Culture is dictated by material reality, which is informed heavily by capital. The shift to individualism is a facet of capitalist societies embracing atomization due to financial independence.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Birth rates are falling in the Nordics below the UK and the US. Are family-friendly policies no longer enough?
- Thread starter RastaMentality
- Start date
It's ignorant to overlook how cultural values can influence economic systems, and vice versa. They are interlinked, not seperate from the other.
Am I wholly anti-captialistic, no. But do I oppose that "infinite growth is a good thing", yes I do.
Individualism stems from Neoliberalism, and Neoliberalism worships Capitalism and takes it to irrational extremes. When people speak about Capitalism in the contemporary era, they are referring to Neoliberalism i.e 'Late-stage Capitalism'.
Last edited:
They really put their humanity to the side when writing articles like this. The people I know here, in Sweden, that have children are very invested in their children. They make loving homes where the children feel safe. And when having an active lifestyle where you, as a parent, don't want to hit pause on your life for 20 years just because of kids then one or perhaps two kids are enough. You don't have time for more.
Couple that with people who are "adolescent" for a far longer time. I have friends in their 40s who haven't really settled down or even had the thought of children. Who'd rather play the latest online game than have children. Life is just so good, why spoil a good thing with children?!
Children are chosen, not just a side-effect of having sex or the demands of society. That makes better children, I believe. Sure, birth-rates decline but the children that are born and born with such possibilities and potential that none have had before.
I don't see a problem. It's just economists being economists.
Couple that with people who are "adolescent" for a far longer time. I have friends in their 40s who haven't really settled down or even had the thought of children. Who'd rather play the latest online game than have children. Life is just so good, why spoil a good thing with children?!
Children are chosen, not just a side-effect of having sex or the demands of society. That makes better children, I believe. Sure, birth-rates decline but the children that are born and born with such possibilities and potential that none have had before.
I don't see a problem. It's just economists being economists.
The last couple women I dated or were with made it an important part of the early conversations that they don't want kids and never will.
And if I weren't on the same page this won't go further.
Obviously as I don't want kids either this worked out.
Just seeing how tired and unhappy those few work colleagues with kids are while I'm happy and full of energy shows me that this is the right decision in this day and age.
There is so much stuff to do,buy and experience that there is simply no place for kids.
And if I weren't on the same page this won't go further.
Obviously as I don't want kids either this worked out.
Just seeing how tired and unhappy those few work colleagues with kids are while I'm happy and full of energy shows me that this is the right decision in this day and age.
There is so much stuff to do,buy and experience that there is simply no place for kids.
In fairness, the article seems to be mostly about Finland. But I don't think people are so much concerned with the welfare of individual children as much as the longterm population bubble that is set to burst as replacement rate drops like a rock. An aging society mean those children grow up in countries where they might have a significant elderly population that requires more care and resources. This also means right-wingers and similar groups will be desperate to control people's wombs in an attempt to mold society to their whims.
It's a complex problem from multiple angles. I do agree that ultimately human childbirth is pretty biologically terrible and despite medical advances it's still a very grueling process compared to many other animals.
I know there are many people who just flat out never wanted kids so I won't say this includes them. But as some in the "I want a family in the future, but…" group, I have to say that as long as:
- general cost of living continues to be an issue
- housing market / rents etc continuing to be a joke
- there are barriers for women returning to their career after giving birth and the early years of raising a child
- childcare cost are exorbitant
etc, etc - then raising a family is going to feel unobtainable for a lot of people (to the point many would rather just not consider it in the first place).
….And that's before you even get into adjacent stuff like work/life balances not being great (when do you have time to meet the hypothetical person you would want to start a family with), modern dating issues (actually finding and building the relationship that person).
- general cost of living continues to be an issue
- housing market / rents etc continuing to be a joke
- there are barriers for women returning to their career after giving birth and the early years of raising a child
- childcare cost are exorbitant
etc, etc - then raising a family is going to feel unobtainable for a lot of people (to the point many would rather just not consider it in the first place).
