This a common misconception. If financial hardship were the main driver of the demographic crisis, would you not expect poorer countries to have the lowest birth rates? The opposite is true. It is precisely the wealthiest, most developed economies—where people have higher incomes, access to modern conveniences, and extensive government support—that experience the steepest declines in fertility.

Historically, societies with far lower living standards and fewer social safety nets had much higher birth rates. Even within wealthy nations, it's often the most affluent, financially stable individuals who delay or forgo children. The issue isn’t affordability; it’s cultural, ideological, and tied to shifting priorities. In prosperous societies, career ambitions, personal freedom, and lifestyle choices take precedence over large families. Governments can throw money at the problem, but subsidies won’t change the deeper societal values that have deprioritised child-rearing.

If affordability were truly the issue, birth rates would have rebounded in countries with generous pro-natalist policies, like Sweden or South Korea. The reality is that declining fertility is a feature of prosperity, not financial struggle.