554
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
554 points (98.6% liked)
politics
19126 readers
1301 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Part of it is just money. The trickle up economics of the last 10 yrs has squeezed the possibility out of the working class.
That seems true only if you ignore examples from countries where wealth distribution and social mobility is much better or people who have actual wealth.
People in northern Europe don't have more babies even though they have the safety nets, social programs and wealth to have them. Rich people don't have more babies even though they have the means to have them.
People just don't want enough babies to renew the population if they're given the choice and other opportunities, it's that simple.
I said part. What you say is also true. It’s a multi faceted issue.
Other arguments would be climate change and political unrest/uncertainty.
That's the thing though, there's nothing that shows that money is any part of the issue. Heck, poor people have more kids than anyone else.
Clearly it’s a multifaceted issue, but all other things being equal (same culture, same applicable social safety net, etc.), rich people do have more babies than poor countrymates: https://ifstudies.org/blog/more-babies-for-the-rich-the-relationship-between-status-and-children-is-changing
It’s a linear relationship for men, and u-shaped for women (middle-income women have fewer kids than poor women, but high-income women have more kids than middle-income women).
Thanks for telling me the same thing twice and also, that's one study and I'll do the same thing you did and share family stats a second time
https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
Rich people do have more babies than poor countrymates: https://ifstudies.org/blog/more-babies-for-the-rich-the-relationship-between-status-and-children-is-changing
It's a linear relationship for men, and u-shaped for women (middle-income women have fewer kids than poor women, but high-income women have more kids than middle-income women).
Clearly it's a multifaceted issue, but all other things being equal, more money does make people more likely to have kids.
For men but if you look at women numbers (and that's the important number at they're the ones having the kids) it paints a different picture.
Also
https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/