….And that's before you even get into adjacent stuff like work/life balances not being great (when do you have time to meet the hypothetical person you would want to start a family with), modern dating issues (actually finding and building the relationship that person).
I feel some of y'all are overestimating factors like "economic uncertainty" with people's choices to have kids. I feel like, most people who strongly want to have a child will just convince themselves that they'd just "make it work".
Having (or not having) children is such an integral factor to how someone sees their life going, it's not going to be as influenced by pragmatism / logic. Like, sure it is a factor, but not an overwhelming one.
Also, i think that more women choosing to live a childless (or even "single") life, and many family deciding to have "only" one child is something that's really hard to compensate by other families having _more_ children (to keep the 2.0 average).
At the same time, I feel like the average family size (or what is considered "normal") has shifted towars smaller families. The amount of couples in our circle of friends deciding to have an only child seems rather high.
Like, for every woman having no kid, another family would need to have four. And how many Milennials do you know that want to be a family of six? I think that's something that was way more normal when we were born (1980s)
Having (or not having) children is such an integral factor to how someone sees their life going, it's not going to be as influenced by pragmatism / logic. Like, sure it is a factor, but not an overwhelming one.
Also, i think that more women choosing to live a childless (or even "single") life, and many family deciding to have "only" one child is something that's really hard to compensate by other families having _more_ children (to keep the 2.0 average).
At the same time, I feel like the average family size (or what is considered "normal") has shifted towars smaller families. The amount of couples in our circle of friends deciding to have an only child seems rather high.
Like, for every woman having no kid, another family would need to have four. And how many Milennials do you know that want to be a family of six? I think that's something that was way more normal when we were born (1980s)
OP
OP
It's an exhausting trend in every single thread on the topic. and I really wish people would try to think harder. The fact that people are even thinking about not having kids because of climate change is a cable of how luxurious our societies have become. That is a privileged, extremely modern position to have. And one that centers yourself in a way that hasn't been seen before.
This is the most boomer-take I've read today.
Why climate change shouldn't be a concern for people who choose not to have children?
Unchecked anthropogenic Climate Change will bring about the worst that humanity has to offer. We're talking wars, frequent natural disasters, hundreds of millions displaced, and resource restrictions.
In periods of long famines, people resort to cannibalism. Is that the world people want their kids in?
Blame conservatives for discouraging people having kids, not the "selfish youngsters".
You don't think cultural problems aren't created and exacerbated by economic problems? There's this place called America I would like to introduce you too, lol.
It's privileged but the same economic levers that push the global economic south to have kids traditionally can also work in the opposite way. If it's a privileged take gotta blame the environment that built those takes. Btw, I don't agree with it being privileged (although obviously its a choice being made by people by and large of a certain class so it is in that sense), but if you're saying 'Gotta get mine and maintain, fuck the world' is the problem and the attitude isn't related to capitalism 🤷🏿♂️. Raising kids isn't a real 'job', parents electing to not have kids because their 'careers' matter more, etc. If the quality of our lives even in nordic countries weren't closely tied to capital those phrases wouldn't exist.
Last edited:
Depends on where you live. In Spain? 30 years ago it was a hell of a lot easier to get a well paid job and buying a house was pretty affordable, which are two of the key factors when deciding to have kids. Now access to job is hard as all hell even if you have an university degree and being able to afford even a shitty small apartment is a miracle, so its not a surprise that far less people decide to have kids here, even if they want to.
Fertility rate in Spain was 1.21 per woman in 1994. it was 1.13 last year so not a big difference. Fertility rate collapsed during the 80s in Spain and was already extremely low in the 90s.
The relationship between individualism and capitalism is contingent and variable. Western societies have shown that capitalism and individualism are joined at the hip.
