Inside capitalism, people aren’t having children because captialism isn’t giving them the economic capability to do so.
The west’s population boom in the 50s to 80s only occurred because a single wage earner could, with a high school education and a wage just a little over minimum wage, be able to own a decent home, have a non-working SAH spouse, several kids, two cars in the driveway, and still have enough left over for a decent holiday once a year as well as save generously for retirement.
This all got stolen from these latest generations. What 90+% of the population was once capable of achieving is now only (largely) available to less than 20% of GenZ. A large proportion have given up on retirement, home ownership, or children. And this is WITH degrees and extensive career experience.
If you want to solve population crashes, start with income inequality: start taxing the wealthy and bring back a 90+% top tax rate. Get this money back into the hands of people who actually generate that wealth, and families will follow.
Oh no, having to spend time with my family oh nooo /s
If rent weren’t so damn high and you didn’t have such a squeeze on every moment of your life to make as much money too survive, spending time and supporting each other efficiently maybe wouldn’t be a problem.
Values are defined by our parents? Is it a caste system? Is extended family more or less efficient? What is the goal: sustainability, B R E E D I N G, vacations, wealth compared to others, power over others, power over ourselves? Etc…
No they don’t. They just have to adopt a culture of euthanasia. I don’t say that to be cruel or indifferent. I assume state assisted programs are in a lot of countries’ futures assuming they can stomach it. It’s not something I’m advocating for. I just think the rich are cold enough to push it to try to fix the problem.
Outside of capitalism it is hard to function below replacement level because the young people have to take care of the elderly
Inside capitalism, people aren’t having children because captialism isn’t giving them the economic capability to do so.
The west’s population boom in the 50s to 80s only occurred because a single wage earner could, with a high school education and a wage just a little over minimum wage, be able to own a decent home, have a non-working SAH spouse, several kids, two cars in the driveway, and still have enough left over for a decent holiday once a year as well as save generously for retirement.
This all got stolen from these latest generations. What 90+% of the population was once capable of achieving is now only (largely) available to less than 20% of GenZ. A large proportion have given up on retirement, home ownership, or children. And this is WITH degrees and extensive career experience.
If you want to solve population crashes, start with income inequality: start taxing the wealthy and bring back a 90+% top tax rate. Get this money back into the hands of people who actually generate that wealth, and families will follow.
Young people would have time to take care of the elderly if they weren’t forced to work 60+ hour weeks consistently
Kind of adjacent when the person is tying infinite economic growth with population “degrowth”
Oh no, having to spend time with my family oh nooo /s
If rent weren’t so damn high and you didn’t have such a squeeze on every moment of your life to make as much money too survive, spending time and supporting each other efficiently maybe wouldn’t be a problem.
Values are defined by our parents? Is it a caste system? Is extended family more or less efficient? What is the goal: sustainability, B R E E D I N G, vacations, wealth compared to others, power over others, power over ourselves? Etc…
No they don’t. They just have to adopt a culture of euthanasia. I don’t say that to be cruel or indifferent. I assume state assisted programs are in a lot of countries’ futures assuming they can stomach it. It’s not something I’m advocating for. I just think the rich are cold enough to push it to try to fix the problem.