You're viewing a single thread.
This is going to be even worse if/when Musk and trump dismantle Social Security. The adult middle class will collapse entirely when their seniors will lose their homes and food, and their children are still at home because they can't afford to live on their own.
Couple this with smaller family sizes, this could mean two single child adults might have to support four living senior citizens (both sets of parents) while also raising children of their own.
This is called the sandwich generation (when you have to take care of both adults and kids on your own). It's a thing!
I fucking feel this.
I'm in a situation where in my family I'm the one who's going to be taking care of my parents as they get older because my only sibling (older) is entirely unreliable and financially unstable.
Then my fiance is ALSO being expected to take up that responsibility because all her siblings went and had 2-4 kids and "can't afford" or "won't have time" to help take care of her mother who is already aging.
So we're having to plan ahead as 25 and 30 year olds to be able to help and support 3 elders. This basically defaults us to not being able to have kids.
Then my fiance is ALSO being expected to take up that responsibility because all her siblings went and had 2-4 kids and “can’t afford” or “won’t have time” to help take care of her mother who is already aging.
Your fiance's siblings are stupid for turning down the free live-in childcare.
An elderly person verging on disabled and one day probably will be, also with what looks like developing early onset dementia probably doesn't make for good childcare
Or like, you could just have kids. Don't Darwin yourself over the stupidity of others
you don't understand how fucking expensive children are i guess.
You don't understand with how little kids can get by. Yep, it's not ideal, but it's mostly a mindset issue, of course you want the best of the best for your children, and not some suboptimal situation. It's also fine to let your parents survive on their own, you never have an obligation to take care of them.
All he (and I) is saying that everything is a choice. You don't have to do anything. You don't have to get new clothes for your children, toys, etc etc. You don't have to make sure your parents live comfortably.
Yes, it's not easy to think another way, but it's possible.
You are very optimist people will still have kids in this situation.
pregnancy prevention is expensive and abortions are becoming illegal i think we'll see more kids
We had a blanket ban on abortion/contraception in the 60s in Romania and while initially there was a boom in newborns, it eventually reverted to the norm even if the ban wasn't lifted. So I'm not so sure about that.
birth rates might go up because times get harder and abortion is illegal... but childhood/infant deaths, deaths from preventable communicable disease, and deaths from exposure to occupational hazards and accidents will all go up
deregulation, dismantling EPA, FDA, NIOSH, medical and scientific research, education. and most importantly, reducing the federal workforce by a couple hundred thousand people who work directly on keeping Americans healthy and safe... is going to have consequences.
I suspect life is going to get much more brutal and short for the next couple generations, assuming we survive that long amidst climate multi crises and wars for resources that are increasingly more expensive to find and extract. so while some people might have a few more kids to work in the slave pits, the life expectancy declines among the 99% is going more than counter act it.
besides, the population growth in America is expected to go net negative by 2033 without sustained immigration, and is rapidly decelerating globally.
Romania tried that already. Decree 770. There was a bump in number if children. After that, pregnant women and childbed mortality went up, kids were neglected or dumped in orphanages. In the end birth rate dropped anyway.
