We Need More Kids

[Politesse]

Two parents working full time can, between them, scrape together about half a parent's worth of time and care for their kids. Not their fault. But not a good system either.

 

[TV and credit cards]

But if we want people to have more babies, maybe it’s the men who need to change.

I think I missed the part where it was explained why we need more babies.

To keep Social Security solvent. And someone is going to have to change out bedpans.

I'll break the news to my seven year old granddaughter because right now she's thinking astronaut.

The reason I'm most familiar with is not men blaming women or women blaming men or women blaming other women. No. The reason I'm most familiar with is people not wanting to "bring children into this world". Anyone else familiar with that statement? So, I blame the government and largely the US government as they are best suited to create a more peaceful world. Beyond that, government can create conditions conducive to family life. How do we do that you ask? Well, create conditions where a family only needs and wants a single bread winner. Push a narrative (and rightfully so) of the importance of raising children. That raising children is one of the most rewarding things a person can do. And along these same lines, convince our supreme court that a parents' right to raise their children as they see fit is the stupidest statements they've ever made. How two idiots figuring out how to fuck makes them omniscient and omnipotent for such an important task is beyond me.

I agree completely with everything you say except the bold. Parents have to be given both authority with responsibility or they will not become parents. No reasonable person wants responsibility without having authority especially raising their own progeny.

I'm not talking about anything absolute or extreme here. Educators not parents and politicians should direct the education of children. Courts should be quick to remove a child from a home when needed and cautious about returning that child. Children need protection and if it's the parents they need protection from, so be it.

I have slightly mixed feelings about that because removing kids from families where there is abuse or serious neglect very much hinges upon the availability of good, high quality, foster homes for those children. Some of whom will be teens. And most of the time, kids want to reunite with their parents, even if their parents have been abusive. Bouncing kids from home to home does not do any of them much good,

Well, along with my pie in the sky idea of a society that protects children is also one where it's financial resources are spent on quality foster care, adoption, and state care system where hard to place teens are kept from living on the streets.

 

[Toni]

But if we want people to have more babies, maybe it’s the men who need to change.

I think I missed the part where it was explained why we need more babies.

To keep Social Security solvent. And someone is going to have to change out bedpans.

I'll break the news to my seven year old granddaughter because right now she's thinking astronaut.

The reason I'm most familiar with is not men blaming women or women blaming men or women blaming other women. No. The reason I'm most familiar with is people not wanting to "bring children into this world". Anyone else familiar with that statement? So, I blame the government and largely the US government as they are best suited to create a more peaceful world. Beyond that, government can create conditions conducive to family life. How do we do that you ask? Well, create conditions where a family only needs and wants a single bread winner. Push a narrative (and rightfully so) of the importance of raising children. That raising children is one of the most rewarding things a person can do. And along these same lines, convince our supreme court that a parents' right to raise their children as they see fit is the stupidest statements they've ever made. How two idiots figuring out how to fuck makes them omniscient and omnipotent for such an important task is beyond me.

I agree completely with everything you say except the bold. Parents have to be given both authority with responsibility or they will not become parents. No reasonable person wants responsibility without having authority especially raising their own progeny.

I'm not talking about anything absolute or extreme here. Educators not parents and politicians should direct the education of children. Courts should be quick to remove a child from a home when needed and cautious about returning that child. Children need protection and if it's the parents they need protection from, so be it.

I have slightly mixed feelings about that because removing kids from families where there is abuse or serious neglect very much hinges upon the availability of good, high quality, foster homes for those children. Some of whom will be teens. And most of the time, kids want to reunite with their parents, even if their parents have been abusive. Bouncing kids from home to home does not do any of them much good,

Well, along with my pie in the sky idea of a society that protects children is also one where it's financial resources are spent on quality foster care, adoption, and state care system where hard to place teens are kept from living on the streets.

Same. But I’d go further back and build a society where there was good work/life balance and a strong social network to help support families ( and individuals), with a robust and excellent health care system with excellent access including access to mental health services and addiction services. This could go a long way towards avoiding addiction in the first place, providing economic stability to families and help when things fall through the cracks.

Most kids want to stay with their families, even when there has been serious neglect and abuse. The goal of foster care is supposed to be reunification. The current system has a strong monetary component and not enough oversight or support for the kids who are displaced.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Two parents working full time can, between them, scrape together about half a parent's worth of time and care for their kids. Not their fault. But not a good system either.

Or is it?
I can find no numbers on this but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts no small percentage of dual income households are such for no other reason than the desire to play keeping up with the Joneses. Let's call it suburbia. And based on how slow people were to come back to work after the pandemic, I suspect many knew they were living an unnecessary lifestyle. But as time passes, we fall back into our familiar habits, don't we?

