They're largely subsistence farmers with high infant mortality and little to no automation which accounts for about 2 billion people. They need children to work the fields and it makes sense to have a lot of children when the labor turn around time is five years and up to a third of them will be dead by then.

The adults pay the "fixed costs" to keep the farm running so each additional child produces more in labor than they consume in resources. They're too poor to hire other adults for labor because they have their own "fixed costs" that are much higher than a child in the family.

> Is it because they have lower expectations for what their children need to live a "good" life

Yes, I think the minimally acceptable quality of life is certainly relative.

> that they just have more hope that things will work out somehow

Possibly, if everyone around you is on an upward trajectory, I can see that changing people’s calculus.

> or that they somehow don't care about these concerns?

I think a big factor is how (financially) independent women are and what kind of access to birth control (especially IUDs) they have. I suspect many of the women who have or had 3+ children would not have if they had similar options to those in developed countries today.

Costs for raising a child is almost certainly lower, and they can likely work towards their top pay range before the age 25

So the country getting richer made us poorer?

Imagine you are a farmer - you don't have trouble finding space for your kids to play or where to house them, like a person living in a modern megacity might. You probably live with or near extended family, and they can often take care of the kids while you are busy, whereas we now have expensive daycare and carehomes, etc.

> You probably live with or near extended family, and they can often take care of the kids while you are busy

You have to reciprocate which is completelt ignored on HN. They do help you with kids and you have to help them with kids, elder care, sick care house fixing amd what not. You also dont get to make that many individualistic decisions either and many people have to accept their decisions made for them.

But that does not go away with choosing not to have kids so might as well use the resources.

Basically my point - that having kids in easier, not that all of life is better - which you could devate till the cows come home

I would think that the regulations around childcare/childbirth in the third world are basically nil.

if I don't provide for my children in America, I enter the legal system.

Some species gravitate towards an r selection stategy when the living conditions are unfavourable. It might well be encoded in our lizard brains.

The growth trajectory and differing priorities.

US is on its way sideways or down for many of its citizens.

The developing world is on its way up.

Even for those with money, self-imposed targets are so high that having children seems like a distraction. Too much work, not enough time.

No condoms

We've got it ladies and gentlemen. The secret to halting population decline in the developed world is banning condoms.

Also banning sex-ed. Do that and unintended pregnancies (and by extension abortions, BTW) will skyrocket.

I don't feel like the effect of contraception on population growth is a secret...

The second order effects get a bit complicated though...

It's reductive to say that developed countries aren't having kids because of condom availability, while ignoring all the underlying social factors that don't go away even if condoms weren't available.

In developing countries, more likely than not. But there's also the factors that make people choose to use condoms when they become available. Condom availability has no effect without the whole marketing/education/social pressure around why people should use condoms.

> It's reductive to say that developed countries aren't having kids because of condom availability, while ignoring all the underlying social factors that don't go away even if condoms weren't available.

I didn't say that. Many, many other things affect the reproductive rate. However the availability of contraception (and other tools for family planning) has a significant and obvious impact on the size of those effects.

Education about familly planning and availability of contraception do in fact influence fertility in developing countries. Also, spcifically education for women does a lot too.

As in, when people are able to reliably plan children, they have less of them.

According to the NGO sector it's because women in developing countries don't have the power to say no when the husband wants sex.