Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks

Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks by itsoktocry on Monday June 26, 2023 @08:13AM (#36478694)

>My family is doing, what I would consider, "quite well", but we'd still be pretty fucked with one more mouth to feed, the need for a larger car and possibly larger house.

What do you consider "quite well"? Does your car have a backseat? Does your home have more than one bedroom? If so, you don't need larger of either.

Yes, there are some sacrifices to having a family. Nothing in life is free. The problem is that it sounds like you don't want to your lifestyle hindered by a child. That's fine, but saying you "can't" is untrue. People much poorer than you are doing it all around the world.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks by 0xParlay on Monday June 26, 2023 @09:05AM (#36479206)

> The problem is that it sounds like you don't want to your lifestyle hindered by a child

But that's not really a problem. The world has plenty of children. If you visit the border of Mexico you can probably snag a handful. Given their state of poverty they won't even mind.

So to the original question. What does it mean for a birthrate to be "too low". Too low for what? Sustaining some level of GDP output? Propping up Wal-marts bottom line with fresh souls to work the checkout counter?

[ Parent | on HN ]