 

[WAB]

And some people are just terrible at handling money.

 

[Gospel]

And some people are just terrible at handling money.

Sure, some people are bad with money, but it doesn't take wild financial incompetence to go broke these days. One unexpected bill, one missed paycheck, or a rent hike, and you’re spiraling. The margin for error now is razor-thin compared to a generation ago.

 

[WAB]

And some people are just terrible at handling money.

Sure, some people are bad with money, but it doesn't take wild financial incompetence to go broke these days. One unexpected bill, one missed paycheck, or a rent hike, and you’re spiraling. The margin for error now is razor-thin compared to a generation ago.

Believe me, I know. I'm not arguing that things are all rosy and peachy. I was homeless for several months, back in about 2020, and I posted here from the local library. For a while I had no job, and no money at all.

Just making an observation...

 

[DBT]

Thinking doesn't provide food, shelter or money in the bank.

Does for me.

And as I get better at thinking, my productivity grows, and I get paid more money. Meanwhile, I don't consume any more food or shelter, although I would like to get double glazed windows.

You are saying that there is no need to put thought to action? You merely think and the money appears? I'd say that thought without action produces nothing, that it is the productivity that results from thought that is putting money into your pocket.

It's the ones and zeroes I produce that people pay me for, because those artefacts express my solutions to problems.

That's basically just thinking for money. Same goes for any number of knowledge workers whose job is Goes on the Computer.

Thought and ideas become code....and what is this code used for? What does it do? What is its purpose?

I'd say you get paid, not merely for thinking, but for the practical applications that some but not all of your thoughts produce.

 

[DBT]

And some people are just terrible at handling money.

Sure, some people are bad with money, but it doesn't take wild financial incompetence to go broke these days. One unexpected bill, one missed paycheck, or a rent hike, and you’re spiraling. The margin for error now is razor-thin compared to a generation ago.

Nor did it happen by accident. Deliberate government policies, as in Australia brought us to this point. Perhaps there were some unintended consequences, but given that we have expert economists and advisors, that is no excuse.

 

[Gospel]

I agree, to an extent. That extent being: people with disposable income can afford financial advisors. But for those living paycheck to paycheck, finding an advisor who’s both accessible and willing to work with them is rare. Most advisors cater to clients with assets, not those just trying to stay afloat.

 

[bigfield]

Thinking doesn't provide food, shelter or money in the bank.

Does for me.

And as I get better at thinking, my productivity grows, and I get paid more money. Meanwhile, I don't consume any more food or shelter, although I would like to get double glazed windows.

You are saying that there is no need to put thought to action? You merely think and the money appears? I'd say that thought without action produces nothing, that it is the productivity that results from thought that is putting money into your pocket.

It's the ones and zeroes I produce that people pay me for, because those artefacts express my solutions to problems.

That's basically just thinking for money. Same goes for any number of knowledge workers whose job is Goes on the Computer.

Thought and ideas become code....and what is this code used for? What does it do? What is its purpose?

I'd say you get paid, not merely for thinking, but for the practical applications that some but not all of your thoughts produce.

I'm many layers removed from any kind of practical application that involves making or consuming material things, besides electricity and coffee. My work is consumed by other people whose job is Goes on the Computer, and the same is true in turn for those people.

And that's the thing: the economy needs people who just work on information, and the economic demand for that information work just keeps growing, because it's a positive feedback loop.

In my lifetime there has been fast and constant growth in the information economy, thanks to technology that was invented before I was born. This economy just keeps growing and getting more complex as people find new ways to produce and use information. There's no natural stopping point for this growth, because people aren't going to stop asking questions.

And none of this economic growth depends on population growth.

 

[Toni]

Two parents working full time can, between them, scrape together about half a parent's worth of time and care for their kids. Not their fault. But not a good system either.

Or is it?
I can find no numbers on this but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts no small percentage of dual income households are such for no other reason than the desire to play keeping up with the Joneses. Let's call it suburbia. And based on how slow people were to come back to work after the pandemic, I suspect many knew they were living an unnecessary lifestyle. But as time passes, we fall back into our familiar habits, don't we?

Maybe in some parts of the country that is true but I don’t think it is universal, and I think it applies now less than it did 30 years ago. But then I haven’t lived in suburbia for well over 30 years, when I lived in a fairly affluent suburb of a major city. At that point, most of the people I knew were young parents of young kids and the moms were mostly taking a break from their careers while the kids were young and the dad was busy building his career. But even then, childcare was an expense that it was not easy to pay- written as someone who used daycare part time while whittling away at my degree—hubby was a prof, albeit freshly minted and low on the pay scale.

