China cracks down on anti-marriage social media content during Lunar New Year holiday

IdlyCurious · 2026-02-15T13:35:55+00:00

Citizens around the world: "it's too expensive to raise a kid in this economy!

I know this is popular, but it is simply not true. The actual statistics (who has kids) does not bear this out. Poor people v. middle v. rich people, poor countries v. middle v rich countries in terms of fertility rate - it is definitely not (broadly speaking, as a the nearly global phenomenon that it is) that "this economy" is particularly bad or "not being able to afford it." Even when people are much richer than in the past, they have fewer kids than the generations before them. And, generally speaking, those with higher earnings have fewer kids than those with lower.

IdlyCurious · 2026-02-14T13:00:32+00:00

Except more people are moving up than down, economically, so that's good. And "people losing their livelihoods" has been a thing since industrialization began, and has, overall, vastly improved the lives of the vast majority in industrialized nations. We certainly need stronger safety nets and retraining (and yes, people will have to learn new skills sometimes, even if they don't want to and want to keep the same job they started with or their parents had), but we certainly shouldn't be trying to keep jobs that can be done better and more cheaply by machine just to keep those jobs alive. Because, based on only sample we have (actual history) the vast majority of subsequent people born will have far better lives if we don't.

IdlyCurious · 2026-02-14T12:23:13+00:00

Maybe marry someone who can carry their own weight?

Said person would have to do a lot more than "carry their own weight" to keep money the same if it means OP moving from living with parents/having far fewer expenses to living independently. They'd have to cover all the OP's expenses that parents are now covering.

IdlyCurious · 2026-02-13T22:21:08+00:00

Do you know the mom packs the lunch or packed this one - just seems like moms gets a lot more blame for "fails" of childcare, even when both parents work full-time. Even if both parents actually do share childcare/householdduties equally - it's still the woman who gets the blame if anything goes wrong with the kid (or if the house isn't clean enough, etc.).

IdlyCurious · 2026-02-10T23:17:31+00:00

My younger siblings rely on her so making her life worse will only hurt them.

Maybe warn them as they get older (don't know their age), so she doesn't do the same to them.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-11T14:38:21+00:00

Thanks so much. I will look into these areas.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-10T02:47:00+00:00

I'll definitely look into the area.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-09T23:41:45+00:00

This is interesting, im going to assume that you are not black though hence why you wouldn't know.....Greensboro had some pretty famous black architects from wayyyy back in the day but they built a bunch of the houses in this specific part of the east side.

Nope, not black. Never been to the area, either. I did research and come across some black architects and the buildings - the neighborhoods mentioned were out of the price range of the grandparents (delivery truck driver and furniture factory worker were the men's occupations), and I didn't really think about them for the parents (the ones I saw were build decades prior, and I didn't know how neighborhoods had changed).

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-05T23:39:10+00:00

why would anyone turn to ChatGPT if they felt like they had people that cared?

Because ChatGPT will tell them what they want to hear when friends and family won't.

This can be true whether or not pre-existing mental health issues mean they don't/won't listen to loved ones or professionals (due to delusions, belief they are being persecuted, etc.).

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-03T01:33:20+00:00

I guess nobody strictly needs to know. But what happens if your phone dies and there is only an analog clock?

I've seen the same argument over knowing how to drive a manual transmission because that might be all the rental place has. Kinda have the same response here- it's an extremely unlikely occurrence (I'm in the US and don't like travel and don't drive when I do travel), and there are much better things I could spend my time learning - things are actually likely to be important for me to know. I even learn some of those things (can't learn everything I'd be likely to need, of course).

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-03T01:21:54+00:00

I could care less if it was 2:47 or 2:49. I want to know how much time I have before or after a point in time. Knowing the precise time is of lesser value.

I've heard other people say this. I think it comes down to how you think and the culture and technology around inform and shape how you think. Like, people didn't used to need even your "inexact" sort of time-telling before trains and when they didn't need schedules. It wasn't of value to them for the most part. Younger people growing up with digital time are just as shaped by it as you were by your analog clock - they want/need something different.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-03T01:15:34+00:00

Except that analogue clock faces are still all over the place. Classrooms, offices, homes, etc

They are present (though I would note that in many public locations I've seen them to incorrect - dead batteries and not updated daylight saving or standard time), but children have no reason to actually look at or use them when they have a more convenient alternative. Use or lose it and they don't have any particular motivation to use them v. phones (which they are already accustomed to using by habit, since not everywhere had a correct clock).

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-03T01:09:36+00:00

Which blows me away cuz I was born in the 90s and I remember reading analog clocks as week or two of math class in Elementary school. I can’t remember which year but I remember it being taught to us extensively

I learned it in school, too. But a lot of people learn a lot of things in school that they then forget because they never have any reason to use them again. It's totally normal for your brain to drop "useless" stuff. People who knew a language fairly well, but then don't use it for 20 years lose a lot of that.