It's an easy scape-goat to blame capitalism for everything and give no thought about the specifics and try to think about a solution. Also, this kind of criticism makes no sense when the economic system of each country changes wildely and it has evolved over-time as well.
I think about this often. I really want to have children, but my country is becoming unlivable
In Spain the collapse of fertility in the 80s was because before then anticonceptives/abortion was illegal so it is not like "people wanted more/could easily afford" having children. Everything contributes though.
This is exactly why I'm not understanding the handwringing about birthrates.
A huge factor that I think gets overlooked is that as we go through the "idealized path" by the time we're in a place to have children, we've become too solidified in our ways and mindset to have kids.
Basically by the time we're like 35, we've gotten used to living without children and it's hard to actually want that disruption in our lives. At some point in middle age people become a bit world weary and the thought of kids becomes burdensome.
Economically If we still lived in a one income society where a high school diploma could get you a good job that let you buy a house, a car, etc. all in your early 20s, then I could see people being homemakers and having time and energy for children again. Instead we've priced our society to mostly reward married people with two incomes and with no children. I don't know how folks are affording some of these housing prices otherwise.
My parents tell me than when they were kids they wouldn't even see their parents that much outside of the usual "eating time and Sundays for church", my parents would go to school on their own and be outside playing with friends till night time, my grandparents didn't have to dedicate that much time or even money to... well, being a parent. Also usually they would end up helping out at the business of their own parents, which makes sense as well.
This is not how society works at all these days, I'm not interested in having children and if I ever have one it will be through adoption and I doubt I will anyways.
This is not how society works at all these days, I'm not interested in having children and if I ever have one it will be through adoption and I doubt I will anyways.
There are many cultural things which have no bearing on material circumstances e.g I grew up in a very poor country, and lots of poor people (despite finding life difficult), still had kids..why? because there was a strong cultural pull to do so. Material possessions had little to no bearing on their decisions. Contrast that with the developed world which is much richer and and where people have way more free time - they choose to use their money and time for other things (again, a cultural choice not an economic one). So miss me with the"material reality" nonsense. The societies of those countries are increasingly becoming anti-natalist, simple as.
See my reply above.
Eaxctly! As if our ancestors were not having children in more challenging situations for hundreds of thousands of years
I mean everyone is free to make choices and I respect that, I just think that the "it's not financially feasible" folks are spouting hogwash; people just don't want to have kids in those societies (which is fine) but using the crutch of capitalism is bullshittery at its worst. These are some of the richest and most privileged places in the world, if they wanted kids, they can have them; they just don't wan't to, and it has nothing to do with Capitalism.
Again see my responses above.
Well put.
There are catch-up contribution rules for Roth-IRAs and 401Ks for late-comers, I wonder if something similar would work for women choosing to enter the workforce or higher education after being SATMs? Something like financial incentives to employers to hire them?
And I grew up in a family who believed more children = more income but soon they arrive in the UK, reality doesn't work that way.
Families in developing countries have a lot children, because more children can bring in the income and due to emphasis of family values, they believe their kids will look after them. Be mindful that workers rights are near non-existent and child labour is prevelant in poorer countries.
In the UK, people of low income backgrounds who have many children have it bad. You just end up poorer and poorer - and I grew up in a poor family, so I know what I'm talking about.
If you're blaming modernity or millennial cultural values for why people don't have kids, then tell me why should birthing people have children in a society hostile to it? When things are so expensive? What happens if their partner leaves them?
You can't give me bullshit that things will workout. It won't, because single-parent headed households are much likely to be poorer, and their kids will less likely to achieve. It's mostly women/FAB are worse off as they are likely burdened with the children caring responsibilities.
Update:
Woman/birthing person carrying a baby for 9 months is a grueling task.
Do not @ me that everyone would be so lucky to have their partners or family to support them. If it was the case, then why do we have single mothers, why do families under single-parent households have it worse off?
