• Awoo [she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    388 months ago

    It might be an unpopular view here but I don’t think it really has anything to do with finances. Fertility rate goes up the poorer people are.

    I think it’s more to do with the general sense of no future worth continuing that people have, and a cultural attitude of hating kids that seems to have built up in western countries. People didn’t hate children 30 years ago the same way they hate children today. Children were a part of everyday life outdoors on every street, you really didn’t do well in the world if you got mad about kids every time you saw them because outside of school hours they were omnipresent outdoors.

    • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      188 months ago

      I think it’s more to do with the general sense of no future worth continuing that people have, and a cultural attitude of hating kids

      Yeah, while finances are an issue i agree its more that sense that the future will be worse. Blaming finances is easier, not just to communicate but also for people to wrap their minds around without having to confront the dread of the future if things continue the way they are.

      Part of me feels the hatred of children and antinatalism in general is a reaction to people not being able to afford kids/feeling there’s no future for children of their own. The way antinatalists speak, there has to be something more there

      • SubstantialNothingness [comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        98 months ago

        This survey does an awful job of separating out the motivations.

        Financial freedom (43%) was equal to financial inability (43%), and a smaller group (31%) “attribute this to the social and political world their children would inherit.”

        I would argue that increasing financial pressures are social and political realities, rather than something separate.

        And there’s no mention of an option for “not wanting to bring children into this hell world based on aspects other than social or political realities” - like climate change or ecological destruction.

        Regardless, it does look like there are multiple factors at play here, including a concern for the future that goes beyond personal finance.

      • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Agreed. I’ve been a teacher before and I don’t hate kids. So I think the problem is that “I hate kids” is more of a lie we tell ourselves because we cannot in good conscience have kids.

        There’s also the fact that the onus is always on women, so we know this is a proxy for something else. If more kids was that much of a priority the bourgeoisie would make some concessions in order to get it. They’d allow more building in “prime real estate” walkable cities and introduce the idea of “community” to America. They’d take a hit on their rent prices and let young people move to the walkable cities they yearn for so they can actually meet people, and you know, get laid to have kids.

        But no, their idea is that they want to mandate that women reproduce or be tossed in jail, and further hammer in the idea for men that if they don’t get laid by age 30 they’re a hopeless loser.

        • bigboopballs [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          58 months ago

          men that if they don’t get laid by age 30 they’re a hopeless loser.

          hey, that’s me. already 34 in fact. sadness-abysmal

        • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          88 months ago

          If more kids was that much of a priority the bourgeoisie would make some concessions in order to get it.

          They are making about as much concession as for mitigating climate change, so they are consistent.

    • Diuretic_Materialism [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      228 months ago

      Fertility rate goes up the poorer people are.

      I think it’s more that families that have been poor for generations know how to raise kids on a budget but people who grew up middle class don’t want to have kids unless they can offer them roughly the same quality of life they had, which is increasingly inaccessible.

      • keepcarrot [she/her]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        38 months ago

        I feel like all life advice in “the middle class” is like… Don’t have kids until you have an established career, mortgage, and can afford a babysitter/daycare.

        That’s not to say the modern situation is entirely caused by that. One thing I thought of is if you’re a peasant, kids might not actually be that helpful in the field but you can keep an eye on your kids fucking about while you plow fields or whatever. Once urbanisation and bosses happen, you can’t just bring your kid into the office while you make sales calls (unless your child is also losing fingers in the textile factory). Modern farms are also different to older farms; you don’t really want your kids to be around heavy machinery too much, though farmers kids I know spent a decent amount of time hanging out with their parents in the combine harvester etc (unlike literally every urban worker I know).

        The survey answer of global hopelessness feels a bit post-hoc to me. I know its a popular narrative, but many doomed societies that have felt doomed have had very high birthrates.

        Individualism is also another one.

    • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      188 months ago

      It might be an unpopular view here but I don’t think it really has anything to do with finances.

