Bei einem Rekordtief von 1,25 Kindern pro kanadischer Frau sollten Sie damit aufhören, sinkende Geburtenraten als eine Option abzutun
Bei einem Rekordtief von 1,25 Kindern pro kanadischer Frau sollten Sie damit aufhören, sinkende Geburtenraten als eine Option abzutun
6 Kommentare
As I commented on this before, we already have one child and can afford another in our current work arrangement.
But we decided against it because of the uncertainty surrounding WFH, and the lack of after school childcare spots.
I would argue that it is indeed a financial issue and it is also a choice. Both men and women want to continue the freedom of being kid-free. It’s a big movement with lots of anti-children communities on Reddit.
Most of my friends are now parents in my 30s, but only a few wanted to be a parent in their 20s.
Another big contributor is the lack of family support for parenting. Some parents have grandparents to help take the load off. One has his in-laws completely covering toddler childcare instead of a daycare. Then there’s others spending $2k+ per month on daycare. That’s a bit gap.
Can’t help that adherence and the practice religion, which has been the moral backbone of strong families for all of human history, is in free fall in the western world and developed economies.
We must learn to place newfound value on the institution of marriage and on our families.
Edit: cue the downvotes, but I’d love to hear an opinion as to why removing an institution that was purposefully built on fostering big families does not lead to less big families.
One of the things that articles like this rarely seem to mention is that by far the main driver of fertility decreases over the past 30 years has been the reduction in teen pregnancy.
Overall fertility for women over 25 has not actually decreased by that much.
However, the article does point out that increasing fertility is a lot more complicated than we make out.
My personal opinion is that like most caregiver positions in society, we have relied on people making huge self-sacrifices to sustain it. Whether it’s nurses, teachers, doctors, or social workers, our society has depended on people choosing others over themselves in so many ways.
That is incompatible with the hyper-individualistic society we have created.
So we either need to figure out how to undo the hyper individual character of modern society, or we need to embrace it and start paying people a lot of money to have kids.
Since we all know neither of those are going to happen, I think it’s probably best if we just accept reality and figure out how to plan for a future with way fewer children and way more older people. And by that, obviously I mean each individual has to figure that out since we obviously aren’t going to do any serious planning as a society. I suggest you start saving.
We absolutely should address the cost of living issues. Maybe that will change birthrates, maybe not. Outside of the baby boom, birthrates been trending steadily downward since the Industrial Revolution.
But worrying about the birthrate when there’s a surplus of people outside our borders looks pretty ugly from here. “We want more people, but not THOSE people.”
If people could afford it, they would have kids. I stead, work life balance and wealth inequality are completely out of line. How do you have a kid when you can’t look after it?