Are video games,birth rate, drugs, and changes irt masculinity actually a problem for the west?
I use the term changes toward masculinity. Some people believe masculinity is under attack. Others simply say that there
But there’s a much much higher birth rate in areas of the world where there is considerably more poverty.
No doubt about it. The middle class is struggling in America. But that doesn’t mean we need to have record numbers of single young men….something(s) else is at play.
The right/this country doesn't want people who can't afford it having children--we've heard it for years.
It's a combo of variables but I kinda toss having so many listless/unattached young men(and lots of other men too tbh) in with the middle class getting crunched. I think it's a little different comparing places that have had high rates of persistent poverty for ages to a place that's in the process of being dismantled. But that's just a guess.
The right/this country doesn't want people who can't afford it having children--we've heard it for years. It's a combo of variables but I kinda toss having so many listless/unattached young men(and lots of other men too tbh) in with the middle class getting crunched. I think it's a little different comparing places that have had high rates of persistent poverty for ages to a pl
it's not only the right , or you would have very different fertility rates in states controlled by democrats, if their policies made any difference. but they don't.
it's not only the right , or you would have very different fertility rates in states controlled by democrats, if their policies made any difference. but they don't.
That's why I also included "this country" it's just something you generally hear said more from conservatives out in the wild.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
That's why I also included "this country" it's just something you generally hear said more from conservatives out in the wild.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
problem though is that elsewhere, even where welfare is Uber massive, fertility rates are horrible.
just check finland
problem though is that elsewhere, even where welfare is Uber massive, fertility rates are horrible.
just check finland
I don't know maybe people don't want to have kids where one of the primary possibilities of being able to raise them is ending up on welfare? It doesn't really inspire confidence imo 😀
The right/this country doesn't want people who can't afford it having children--we've heard it for years. It's a combo of variables but I kinda toss having so many listless/unattached young men(and lots of other men too tbh) in with the middle class getting crunched. I think it's a little different comparing places that have had high rates of persistent poverty for ages to a pl
Back in the 1970s we didn't have the big pool of never married guys in their 20s and 30s that we see today. By age 25 in 1970, only about 1/4 of men and just over 1 in 10 women had never married. Today those number basically flip-flopped: close to 3/4 of men and 2/3 of women at 25 are still single. Then when we cross over the 40 y/o demo, we start seeing a surplus of unmarried women compared to men.
A 25 y/o recent college grad, living with his parents, working an entry level job and a ton of school debt just isn't the same marriage material as say a guy landing the career job at General Motors or getting in a union back in the 70s. Then there's the rise in women's education, income and independence.
I don't know maybe people don't want to have kids where one of the primary possibilities of being able to raise them is ending up on welfare? It doesn't really inspire confidence imo 😀
having kids has always been mote expensive than nothing having kids since forever. I don't understand this
having kids has always been mote expensive than nothing having kids since forever. I don't understand this
There's a difference between expensive and affordable. Capisce? Something can be expensive but still affordable/do-able. Good luck getting people to want to have kids with potentially having to count on welfare as one of the foundations of doing it. Just get on welfare--it's gonna be awesome! lol
I mean we can sit here going round and round but the reality is cost ranks as one of the very top reasons people give for not doing it these days. It's just reality dude.
There's a difference between expensive and affordable. Capisce? Something can be expensive but still affordable/do-able. Good luck getting people to want to have kids with potentially having to count on welfare as one of the foundations of doing it. Just get on welfare--it's gonna be awesome! lolI mean we can sit here going round and round but the reality is cost ranks as one o
Cultural pressure is probably the main driver. There’s a well-established inverse correlation between fertility rates and women’s rights/independence. So maybe we should be asking:
Q: why did women have so many children back then?
A: Cultural or patriarchal oppression. It’s apparent with how much Latino immigrant fertility rates drop from their native country. Same with Muslim immigrants. By the second or third generation, their fertility rates are pretty near the norm.
Who wants kids ?
They might actually wants to get a college degree .
That is A house right there gone in smoke for 1 kid :p
Back in the 1970s we didn't have the big pool of never married guys in their 20s and 30s that we see today. By age 25 in 1970, only about 1/4 of men and just over 1 in 10 women had never married. Today those number basically flip-flopped: close to 3/4 of men and 2/3 of women at 25 are still single. Then when we cross over the 40 y/o demo, we start seeing a surplus of unmarried
That Makes sense .
Gay men live in a world that wasn’t made for us and created a culture that literally gives us the strength to be kept alive.
Straight white men currently live in a world made for them but their culture is killing them.
There's a difference between expensive and affordable. Capisce? Something can be expensive but still affordable/do-able. Good luck getting people to want to have kids with potentially having to count on welfare as one of the foundations of doing it. Just get on welfare--it's gonna be awesome! lolI mean we can sit here going round and round but the reality is
yes they blame costs but you know it's fake otherwise richer parts of every country would have higher fertility while *it's exactly the opposite almost everywhere*.
Ya, it's a giant conspiracy by the girls 🙄 Maybe we should go back to basically forcing teenagers to get married so they can have sex. That worked out well. It seems like most genx'ers I know had their parents get divorced.
girls? it's men responding as well.
your problem here is trying to push for policies you prefer for other reasons under the cover of attempting to solve the fertility rate problem.
fact is fertility is dropping dramatically in nations with high welfare, in nation with low welfare and in nations with medium welfare.
so it cannot be about welfare.
fertility is dropping dramatically in places with good real wage growth and in places with bad real wage growth.
so it cannot be about wage growth.
and so on.
for example as much as I like freedom, fertility is dropping a lot both in free countries and in not free countries.
when something is happening at the same time in Helsinki, Shangai, rural Sicily and the Amazon Basin, we could all agree to stop trying to link that to any policy we prefer for other reasons.
just to avoid wasting time
Wage growth isolated by itself doesn't nec. mean anything dude. It's about reality and conditions on the ground. Many people see the cost of everything housing/college etc as unrealistic to do with multiple(say over 2) kids.
