US Birthrate Continues to Decline

[JohnDB]

This thread is about teh decline in birthrate. Feminism is an ideology that attacks the Ideal of Motherhood and tried to replace it with CAREER.

I see cause and effect. You, naturally, don't.




"slowly" in that context, has no meaning. You are just dismissing the point, without actually addressing the point.



"normal" has no meaning in that context.

The financial crisis of 2008, is long over. Any remaining trend is SOMETHING ELSE.



Feminism is a major part of modern liberalism. Which is a huge part of the rise of illiberal democracies and social discohesion.

So, not sure of your point here.



That's nonsense.




This thread is about teh declining birthrate. WOmen naturally have a large role in that. FEMINISM is an ideology that has been attacking the IDEAL of MOTHERHOOD,a and trying to replace it with CAREER.

Discussing the impact of that, on the lives of women AND MEN, is certainly called for.

If it has been good, then let's celebrate that, and keep going.

If it has been BAD, then let's stop doing it, and try to fix the damage.





Agreed. So, you with us, or are you with the oligarchs who want low labor costs and globalism and women in the workplace and men being treated like scum of the earth and unrestricted third world immigration.

Which side are you on? US, or the OLIGARCHS?




We lost that feeling due to globalization back in the 70s.

Looking back, i think that was a mistake. We should fix that.



Why couldn't she take an uber?

Women have ALWAYS been in the workforce....earning money to pay their bills. And women were the inventors of the "side hustle"....doing odd jobs and crafts to make extra money.

It was AFTER WW2 that women stayed in the workforce beyond just secretaries in droves for half to 75% wages of a man....which eventually drove down everyone's wages.
(The extra camping gear and toys the money provided was nice)

Then in the late 60's and 70's as a result of several factors including the hippies (who didn't like work....only whatever would separate women from their undergarments) the Feminist movement got started as well as the degradation especially of white men. But it really affected Black fathers moreso. Because up to this point most black families were intact...until the feminists got started attacking ALL men.

And so it destroyed the vulnerable black families first....then the white famies.
Abortion and birth control helping the women achieve their goals. But these things devastated the sanity of women.

Instead of friends and families women got adversaries/coworkers, office politics, and a paycheck.

 

[Correll]

Women have ALWAYS been in the workforce....earning money to pay their bills. And women were the inventors of the "side hustle"....doing odd jobs and crafts to make extra money.

It was AFTER WW2 that women stayed in the workforce beyond just secretaries in droves for half to 75% wages of a man....which eventually drove down everyone's wages.
(The extra camping gear and toys the money provided was nice)

Then in the late 60's and 70's as a result of several factors including the hippies (who didn't like work....only whatever would separate women from their undergarments) the Feminist movement got started as well as the degradation especially of white men. But it really affected Black fathers moreso. Because up to this point most black families were intact...until the feminists got started attacking ALL men.

And so it destroyed the vulnerable black families first....then the white famies.
Abortion and birth control helping the women achieve their goals. But these things devastated the sanity of women.

Instead of friends and families women got adversaries/coworkers, office politics, and a paycheck.

Yep.

 

[Marener]

This thread is about teh decline in birthrate. Feminism is an ideology that attacks the Ideal of Motherhood and tried to replace it with CAREER.

I see cause and effect. You, naturally, don't.

It doesn't attack the ideal of motherhood. It provides agency to women to chose the life that they want.

"slowly" in that context, has no meaning. You are just dismissing the point, without actually addressing the point.

Slowly means that the labor force participation rate increased from 40 to 70% over a period of 40 years. That's pretty specific. Your point is addressed by disproving that there was anything "sudden" about it.

"normal" has no meaning in that context.

Normal means about 2 to 2.1 births per woman, which is the replacement rate.

The financial crisis of 2008, is long over. Any remaining trend is SOMETHING ELSE.

The crisis may be over but it's effects aren't. The economy and our expectations from it changed a lot since then. Young adults entering the workforce during time had their lives and careers set back years during the slow recovery.

Feminism is a major part of modern liberalism. Which is a huge part of the rise of illiberal democracies and social discohesion.

So, not sure of your point here.

Illiberal democracies are a right wing phenomenon. See Vicktor Orban and Vance's full throated support of him as an example.

That's nonsense.

Not at all. Emotional intelligence is not a typical masculine trait and unfortunately never been emphasized in the raising of young men. It is, however, highly valuable in a marriage.