Do I think that younger (than me) people today are more invested in things and experiences that don’t include being stay at home parents than they should be? Yeah but not my choice. I made mine and they get to make their own. But in my town, a very working class place, 30 years ago both parents were juggling multiple poorly paid jobs with poor or no benefits to keep lights on and something on the table. I was one of very few stay at home parents I knew and mostly that was because I could not afford daycare—when it was way way less expensive than it is now.

When I finally got a ‘real’ job and not just some poorly paid part time work, in practical terms, it was to pay for kids’ college. We did NOT want our kids taking out loans to pay for school. And then it pays to update wiring and plumbing in the house and to update kitchens and bathrooms—something that had been needed for decades.

But lots of parents my age and younger felt differently. A LOT of young and youngish adults graduated with crippling debt, and extremely high costs for housing and childcare. Even in small towns where costs are less but so is pay. Too many parents I know felt that if they could pay for their degrees themselves then so could their kids —without actually considering the differences in costs, not matched by increase in pay for summer jobs. And despite the good advice of VP Vance, a lot of grandparents are still working and not available for child care.

We recently took a family vacation with adult kids and partners and grandchild. Grandparents ( us) paid the rental. One of my kids suggested doing it every year. I said sure but maybe he and some friends could split the rent on a place sometime. He looked at me and told me that he had already checked prices and had done calculations and that he couldn’t afford it and he was better off than most of his friends. He has a decent paying full time job, is in the reserves and no partner/kids. His friends all have full time jobs, some are married so dual income and some have kids. They live very modest lifestyles with no fancy anything except maybe computers.

 

[bigfield]

Childcare is kind of secondary to housing: When housing is expensive, you need two full time incomes to pay for it. And when both parents are working full time jobs, they also need to pay for full time daycare. If housing was cheap, like it was when my parents started a family, then you could pay for the house on one income and care for the kids at home.

 

[Toni]

Childcare is kind of secondary to housing: When housing is expensive, you need two full time incomes to pay for it. And when both parents are working full time jobs, they also need to pay for full time daycare. If housing was cheap, like it was when my parents started a family, then you could pay for the house on one income and care for the kids at home.

If housing were cheaper—and cars were cheaper and groceries were cheaper.

Oh, and if women did not want to have their own careers instead of having their every want and need constantly dared only after their husband’s career and their children’s schooling and social needs. You know: if women would only give up this notion that they are and should be considered fully autonomous individuals with minds and ambitions and needs of their own not to be relegated to some after thought, if that.

I mean, men could step up and do childcare and laundry and meal prep and vacuum and arrange play dates. They could take days off when the kid(s) get sick. They could grocery shop and know the kids’ shoe sizes and the names of their friends’ parents and coaches. Or teachers! They could send Christmas cards and buy Christmas presents and maintain family connections and manage the family social calendar.

Currently, for the most part, they don’t. Sure, more do now compared with a generation ago and certainly more than two generations ago.

Of course I just described a typical heteronormative marriage with kids. Mileage will vary upon configuration of partners but it’s pretty common for one person’s career to dominate.

OR we could have a full time job be 30 hrs a week, universal health care, affordable and excellent day care and preschool programs, 30 days paid time off, universal paid parental leave for a minimum of 3 months.

We could quit giving a fuck what any Kardashian does or has or fucks, and same with any other celebrity.

 

[Politesse]

The Venn diagram of those who think raising a large family on a single income is possible and those who have actually tried to do so in the last twenty years is just two circles. Quit your job, empty your bank account, give away your savings, start at the bottom of a new "career ladder", adopt two children and a disabled elder in need of care, and then tell me how easy young people have it these days, how vain and selfish they are. And good luck, because you are going to need it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Childcare is kind of secondary to housing: When housing is expensive, you need two full time incomes to pay for it. And when both parents are working full time jobs, they also need to pay for full time daycare. If housing was cheap, like it was when my parents started a family, then you could pay for the house on one income and care for the kids at home.

If housing were cheaper—and cars were cheaper and groceries were cheaper.

I feel a large part of the problem inter-generationally is that people are so wrapped up in their own generational experience, they don't appreciate the unique situation of the current generation. There is no draft to send 18+ year old males to Vietnam, but historically low interest rates and predatory lending and no one guarding the hen house led to an absurd increase in housing prices. And then with the pandemic, small supply and low interest rates made it happen again. 20 years ago, the banks were giving money away like it was nothing. And housing inflated a lot because of that. Interest rates aren't much higher today... yet, add the increase of that to the ballooned housing, it isn't easy to afford houses. And the people that benefited from it are the older generations that were able to take advantage of it.

This isn't to say housing wasn't an issue in the 1950s when white people were fleeing the city. Low supply, high demand. But there were more jobs out there. The workplace today consists of a lot of jobs that lack money. There are plenty of good professions still, but this creates a difficult recipe for success.

Oh, and if women did not want to have their own careers instead of having their every want and need constantly dared only after their husband’s career and their children’s schooling and social needs. You know: if women would only give up this notion that they are and should be considered fully autonomous individuals with minds and ambitions and needs of their own not to be relegated to some after thought, if that.

I mean, men could step up and do childcare and laundry and meal prep and vacuum and arrange play dates. They could take days off when the kid(s) get sick. They could grocery shop and know the kids’ shoe sizes and the names of their friends’ parents and coaches. Or teachers! They could send Christmas cards and buy Christmas presents and maintain family connections and manage the family social calendar.

I wasn't aware that I wasn't doing any of that.

Currently, for the most part, they don’t. Sure, more do now compared with a generation ago and certainly more than two generations ago.

Honestly, I have no idea how people run their homes in my generation and younger.

OR we could have a full time job be 30 hrs a week, universal health care, affordable and excellent day care and preschool programs, 30 days paid time off, universal paid parental leave for a minimum of 3 months.

We could quit giving a fuck what any Kardashian does or has or fucks, and same with any other celebrity.

Middle class people that decide the elections want lower taxes. They think it will make them happier having a little more of their money. Americans don't seem to know how to be happy.

 

[Toni]

Childcare is kind of secondary to housing: When housing is expensive, you need two full time incomes to pay for it. And when both parents are working full time jobs, they also need to pay for full time daycare. If housing was cheap, like it was when my parents started a family, then you could pay for the house on one income and care for the kids at home.

If housing were cheaper—and cars were cheaper and groceries were cheaper.

I feel a large part of the problem inter-generationally is that people are so wrapped up in their own generational experience, they don't appreciate the unique situation of the current generation. There is no draft to send 18+ year old males to Vietnam, but historically low interest rates and predatory lending and no one guarding the hen house led to an absurd increase in housing prices. And then with the pandemic, small supply and low interest rates made it happen again. 20 years ago, the banks were giving money away like it was nothing. And housing inflated a lot because of that. Interest rates aren't much higher today... yet, add the increase of that to the ballooned housing, it isn't easy to afford houses. And the people that benefited from it are the older generations that were able to take advantage of it.

This isn't to say housing wasn't an issue in the 1950s when white people were fleeing the city. Low supply, high demand. But there were more jobs out there. The workplace today consists of a lot of jobs that lack money. There are plenty of good professions still, but this creates a difficult recipe for success.

Oh, and if women did not want to have their own careers instead of having their every want and need constantly dared only after their husband’s career and their children’s schooling and social needs. You know: if women would only give up this notion that they are and should be considered fully autonomous individuals with minds and ambitions and needs of their own not to be relegated to some after thought, if that.

I mean, men could step up and do childcare and laundry and meal prep and vacuum and arrange play dates. They could take days off when the kid(s) get sick. They could grocery shop and know the kids’ shoe sizes and the names of their friends’ parents and coaches. Or teachers! They could send Christmas cards and buy Christmas presents and maintain family connections and manage the family social calendar.

I wasn't aware that I wasn't doing any of that.

Currently, for the most part, they don’t. Sure, more do now compared with a generation ago and certainly more than two generations ago.

Honestly, I have no idea how people run their homes in my generation and younger.

OR we could have a full time job be 30 hrs a week, universal health care, affordable and excellent day care and preschool programs, 30 days paid time off, universal paid parental leave for a minimum of 3 months.

We could quit giving a fuck what any Kardashian does or has or fucks, and same with any other celebrity.

Middle class people that decide the elections want lower taxes. They think it will make them happier having a little more of their money. Americans don't seem to know how to be happy.

Of course not all men. My husband was kind of a wonder because he was good with kids and cooked and loaded the dishwasher. I have friends whose husband has never changed a diaper. I do see dads in grocery stores—something my husband also did sometimes and at a couple of points when I was working long hours, almost exclusively and could throw in a load of laundry before I simply told him he could do his own laundry because I wasn’t going to do it anymore. But hubby was also an academic who had more flexible schedules than most adults with jobs. He could and did run kids places and go to teacher conferences and with our first, he was the one at the doctors office.

Some dads stay home with kids or choose a lower paying job with more flexibility so that the moms could focus on their jobs. I do see more dads in grocery stores with kids in tow or at Target or on bike rides or pushing strollers or wearing the baby. Most younger couples that I know have separate finances so presumably they split bill paying. I’ve heard of a few schemes that to me seem bizarre —not to mention sexist—but whatever floats boats. We were so poor when we started that we had to combine into one checking/one savings account and we’ve mostly kept that scheme. It seems like so much extra work and conflict ( based on observation/people complaining) than what we did.

 

[bilby]

Thought and ideas become code....and what is this code used for? What does it do? What is its purpose?

I'd say you get paid, not merely for thinking, but for the practical applications that some but not all of your thoughts produce.

Sure, you say that. But as your evidence here (bolded above) is an appeal to ignorance, why should anyone agree with you?

The answer to your questions (in a modern developed society) is largely that it enables other people to do more thinking, for which they too are paid.

And of course, many of the ultimate "practical applications" of thinking (where there even is one) use zero resources - or even reduce the use of resources.

For example, someone who comes up with a better way to forecast storms at sea, the economic consequence of which is that ships and cargoes are not lost, and need not be replaced; Or someone who thinks up a new way to sort recycleable materials from garbage that currently goes to landfill; Or someone who comes up with a way to extract more metal from ore, or to extract it using using less energy. All ways in which thinking can reduce resource consumption.

Your inability to imagine something might feel like evidence that that thing does not exist, but it really isn't. It's just evidence that your imagination isn't as good as you think it is.

One of the key features of a developed economy is efficiency - the accomplishment of the same ends with less use of resources. These efficiencies result from innovation - ie 'thinking'.

 

[Toni]

In case you are wondering why women are opting out of motherhood:

Phoenix police rescue baby left alone for days after mother dies

A baby who was left alone for days in a Phoenix apartment after the infant's mother died was rescued by police officers.

www.cbsnews.com

Headline reads:

Phoenix police rescue baby left alone for days after mother dies​

A baby who was left alone for days in a Phoenix, Arizona, apartment was rescued by police officers last month after the infant's mother had died, officials said Friday.

Phoenix police said they received a call from a neighbor on the morning of May 14 to check on a woman who had recently given birth, but who had not been heard from for several days.

So, a new mother, recently having given birth and apparently at home alone with a newborn DIES and the headline is still that the baby was left alone. Like the mother went out partying.

The headline should have read that new mother dies because she did not receive the necessary post partum care she needed. But nope.

Women are NOT getting the support they need to survive pregnancy and childbirth, much less raise a child decently and they are still blamed.

In case you missed the news, the maternal death rate in the US is rising. This, btw, includes well educated women and women who are well off and who are not medically ignorant. These include physicians who have died due to pregnancy related issues (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Chaniece_Wallace)

and Serena Williams, who nearly dyed because her physicians refused to listen to her. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...ar-death-childbirth-complications/9504616002/)

It almost was my daughter in law as well who had preeclampsia and was re-hospitalized the day after she came home due to post partum preeclampsia. Thank god for the home nurse visit

 

[DBT]

Thinking doesn't provide food, shelter or money in the bank.

Does for me.

And as I get better at thinking, my productivity grows, and I get paid more money. Meanwhile, I don't consume any more food or shelter, although I would like to get double glazed windows.

You are saying that there is no need to put thought to action? You merely think and the money appears? I'd say that thought without action produces nothing, that it is the productivity that results from thought that is putting money into your pocket.

It's the ones and zeroes I produce that people pay me for, because those artefacts express my solutions to problems.

That's basically just thinking for money. Same goes for any number of knowledge workers whose job is Goes on the Computer.

Thought and ideas become code....and what is this code used for? What does it do? What is its purpose?

I'd say you get paid, not merely for thinking, but for the practical applications that some but not all of your thoughts produce.

I'm many layers removed from any kind of practical application that involves making or consuming material things, besides electricity and coffee. My work is consumed by other people whose job is Goes on the Computer, and the same is true in turn for those people.

And that's the thing: the economy needs people who just work on information, and the economic demand for that information work just keeps growing, because it's a positive feedback loop.

In my lifetime there has been fast and constant growth in the information economy, thanks to technology that was invented before I was born. This economy just keeps growing and getting more complex as people find new ways to produce and use information. There's no natural stopping point for this growth, because people aren't going to stop asking questions.

And none of this economic growth depends on population growth.

Why does it matter how many layers there are between a thought or idea and its practical application? The point is that it's not the thought per se that produces revenue, but its practical application, the value the idea has in developing, running or growing a business.