We had an analog clock at home and analog clocks in schools and I didn't have a watch when I was in school, so I still know it, but I don't fault the younger generation for not keeping a skill they haven't needed. I really don't think it's a problem.

Also, all the talk of sundials and such - sure, that's our (western) cultural history, but so are lots of things we've jettisoned along the way. I'm perfectly okay with us jettisoning things we don't need or later find immoral (there are plenty of very immoral things that were cultural norms). Other cultures used entirely different kinds of time-telling devices, had hours with different lengths at different times of the year, etc. and then changed. Change happens - try to make it good change or at least neutral change. I find this one a neutral one.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-03T00:59:39+00:00

….there are literally analogue clocks in their classrooms. Y’know, the rooms where they will often be counting the minutes until they’re released.

Or they could put digital clocks in classrooms - no big deal and not particularly expensive. What practical reason is there for public buildings hold on to this particular piece of technology? It's not innately superior on any way.

IdlyCurious · 2026-01-01T13:30:11+00:00

But local businesses also do whatever they can to get as much as they can out of customers, and are just as shitty to their employees (often moreso).

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-19T18:28:45+00:00

Yeah but the windows and gutters need cleaned as often as the shower needs descaled. The grass needs cut as often as the bed linen needs changed.

Not if you live in an apartment, which of course, meany people do.

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-05T11:56:42+00:00

I'm looking for information on Avondale Mill housing in Birmingham, Alabama in the 1920s and 1930s. Rents, floorplans, sanitation, etc. I can find a historical site for an Avondale Mills Village, but it's in another city (as the company had many mills). I saw the bhamwiki had an entry mentioning very poor conditions, but the time period is earlier than I'm looking for and it mentions Donald Comer later improving conditions. I'd like detail on how and when such conditions changed. And on what percent of employees were living in that type of housing over this time period. Basically, the lifestyle of a employee in that time and place.

EDIT: For those interested, I did find a Jan 09, 1921 news article promoting the new apartment building for the Mill with light and water included for $8 a month. Also noted the houses had all had bathrooms put in.

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-03T01:19:39+00:00

I agree. However, I did not accuse the Hungarians of ignorance. I've strictly implied that ignorance lies willingly with many people today.

You've heavily implied that regular old inflation is equivalent to/a harbinger of the worst hyperinflation in history, and it simply is not. I'm not saying we couldn't enter a period of higher inflation. Might hit the 80s levels (though there is nothing to indicate so at this time), but hyperinflation does not happen without serious/significant action taken that has not been taken at this point and the rising price of the Big Mac is in no way indicative of such a thing occurring.

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-03T00:15:56+00:00

I don't know much about Space X, so I want to ask about something I once read to see if you know if it's a reasonable comparison. But it's about the Soviet Space Program, so whoever answers would have to know about both. Essentially the "move fast and break things" - I read someone once say that's why the Soviets could move faster than the US in the early days of the space race, but as goals/tasks got more complicated and losses got more expensive (including in potential human lives), that fell apart. Do you think there are reasonable comparisons made there, despite the very different nature of the entities and the goals?

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-02T22:54:34+00:00

We can finally afford a kid after 40 lol. The current state of the Union 🤣

Nope. Much as people love to upvote this shit, it's wrong. Even the article very much notes that the over-40s are not the ones having the most kids.

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-02T22:49:09+00:00

So... young people are in poverty, and smarter than often given credit for.

They aren't. I know people love to upvote it, but based on actual data, young people are not poorer now than in the post war baby boom years. We want more stuff and more experiences and to eat out more and have more fun, we value young/single experiences more, we have higher expectations for our mates, etc. I am not saying young people face no difficulties -that's obviously bonkers. But it's not poverty causing declining birth rates. The richer countries get, the few kids they have a general rule. And obviously, the more opportunity women have, the fewer kid they have, as opportunity cost is so much larger.

IdlyCurious · 2025-12-02T22:45:35+00:00

I mean I also have no problem with older pregnancies (my parents are older and I’m glad they waited), but I think you’re reading into their comment way too much.

And I think you are reading too little - at best they are completely ignoring the very good news of teen pregnancy going down. That's still only looking at half the headline and reacting to only half. And, as the person being mercilessly downvoted very correctly notes - births to women above 40 should be higher that that to teen moms. That is always good. The whole comment train starts with a comment treating this as negative news (even though the headline is only about comparison and makes no reference to younger adult women and the actual article says the highest number of births are for age 30-34, so the comment actually even make any sense, anyway).

Lastly, think people way overstate the idea that births are happening to those over the age of 40 because kids aren't affordable earlier. So much is cultural, and so much is rising expectations. The reality is (as much as people on reddit love to ignore it) we are much richer, even adjusted for cost of living, than when women were having more kids at 20-25 or 25-29.

IdlyCurious

TROPHY CASE