This thread is about teh declining birthrate. WOmen naturally have a large role in that. FEMINISM is an ideology that has been attacking the IDEAL of MOTHERHOOD,a and trying to replace it with CAREER.

Discussing the impact of that, on the lives of women AND MEN, is certainly called for.

If it has been good, then let's celebrate that, and keep going.

If it has been BAD, then let's stop doing it, and try to fix the damage.

You're all about blaming women for not having more kids, but never wanting to blame men for not being the kind of person women want to have kids with. You can slice this argument both ways.

Feminism provided women opportunities to utilize their talents and abilities where they were once locked out or suppressed. Seems pretty good to me.

Agreed. So, you with us, or are you with the oligarchs who want low labor costs and globalism and women in the workplace and men being treated like scum of the earth and unrestricted third world immigration.

Which side are you on? US, or the OLIGARCHS?

It really isn't about globalism and immigration, because the labor market is really not about manual labor anymore.

It's really more about corporations focusing almost entirely on maximizing shareholder profit which means the wellbeing of their employees is a far distant concept.

Workers are totally expendable. That doesn't make anyone feel terribly secure about their future. The rug could be pulled out from you anytime for any reason and in this labor market, you'd have an extremely difficult time finding a new position.

We lost that feeling due to globalization back in the 70s.

Looking back, i think that was a mistake. We should fix that.

Again, you seem to equate the labor market solely with manufacturing when it's always been a modest slice of the workforce.

Why couldn't she take an uber?

His need to tell her she couldn't take the car represents the kind of control he seeks over her.

Control over a wife is a huge aspect of conservative perspective on how to treat wives. Hell, they freak out just thinking that they may vote differently than them.

 

[Correll]

It doesn't attack the ideal of motherhood. It provides agency to women to chose the life that they want.

No, feminists have been pretty clear. THey have a preferred path and they having nothing but contempt for women that don't follow that path.

Slowly means that the labor force participation rate increased from 40 to 70% over a period of 40 years. That's pretty specific. Your point is addressed by disproving that there was anything "sudden" about it.

That is a huge and sudden increase for an economy to absorb. Naturally wages stagnated. And continue to stagnate.

Normal means about 2 to 2.1 births per woman, which is the replacement rate.

Early 20th century saw birthrates over 3.5. By what standards did you decide that THAT was not the norm?

The crisis may be over but it's effects aren't. The economy and our expectations from it changed a lot since then. Young adults entering the workforce during time had their lives and careers set back years during the slow recovery.

But still, those years are over. That slow down, if things returned to "normal" should result in a BUMP, as they play catch up, along side of younger people, moving at a "normal" pace.

That that did not happen, is a concern. That you want to dismiss it, is odd.

Illiberal democracies are a right wing phenomenon. See Vicktor Orban and Vance's full throated support of him as an example.

Tell that to the thousands of brits being arrested by people like you, for saying non liberal things online.

Not at all. Emotional intelligence is not a typical masculine trait and unfortunately never been emphasized in the raising of young men. It is, however, highly valuable in a marriage.

You watch the manosphere, they talk to women about why they started divorce or have bad views on men.

That is not hte kind of shit they say. These women have been indoctrinated by lefties like yourself to have negative views on men.

You're all about blaming women for not having more kids, but never wanting to blame men for not being the kind of person women want to have kids with. You can slice this argument both ways.

You can have ARGUMENTS both ways. Of course, only one of those arguments are going to reflect REALITY.

The reality is that women are practicing HYPERGAMY, which does NOT lead to healthy relationships, and instead encourages hook up culture.

Feminism provided women opportunities to utilize their talents and abilities where they were once locked out or suppressed. Seems pretty good to me.

That is you playing fledgling again. Pretending to be unaware of everything that has occurred on this planet in the modern era.

It really isn't about globalism and immigration, because the labor market is really not about manual labor anymore.

Well, that's a load of shit talk. The rich oligarchs want open borders and high immigration to keep the cost of labor low. Your attempt to confuse the issue by starting a retarded back and forth about "manual" vs "skilled labor" is dismissed as too retarded and dishonest to... **** with.

YOU are on teh side of the oligarchs. YOU are supporting them in their attempt to keep labor cheap as hell, ie WAGES LOW AND STAGNANT.

I want higher wages, both as a means to an end, ie better birthrates, adn b. for the good that is inherent in workers have better lives.

Unfortunately, I have never met a leftard that will be honest about why they oppose this.

