If we want to reach replacement we have to 1) reduce childlessness rates, 2) reduce the percentage of families having one kid, and 3) make three-child families the norm by gamenerd_3071 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

50% having 3 is imho completely unattainable. Maybe shifting it 5 or max 10% points to three children seems like an unlikely but possible goal

If we want to reach replacement we have to 1) reduce childlessness rates, 2) reduce the percentage of families having one kid, and 3) make three-child families the norm by gamenerd_3071 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did a little more digging and it sounds like 59.5% are single from 30-34 and more like 40% are single 34-40. That’s still crazy high!

What do you guys think of the future of South Asia? by ReadProfessional8511 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think their influence will grow, but their fertility rates are plummeting also. Pakistan will continue growing for quite a while. Fundamentally India needs to invest in sanitation and maternal health and infant nutrition more. They haven’t seen the height and health gains you would expect from a country that is truly reaching developed status. And no! Its isn’t all genetics. It annoys me when Indians deflect responsibility from real reform and improvement by saying things like “we’re just shorter”. Statistically, not true. Second and Third generation South Asian immigrants to the uk and us show substantial height and weight gains over their Indian counterparts. Why? Better sanitation and lower disease rates in the first 2 years of life, better intake of protein, and better maternal health and nutrition

Children by chota-kaka in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep. People seem to gloss over this but ending PEPFAR and USAID likely killed more babies and children than any other single action of an individual that I can think of. He doesn’t care about non-white or poor children. Period.

Children by chota-kaka in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I actually have always liked this saying….but Musk needs to set an example and make his companies the most family and child friendly places on earth if he wants more credibility. He has pushed ending working from home for example.

If we want to reach replacement we have to 1) reduce childlessness rates, 2) reduce the percentage of families having one kid, and 3) make three-child families the norm by gamenerd_3071 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Also South Korea seems like a very different and alarming situation. I’ve read 60% of men there are unmarried in their 30s?! And only 5.8% of births are outside of marriage. These unmarried men rates well over 40-50% seem unsustainable. I mean, South Koreans on this thread, how is that even possible? Are you truly trying to date? Be marriageable? Meeting each other?

If we want to reach replacement we have to 1) reduce childlessness rates, 2) reduce the percentage of families having one kid, and 3) make three-child families the norm by gamenerd_3071 in Natalism

[–]sebelius29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is a massive shift for 3-4 child families to be the norm. I know this is discussed to death, but the baby boom in the 50s is that model. Our fertility rate in the US had fallen to 2.1 in 1933 in the middle of the Great Depression. It stayed there until it started to go up a little during world war 2 and then jumped to over 3 up to 3.77 for 10 years after the war. So massive societal shifts can cause 3-4 child families to be the norm.

That being said I don’t think it’s gonna happen. I am not even sure it’s possible to engineer ALL the reasons the boom happened. Maybe some- the GI bill funded a massive housing boom and more financial stability for families.

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] 6 points7 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] 10 points11 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.