UK's birthrate had became the lowest despite the population increasing due to immigration. Which means even immigrants are having children less as living in the UK is so fricking costly.
To have a child is literally a luxary of itself, and UK happens to be the most expensive of the OCEDs to raise a child.
Birthrate in UK falls to record low as campaigners say ‘procreation a luxury’
Total fertility was 1.49 children per woman in 2022 amid rising housing and childcare costs
www.theguardian.com
‘So many working parents are screwed’: mothers on Britain’s childcare costs
Parents describe plight as pressure builds on Jeremy Hunt to provide help in the budget
www.theguardian.com
Last edited:
They were, but is that fair to the kids? I think we are in the first generation who actually thinks about that
OP
OP
Yes because we are rich and comfortable enough to make that decision. Just like how we have enough time to post on a message board.
I wonder what the correlation is between spirituality/religiousness and birth rates. Having kids is not a "logical" decision and causes tension with a strictly physicalist point of view.
I mean, the issue is that the birth rates keep getting lower year after year even when birthrates were already pretty low. 2023 was had the lowest birthrate since 1941, and having in mind that fertility rates were already pretty low yeah, its an issue if even with that in mind less and less people are having kids every year. Its not going to be as dramatic as other countries as, since fertility rate was already low, you end up having a floor effect.
I mean, I pointed out there's a certain level of privledge in the choice itself but its a pretty myopic read that 'winning' in a capitalistic society means it doesn't affect your choices and you can't slip backwards even if the backwards slip itself is privileged in comparison to the global south.
I mean a black homeless American is much more privilege than a homeless person in Haiti, doesn't negate some of those same sociopolitical forces put them in those places. Its a boomer 'avocado toast' take that economic forces don't affect first world citizens even and doesn't subsequently influence their choices because the West is much more insulated than other places to sharp economic calamities.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Yes but these threads are always filled with overwhelming negativity as if things were better before.
It really demonstrates the negativity brain rot on the internet that the knee jerk reaction to every report like this is to relate it to everything negative instead of seeing it as a result of our societies becoming better in almost every way.
Last edited:
Thanks for insight. obviously as someone not from Spain I just looked at the numbers and so didn't know reasons behind the massive decline.
That is why I don't think it really relates to economical situation. Birth rates have plummeted pretty much in every single country on earth during last 5 years no matter if the economy is booming or not. We also had lowest ever fertility rate ever last year in Finland when just a bit over decade ago (2010) we had highest fertility rate since 1970. it's change in lifestyles. There are simply so much to do in modern world for people and kids don't fit to that.
My two cents on this, which ain't even worth that, is that we've grown so used to hyper convenience and instant gratification. Having kids is very counter to that. Even selfish reasons for kids still lead to a selfless act. The work, the care, the stress. God the stress! I honestly think people in general have just gotten more selfish over the last two or three decades, and they don't want their lifestyles to change at all.
Poor countries having high birth rates is an extremely well documented phenomenon - less access to birth control, bigger families being desired as a labor force, and so on. It's unscientific to dismiss the materialist factor behind these trends.
Developing countries are providing labour for developed countries, so having children is also tied to providing labour force for the imperial core. Along with religious and cultural factors emboldening that. I don't think all these things can be divorced from each other. But you seem set on avoiding considering material conditions as a factor, so will just have to agree to disagree.
All the money in the world doesn't mean people want to have to go through that experience if they can avoid it.
To overcome the fact childbirth is part of having kids takes some combination of 3 factors:
1. An overwhelming urge to have kids
2. Lack of information / education
3. Reduced autonomy
In 2024 people who can have children are both much more free and are much more educated on the consequences of that decision than they've ever been before. So to have kids in this situation, they have to *really* want kids. This is a good thing.
For hundreds of thousands of years pregnancy has simply been forced on people, either literally or through controlling their access to information so their decisions are less informed. Which was obviously evil.
Anyway it's not all about childbirth but I don't think you can discount that opting out of torture is part of decision making.