It's really more about corporations focusing almost entirely on maximizing shareholder profit which means the wellbeing of their employees is a far distant concept.

Whatever dude. THe point is, you are on teh side of the corporations and against the employees. And you will play retard to avoid answering why.

Workers are totally expendable. That doesn't make anyone feel terribly secure about their future. The rug could be pulled out from you anytime for any reason and in this labor market, you'd have an extremely difficult time finding a new position.

This is a result of the flooded labor pool, that you support and I oppose. You again, are on teh side of the employers and against the workers.

So...yeah.

Again, you seem to equate the labor market solely with manufacturing when it's always been a modest slice of the workforce.

Just, **** off. Ok. There is a limit to how much of your leftard shit talk I can put up with in a single serving. you shit talking asshole.

His need to tell her she couldn't take the car represents the kind of control he seeks over her.

Or maybe if the situation was a ******* TENTH as bad as you pretend it was, she should just have taken an uber and gotten the **** out of there.

That she insisted on the family car, and refused to give an estimated return time, was her being a *****.

Control over a wife is a huge aspect of conservative perspective on how to treat wives. Hell, they freak out just thinking that they may vote differently than them.

Hye, you ever see a leftard, face to face with a black that isn't voting for them? LOL, remember how bent out of shape BIDEN was about that, back when he was still aware of the world?

That was hilarious.

 

[Marener]

No, feminists have been pretty clear. THey have a preferred path and they having nothing but contempt for women that don't follow that path.

So you say, but maybe you're just exposed to the fringe by your manosphere media bubble.

That is a huge and sudden increase for an economy to absorb. Naturally wages stagnated. And continue to stagnate.

40 years is hardly sudden.

Early 20th century saw birthrates over 3.5. By what standards did you decide that THAT was not the norm?

Replacement rate seemed to be a pretty rational standard.

But still, those years are over. That slow down, if things returned to "normal" should result in a BUMP, as they play catch up, along side of younger people, moving at a "normal" pace.

That that did not happen, is a concern. That you want to dismiss it, is odd.

"Should" doesn't mean that it did. The post-great recession had a number of factors that we didn't necessarily predict. For example, housing never really caught up, making home ownership more difficult for young people. The gig economy became very prevalent during this time.

Im concerned enough to be talking about it. I'd rather find out the reason rather than just trying to blame women for everything.

Tell that to the thousands of brits being arrested by people like you, for saying non liberal things online.

What did they say? Something outrageous like telling members of the military they shouldn't follow illegal orders?

Illiberal democracies use political power to enforce limitations on speech expressly to maintain power (among other things). The British have strict rules about being nice to each other, but it really doesn't have much to do with maintaining political power.

You watch the manosphere, they talk to women about why they started divorce or have bad views on men

That is not hte kind of shit they say. These women have been indoctrinated by lefties like yourself to have negative views on men.

It's hardly surprising these are the women that the manosphere would promote, given how it corroborates their narrative.

You can have ARGUMENTS both ways. Of course, only one of those arguments are going to reflect REALITY.

The reality is that women are practicing HYPERGAMY, which does NOT lead to healthy relationships, and instead encourages hook up culture.

Seems to me that hypergamy reflects historical norms of marriage. Not sure how it promotes "hook up culture", given the goal of hypergamy is secure social status through marriage. Sure, some women want to marry up, but as I pointed out a larger proportion of men don't want to date a woman who is more successful than them.

That is you playing fledgling again. Pretending to be unaware of everything that has occurred on this planet in the modern era.

I'm well aware that men have long tried to blame their failings on women.

Well, that's a load of shit talk. The rich oligarchs want open borders and high immigration to keep the cost of labor low. Your attempt to confuse the issue by starting a retarded back and forth about "manual" vs "skilled labor" is dismissed as too retarded and dishonest to... **** with.

Low skill manual labor will always be low wage because these jobs are ultimately low value and low productivity. I'm really talking more about the middle class.

YOU are on teh side of the oligarchs. YOU are supporting them in their attempt to keep labor cheap as hell, ie WAGES LOW AND STAGNANT.

Same thing. Immigration doesn't really affect the wages of most Americans. Maybe if you're a roofer or a dishwasher. Anyone working in corporate America doesn't really give a shit.

I want higher wages, both as a means to an end, ie better birthrates, adn b. for the good that is inherent in workers have better lives.

You can want whatever you want, doesn't mean you're willing to do anything about it. