to hurt fertility and increase the acceleration of the falling rate.
I think the responsibility element of it might be bigger than the financial element, honestly. I know a lot of people my age simply don't want the responsibility. They're worried about losing their freedom. It ends up being a bit of a joke because of how little they actually do in their day to day lives. I'm not sure what they'd have to do differently by having kids.
Everybody also talks about wanting to be in a good place mentally and emotionally before having kids. But... these are also the same people who do almost nothing to improve their mental and emotional health.
The issue just seems to be Millennials freaking out about growing up, per usual.
Certainly there was a growing childlessness movement. I’ve read recently it’s gone down even though poor people are still having 12 babies and educated are only having a modest two. #idiocracy
It makes sense... the less educated folks have lower expectations/hopes about the level of comfort they can reasonably attain in life. It's a lower bar to meet. So they get more comfortable with having children sooner.
Cost of it has jack fucking shit to do with it. How many people nowadays are in legitimate fear of famine and death caused by a harsh winter?
There are multiple reasons, you can boil them down to - people are selfish shits. These generations are incapable of taking care of kids. No love to give, no yearning for a family, no interest in changing themselves or making sacrifices for their family.
As for your comments, please explain to me exactly how this has nothing at all to do with feminism and is totally a problem caused by 'toxic masculinity', when the nations that have this issue are feminist nations?
Capitalism. Rich cunts using basic human needs as an avenue for personal profit at the expense of basically everyone else. People who are being pushed ever deeper into poverty by the greed of those arseholes can't even buy their own homes, let alone afford to raise children.
And funnily enough, Capitalism is ALSO to blame for all the immigration nonsense. Because there is nothing big companies love more than cheap labour and additional competition for resources to drive prices up.
If it were merely cost that was the issue , Africa would not have a high birth rates, still nor would our impoverished ancestors.
Cost is the excuse we give ourselves for unrealistic expectation we have set for raising children. Expectations set as much by idiot cultural leaders as it is accepted by appealing to our personal greed and desire to have it all as promised by the same.
Cost is indeed an issue if you can't afford to make any living arrangement as is unfortunate the case in a nuclear family situation isolated from parents. But that in itself is indeed part of the problem.
We humans were never meant to grownup without our grandparents, and extended family support systems. We westerns have suffered greatly personalty, financially, and culturally for want of it.
@Avicenna Yes, Africa is urbanizing and industrializing
People can't afford kids, they can barely afford to buy a house. You need both a house and money for children, then one of the parents needs time to raise the kids. All resources we are lacking in our poor countries (Yes, the west is currently poor I don't care what kind of international buying power we have, we can't afford basic things while they can).
Alright so tell me how i'd pull it off then. Houses in my country, regular family homes with 2 houses attached to you are half a million dollars and the market will plummet once the politicians decide to end immigration. Meanwhile migrants come first on our rental market and they let more migrants in than they can build houses. In my entire province all I can apply for to rent is a parking space. In another province all I can apply for is a single house with 120 signups depending on priority on a waiting list ill never get high enough on but have to pay yearly for to get on.
How do I get affordable housing to start a family so that my income can carry the entire family?
You mean the second homes thing? I didn't fully understand what you mean. I was talking about terraced housing. Not people with second homes. Terraced houses is a row of houses all attached to each other. Its not a standalone house like you'd see in the US where no neighbor house is directly attached.
Hope that clears things up.
In your country degrees have gotten so expensive it sometimes makes more sense to find a job without one. I was planning to move to the US for my last relationship and would have had the best of both worlds. My IT degree was only $3000 so I have a good amount of savings, at the time the conversion was favorable so I'd basically had been able to afford a starting home without a mortgage there. So I agree that in your country, not everywhere but in some states / good places you can find properly affordable housing and the housing prices being high don't have much to do with the migrants (yet). But once your at netherlands levels of housing debt and simultaniously have a policy that puts migrants first it is definitely to blame on the migrants.
A lot of reasons. People feel like they can't afford any/more kids, a growing amount of people simply don't want them, and the average age at which people are getting married and becoming parents is rising, which of course means that they can have fewer children.
There is no one reason, there are a number of reasosn as to why. The environment and global warming is one, the cost of living, technology leading to a lack of social interaction (this is notable in Japan) nearly half of all men under 40 are virgins in Japan. Feminism is another reason, it is leading to the genders hating on each other, being suspicious of each other and it is causing men to be shitted over by women, so they don't want kids with them anymore.
Lol what a simp
No you are a simp
i'm out. i can move. let america destroy itself
now i gotta pay a monthly rent on bunker space? fuck that
people don't need a bunch of kids to work on the farm and bring in income.
Birth control.
Cost of raising kids.
there's an inverse relationship between education level and family size.
Because people are more concerned with affording a baby than having one.
Income inequality is a very strong indicator of future birth rates; its the direct reason why birth rates are dropping. For the record, 'poor people' birth rate numbers are being buffered by migrate populous. If you look at the third generation onward you can draw a accurate trend line following socioeconomic factors with birthrates over time
Uhh poor people have the highest birth rate. Hands down.
I mean all birth rates are falling…but poverty level families keep pumping them out!
www.statista.com/.../
I support sexually liberal sex positive people's decision about not having kids.
If I couldn't say the costs my guess would be right wing media. Men can't easily be angry and horny at the same time and right wing media is 100% focused on keeping men angry 24/7. So, less sex and less babies..
Cost of kids and decline of society. People are giving up on the "American Dream."
Going to college doesn't guarantee you a better job anymore. Instead it now guarantees you a shitload of debt. Who's fault is that? The teenagers?
I don't know man, I just know not very many people I graduated with got a job with their degree like they were told they would. I don't think that's an isolated thing either, I've definitely heard of it happening a lot more recently...
I can’t speak to your friends. I do know having that degree your friends are at least statiscallh more likely to make a million more bucks over their lifetime than those without. Tons of research bears this out,
Whether that starts right out of college or a few years after. I know several grads who just love the university life so much they stayed there and worked odd jobs.
But then they got a chick preggers and got six figure jobs.
Having a degree can help you get a job, sure, but it's largely the same predictors as it is without a degree: connections, experience, and confidence. College can build all three, but just the degree is technically none. It helps your resume, but there's so many resumes right now and so many people go to college, it really doesn't help that much anymore. It's like inflation the value of a degree went down because they're more common.
I forgot how medians work is that the one where it's all the numbers divided by all the numbers, or just the number that's in the middle of the line?
I went to college
I did...
Okay then
Women can't find comparable men, acceptance of gay/lesbian has caused less births, you're right about costs, some even feel bringing a child into this current shit hole is not fair to that child.
The educated can see the issue of chronic overpopulation and don't wish to add to it
The uneducated can't afford the costs involved in child rearing
Men are no longer willing to be victimized by women who make false accusations to get money.
what you put down as A and every other degeneracy that leftists have started
Hands down cost!
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions