(I didn't see any rules against purely text posts to stimulate discussion. But if this is against the rules, please let me know)

Some discussion if you're unaware.

...conclude that “shifting priorities” about family, careers, and how to allocate one’s time and resources is the most likely explanation for the dramatic reduction in rates of childbearing seen among more recent cohorts of young adults. We have not found compelling data support for more readily observed (and potentially altered) policy or economic factors, like the price of childcare or rent.

So, is this a problem to you at all? If it is, then how would you address it? If it isn't, is this a problem that can be addressed along with addressing what you believe is the greater problem? How?

  • CarmineCatboy [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It's a global issue that affects every highly educated society. And it's been decade after decade of governments bribing their populations to try and get them to have children. It failed every time. The economic strategy of people who live in post industrial urban centers is just not compatible with a growing population. You can of course look at it from the point of view of rising childcare costs, but that's part of a larger social democratic project. From what I understand the american population will continue to grow via immigration and the country isn't in a situation as dire as, say, Japan.

    Ultimately, if there's a problem to be fixed it is the fact public and private finance will have to deleverage themselves somehow once the pyramid topples over. Widening the base is simply not going to happen.

  • BelieveRevolt [he/him]
    ·
    9 months ago

    It's not a problem anywhere because there are eight billion people on this planet. "Declining birth rates" is typically a thinly veiled racist talking point.

    • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
      hexagon
      ·
      9 months ago

      “Declining birth rates” is typically a thinly veiled racist talking point.

      While I know what you're talking about, and would generally agree, the Brookings article linked discusses it at the national level without differentiating between demographics. That is, after all, why I chose that article over something discussing the Great Replacement, as if it were real (to be clear, it is not).

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    ·
    9 months ago

    Needs to be viable financially to have children. Which at this point would require a complete re-work of society in many ways. You used to be able to drive a bus for a living or wait tables and make enough to support a spouse who works part time or is a full time caretaker for the children, own a modest home and a car, and often have a basic pension for retirement.

    Now days, a huge number of people are making well into the 6 figures, both partners working full time, sometimes also suplimenting income with gigs, and are barely able to afford their monthly rent and expenses.

    Many people my age just laugh when you talk about the prospect of having kids. With what money and time? They can't afford for one parter to quit their job to stay home with the kid(s), they can't afford childcare while both partners work, and even if they can scrape the money together for one of those options, they aren't able to save any significant money for the kid for college. And degrees are only becoming more expensive every year and less effective as the job market becomes more vicious.

    People are looking at the pros and cons and aren't finding hardly any pros. Everybody's quality of life suffers greatly by having a kid in that setting, including the kid.

  • heavyboots@lemmy.ml
    ·
    9 months ago

    As everyone else has said, I don't consider it a problem. Earth is pretty far over carrying capacity as it is.

    • sharkfucker420 [comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It isn't over it's capacity but I also don't think declining birthrates should be considered a problem unless the total amount of people begins to decline at a significant rate. Birthrates only need to be high so that capitalist will have more people from which they can extract capital. If the population stagnates it's not possible for a business to expand indefinitely and investors do not like when they can't profit.

      I'm sure there is much more that can be expanded on here but this is a personal belief I just considered and wrote on the spot.

      Edit: having young people is important to a communist society as well and a age distribution with a fat middle can be a problem there too because young people do the majority of the work but i think with current technological advances this issue may be and become less significant with time.