To overcome the fact childbirth is part of having kids takes some combination of 3 factors:
1. An overwhelming urge to have kids
2. Lack of information / education
3. Reduced autonomy
In 2024 people who can have children are both much more free and are much more educated on the consequences of that decision than they've ever been before. So to have kids in this situation, they have to *really* want kids. This is a good thing.
For hundreds of thousands of years pregnancy has simply been forced on people, either literally or through controlling their access to information so their decisions are less informed. Which was obviously evil.
Anyway it's not all about childbirth but I don't think you can discount that opting out of torture is part of decision making.
Population growth is the general engine of economic growth since you have more production and more consumption as population increases. Without that guaranteed growth modern economic models and political systems no longer make sense and are likely to collapse. What systems can function without guaranteed growth haven't been figured out yet.
Hmmm… Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan… etc East Asian countries are famously known to be "collectivism" societies. Yet they also have some of the lowest birth rates in the world currently. I guess I am not sure if the "individualism" aspect is the sole reason why?
I think what has been pointed out is the variety of countries with different makeup of economic and social systems and cultures all experiencing the same decreasing birth rate. The root causes are likely very complex and not clean cut with simple reasons like capitalism and/or individualism.
I'm aware, but it'll get sorted via policies (likely some combination of immigration, raised retirement ages/stingier pensions, family growth incentives, etc). Still a long way off from collapsing.
"Individualism" and "collectivism" aren't binaries and generally poor frameworks to talk about these topics, is my point. What countries like those listed do have, however, are stressful work cultures and lack of social/economic mobility. Under capitalism, developed countries have moved towards more atomized, nuclear family structures and less communal living, which means people seek high paying jobs that allow independence. Yet, in the last few decades we have seen the limits of this as prices keep outstripping income. Having children becomes another significant burden in an already overstressed society.
If people dont want kids just let them, if when they get old there is no money for pensions then thats how it is, better start saving money now so you can live without that when you are old.
While that will be a problem the real problem will be all the elderly people with money and voting power. While they'll have plenty of money to give politicians there simply won't be enough people to physically care for the elderly. So it's gonna have to be immigrants and do you think they're going to have some reasonable immigration policy? Nope I'd lean towards something closer to slavery than the other way.
I read a lot of stuff about needing to keep the economy afloat cause so many are old.
At the same time 10% of the population own 75% of the wealth in sweden.
So the resources are there. It's just not helping the population.
At the same time 10% of the population own 75% of the wealth in sweden.
So the resources are there. It's just not helping the population.
More like women are only very recently allowed to be "selfish" in the way men have historically been allowed to be.
Countries you listed are neoliberalist economies. Their social attitudes are collectivist but the economies are built on neoliberalism. After WWII, countries borrowed loans from the World Bank and had to meet certain conditions to borrow from them i.e increased FDI, deregulation, allow free trade, cut public spending...et cetra.
Sure each countries has their unique set of problems such as China's one child policy, but we can't pretend the economic framework didn't play a huge influence.
Most cited reasons why young adults choose to not have children or postpone it, is that it is costly.
- Long working hours
- Rising living costs
- Unaffordable housing
- Lack of public safety net
- Retirement age increasing
- Job insecurity
- Inequal distribution of wealth
- Inequal distribution of household and childcare responsibilities
- Intergenerational wealth divide and inheritance
- Uncertainties about child's future
East Asia
Europe
China / China 2
Japan
South Korea
Japan & South Korea 2
USA / USA 2
UK / UK 2
Governments can blame women or offer measly ¥3000 handouts however they want but that is not enough to cover the rising costs of living and cultural pressures.
When adults of today are working inhumane hours (we're talking 40 to 80), paying more for things, compared to prior generations (boomers were able to afford things, have time to socialise and care for family, and had access to better public services); governments should think really hard where to prioritise: short-term economic "infinite" growth or the impending demographic crisis.