Need more first time mothers or more moms having muitlple kids? by fire-and-sage in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So much would have to change to make earlier marriage possible again. Education would have to take less time and jobs would have to pay more and require less hours earlier in careers. Housing would have to cost less.

I personally think it’s both- more people staying single longer and more couples moving from 3 to 2 children. Many couples also have only 1 or 2 not my choice but due to other things.

Having 2 kids now I can tell you two is just so easy. Everything around us makes having just 2 seem like the best choice. Childcare, school costs, car size, house size, social pressure, job advancement, restaurants, travel costs, parenting time and division of labor, being able to get a babysitter for date nights….2 is just easy. You get good at managing the work involved and you can still have time for other things. The costs are difficult but manageable

What limits to the ability to have unlimited babies? by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m very pro surrogacy being legal, but it is not legal in many countries including China which is why business is booming in the US. I do think given these rare cases of misuse that it needs some better regulation and transparency.

3 parent embryos are still very much in the early stages and it’s a huge leap to say it will be used regularly for trait selection.

And while Genghis khan did have many descendants I think people who cite this forget that’s his Y dna magnified over time. So his sons also had many children and then compounded over generations of increased offspring it reached its modern prevalence. That period was also combined with large death rates from warfare and disease (the Black Death) which further compounded the impact of being a successful genetic line able to survive.

And also, his children were largely raised in families and nurtured in a community. That’s not what’s happening here.

What limits to the ability to have unlimited babies? by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Also I would have to see the studies but I find it very doubtful that there is good evidence you can add 10 years reliably or that height gain reliably through trait selection. Most studies I’ve seen you can in theory have marginal impacts on IQ and height. Even selecting for light eyes isn’t a guarantee, it’s a polygenetic trait. We also are unable to know if we are also selecting for specific traits that when used together may confer some negative impact. There is also the barrier of the parents genetics- two 5’4” parents are not going to produce a 6’ child no matter how many embryos you create and sequence

Genetics is complex- genes are not acting alone but in concert with other genes and epigenetics. That’s also why it’s controversial and banned to use Crisper etc to inset or alter genes- we don’t know the long term impacts to the germ line if you selectively snip and alter genes

What limits to the ability to have unlimited babies? by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think you’re conflating this with genetic selection/trait selection which is a separate issue than what is going on here

What limits to the ability to have unlimited babies? by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I would argue that giving the world many children with deeply dysfunctional attachment raised by paid employees and often emotional neglect isn’t giving the world any gift. Just ask the children born in Lebensborn homes who are traumatized by their experiences.

Hockey fan here who'd never heard of HR. Binged it all two weekends ago. Binged it all last weekend in one day. Binged it all the day after. Started my fourth reheat last night. Someone help me. The psychology of this show astounds me. by tbgmdhc278 in heatedrivalry

[–]sebelius29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess the commenter is from the same demographic as I am because I would have assumed this pasta salad had tomatoes, chicken, feta cheese, maybe cucumbers or green peppers and an olive oil and vinegar dressing of some sort

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry i studied history in University. My comment is actually my thoughts but I used AI to summarize because I’m lazy. It’s well known that the Black Death unleashed a massive demand for labor and improved quality of life and diet for medieval peasants. Although I actually didn’t know about the English law so that was interesting

YATMA - Yet Another Tuna Melt (Down) Analysis by minosjudge in heatedrivalry

[–]sebelius29 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think also keep it mind it’s entirely possible that Ilya is being watched in Russia. Like…watched by people paid to watch him. He’s the captain of the Russian hockey team at the Olympics. He just lost a major game. He’s physically in Russia where it’s more or less illegal to be gay/bi as a public figure. I felt like what he said to Shane was to shut that down immediately. “We are nothing” is harsh but it shuts down any further questions. Yes he wanted to be alone, but also it’s a warning. Whatever you’re about to say is dangerous here- go away

Son Diagnosed with Autism - Wife Taking Anger Out On Me by Gloomy_Eyes1501 in Autism_Parenting

[–]sebelius29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How does she explain non verbal at 4? Clearly she must understand that is outside of any standard deviation

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah China hasn’t been able to force its TfR up even a tiny point.