I mean you can sit there and say it's all fake and all the other side has to do is say--scoreboard. Scoreboard is what's reality not your feelings luci
Wage growth isolated by itself doesn't nec. mean anything dude. It's about reality and conditions on the ground. Many people see the cost of everything housing/college etc as unrealistic to do with multiple(say over 2) kids.
I mean you can sit there and say it's all fake and all the other side has to do is say--scoreboard. Scoreboard is what's reality not your feelings luci
college is FREE IN FINLAND. Free as in tuition is ZERO EUR.
house prices are STABLE not increasing
THEY DONT HAVE KIDS ANYWAY
this proves beyond reasonable doubt IT IS NOT ABOUT WHAT YOU CLAIM IT IS
Luciom and me agree white male culture needs to change we just disagree on the direction of that change.
I think of the pontoon boats riding onto the beaches in Normandy and what it takes to face almost certain death so that the community can survive. I contemplate that and I wonder "would incels do that?".
I don't think so.
Lacking incentives for men is only a problem if you need men to fight wars or if you don't want a bunch of dudes milling around pointlessly and then start thinking fascism is their only way to achieve anything.
Mostly from immigration but polygamy is a factor:
Immigration isn't a factor in the US. We're not Europe; we actually import more females than males. I doubt the quasi polygamy angle counts for much over here. Mostly what you see are age and lifestyle dynamics that result in a larger percentage of single males <30 and a larger percentage of single females >60.
Polygamy is not so much an issue in the GCC countries. Quite rare there. It is found more in sub Sahara Africa.
There are more female doctors and lawyers in Saudi Arabia than they’re ever were before…. But they still have a birth rate that is well above the replacement rate. Obviously there are still social challenges in Saudi Arabia from a western perspective. But it is clearly an example of a wealthy country where most of its citizens are in the middle or upper class, and it still has a decently high birth rate of 2.3 births per woman
But again, I have to keep going back to the United States in the middle of the 20th century. It’s very specifically for the point that people attempt to make to say “well where there is widespread poverty there is a high birth rate”. Considering the United States being a powerhouse country after World War II. The Post World War II economic boom for example saw the Usa become the strongest country in the world economically and militarly
All has to do is look at the birth rate in the United States in the middle 20th century and it was much higher than it is today. The US birth rate in the 1950s was about 3.8 per woman compared to 1.6 per woman today. And most people cite the post World War II economic boom as the most prosperous era for the American middle class. Back in those days, you could get a job out of high school at a steel or Auto plant and be set for life. It simply doesn’t exist like that today. Even folks with a college education are weighed down by college debt. And not to mention, they have to often Move somewhere They might not want to to find a job correlating with their degree. … if they’re able to even find such a job.
The US is still a great place and the top destination in the world for refugees and immigrants. But the low birth rate might be problematic in the future and put a strain on healthcare and Social Security.
Back in the 1970s we didn't have the big pool of never married guys in their 20s and 30s that we see today. By age 25 in 1970, only about 1/4 of men and just over 1 in 10 women had never married. Today those number basically flip-flopped: close to 3/4 of men and 2/3 of women at 25 are still single. Then when we cross over the 40 y/o demo, we start seeing a surplus of unmarried
Yes, this is effectively what Professor Galloway pointed out. In addition to the easy access to porn, the legalization of marijuana, the negative aspects of social media….some young men being OK with having an AI girlfriend. These problems were not around in the 1970s.
But also worth mentioning are the younger women dating older men which in part explains why there are a lot of young single men in the USA.
having kids has always been mote expensive than nothing having kids since forever. I don't understand this
Sure but it is considerably more expensive to raise a child in the USA today compared to the 1970s
Luciom and me agree white male culture needs to change we just disagree on the direction of that change.
Yes, white male culture certainly needs to change in the USA… so does black male culture. For example, most of the gang violence in the US is committed by young black men. White young men are way over represented when it comes to mass school shooters.
Further,
“Gender and age: Men younger than 40 are more likely than women in this age group to be unpartnered. But among those 40 and older, women are more likely to be unpartnered. For example, 51% of women 65 and older are unpartnered, compared with only 29% of men in the same age group.
Race and ethnicity: 61% of Black adults are unpartnered, compared with 45% of Hispanic adults, 38% of White adults and 35% of Asian adults”
I think of the pontoon boats riding onto the beaches in Normandy and what it takes to face almost certain death so that the community can survive. I contemplate that and I wonder "would incels do that?".I don't think so. Lacking incentives for men is only a problem if you need men to fight wars or if you don't want a bunch of dudes milling around pointlessly and then start thin
If you had a bunch of like pro BLM woke people in America during World War II we would’ve gotten crushed.
Sure but it is considerably more expensive to raise a child in the USA today compared to the 1970s https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/articles...https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/202...
This is heavily situational.
I've got two kids, approaching teenagers now and I honestly probably have more money than I would if I didn't have kids.
I didn't upsize my home, my wife stays at home, they go to public schools, their healthcare has either been through my employer, or when i transitioned, through medi cal. I also received about 300-600 month in cal fresh food stamps when transitioning work or working for myself (auto or construction) when their cost of food was probably half that at most. Plus I spent time with them instead of splurging doing other stuff.
Maybe if I was Elon Musk and my wife was Selena Gomez, we'd then may be paying a lot for private school and childcare and another house so they can each have their own room instead of them sleeping in our bed and such, but poor people will be able to raise kids for well below those figures.