      The survey posted is literally showing that it is the primary reason. And it didn’t ignore your concerns:

      Nearly a quarter (23%) of Millennials and Gen Z without children do not plan to become parents, primarily due to financial reasons. Furthermore, 31% of Millennials and Gen Z who say they don’t plan to become a parent attribute this to the social and political world their children would inherit.

      The idea that the world is so hopeless it would be wrong to bring kids into it is real, but it is absolutely not the primary reason. Unless you have a source that says otherwise.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      88 months ago

      It might be an unpopular view here but I don’t think it really has anything to do with finances. Fertility rate goes up the poorer people are.

      The Global South has a higher birth rate than the imperial core. I don’t think it has anything to do with finances at all. Are Congolese artisanal miners and Bangladeshi sweatshop workers somehow more financially secure than some software developer living in the West?

      • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        The conditions of child rearing are so socially and economically different in the impoverished global south versus the imperial core that there’s no way to isolate those variables.

        And as I’ve said elsewhere, the headline isn’t conjecture. It’s the answer people gave to a survey. When asked why they aren’t having kids, young Americans say finances are the primary reason.

  • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    518 months ago

    I am also unsure if the world is ending. The last generation of humans may already be alive. They may already be adults with college degrees. Mad Max is fine to watch on screen, but would be a horrifying reality to live in.

    I do not want to subject people to the upcoming WW3.

      • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        The end of human civilization may be occurring within our lifetime. So children born today may be fighting in wars over water or killed in nuclear attacks twenty years from now. They may not be able to survive these events. Meaning, they won’t have children of their own.

        If the damage is severe enough, the human population might bottleneck to where we won’t have enough genetic diversity to repopulate the earth. Sort of like how cheetahs are going extinct because they’re all born with the same genetic disorder and there aren’t any cheetahs without it.

    • coeliacmccarthy [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      308 months ago

      The world is closer to ended than ending. More than half of complex macroscopic life is already dead or replaced by monoculture/livestock. Today’s fossil record would lbe considered post extinction event to future alien paleontologists.

    • Humanity is going to survive, perhaps in small isolated pockets that never reach the potential capitalism squandered.

      That being said, if I were to have a kid I’d be taking on the burden of finding a way to set them up for a good life. I don’t see a good life in near to mid term future for anyone not extremely lucky in birth circumstance.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        228 months ago

        Humanity is going to survive, perhaps in small isolated pockets that never reach the potential capitalism squandered.

        The neoliberal propaganda known as “Kurzgesagt” said that if 99% of humanity is wiped out, that’s still a “win” for Team Humanity™. The propaganda declined to state what the planetary conditions would look like for that 1% but assumed everything would be fine after that.

        • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Seriously , if Kurzgesagt actually thinks that I’m absolutely disgusted, that sounds like Hitler particles shit right there.

          EDIT: disregard the stuff I said about Stalin’s quote. I double checked it and apparently that quote wasn’t even something he actually said.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            128 months ago

            if Kurzgesagt actually thinks that I’m absolutely disgusted, that sounds like Hitler particles shit right there.

            The words Kurzgesagt said were something about a “win for team humanity” with even a 1% human survival total during some industry-driven environmental collapse. There was some weapons-grade hopium about how wonderful it’d be for “team humanity” to live on with whatever killed the other 99% on so poisoned a planet.

    • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18 months ago

      Seriously.

      I refuse to raise any kid outside of a walkable city, even if they paid me to stay in podunk suburbia and gave me a house for free I wouldn’t have a kid. Raising anyone here would practically feel like abuse.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    598 months ago

    “Raising a child costs money” is an complete unsupportable situation for any society and represents completely indefensible failure.

  • GnastyGnuts [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    218 months ago

    The only circumstance under which I could ever see myself having children is if I lived in China. Even that would be a bit scary as long as USA still exists.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    38 months ago

    Finances

    My genetic heart condition

    Having my brother’s kids for the weekend occasionally is QUITE ENOUGH thanks.

  • Acute_Engles [he/him, any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    43
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I hate being reminded that it costs money to go to the hospital and get your baby delivered in the US. Yeah it’s super expensive having a kid but i didn’t have to pay $10k+ to have it removed from my partner