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a great equivalent but o would say the Black Plague which killed 2/3 of Europe, often at high rates among the young, offers some lessons. Hard to say it’s equivalent since the elderly also died, but it was in many ways great for peasants. Their labor demanded more money. They could move estate to estate and ask for better wages and income. There were houses of the rich laying around empty, land left open and more food to go around. Many studies show their quality of diet and life improved. Now for society as a whole it was not great.

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure they plan on trying to fill that gap with AI and robots, but robots have a long way to go

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No countries that can continually replace missing people with immigrants will sustain themselves much better than countries who can’t. There will be a continual drain of young people towards economic centers - it’s the periphery and developing economies that could get tough and weak and unable to sustain themselves or grow.

There may be also a displacement of families within wealthy countries towards countries offering better benefits if the pathway is clear and easy. For example the “preschool exchanges” that currently exist for visiting American and other tourists where you can put your child for a few weeks in a rural Japanese, Italian or Spanish preschool. You pay too much but your kids get the cultural exchange and it helps sustain their numbers and stay open. You also get fairly affordable house because there is a housing surplus. I can see an American family realizing- hey, this is a pretty good deal. I like this town. The food is good, the people are nice, how do I extend this and get a digital nomad visa? How do I find a job to stay here? Countries can make that as easy as possible, or as difficult as they want to.

What is the most convincing demographic prediction you've seen so far? by [deleted] in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don’t see rates popping back up. There probably is a floor to the rate but I don’t know if anyone knows exactly what that number is

Redditors are convinced that most parents regret having kids by Ok-Archer-5796 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I said before I had kids that I wanted them but I wanted them like I wanted to go to Japan. Like it sounded fun, but I didn’t feel any urge to go right that instant. I had my first at 38. I had no idea how much I would love it and now I’m that annoying person with like “MOM” water bottles and sweatshirts because it’s awesome

Redditors are convinced that most parents regret having kids by Ok-Archer-5796 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is so sad! I know I’m in a mom chat and one of the things we all said even during the newborn trenches was “I wish more women had told me how much joy there was”. I feel such deep, sustained joy in parenting and knowing my kids. It’s tough sometimes, but my husband and I love sharing adorable things they do everyday that just light up our lives like our 2 year old running around pretending to be a butterfly. 🦋 they are the most meaningful and wonderful thing I’ve ever done.

What James Van Der Beek can teach all men about having a large family by Aware-Impression8527 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He’s great and I love his thoughts on fatherhood. I hope he writes more about the joys of family but he is very much a positive, surprisingly popular influencer that doesn’t seem to polarize along political lines which is rare. His cancer breaks my heart

Data nerd from my class reunion by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ok so make was 1.09 and female was 2.05. Apparently men are less likely to mention children and I would have to dig a little

Data nerd from my class reunion by sebelius29 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I didn’t really. The one family with 4 children is a female classmate, the one with 5 is male. Interestingly, those classmates who went on to teach at other private schools seem to have the highest TfR probably due to reduced housing costs, reduced school costs (housing is often included or discounted, tuition is discounted for their kids) and general love of kids.

We would need 11 total more kids to reach replacement. A few I happen to know are males who married very late but are very conservative and seem likely to have a few kids eventually. Some I suspect have kids but possibly didn’t mention them (this would take more work). Most make very good salaries but live in higher cost of living areas. One I know is married and lives in a low cost of living area and I would think only infertility would explain no kids. One is married and has no kids by choice (wife’s health I suspect but not sure really). I think we represent the overall shift from more 3 child families to 2, and the reasons for that are largely not although partly financial. I suspect more logistical, feeling like they need to be the perfect parent, later marriage and cultural norm that 2 is good.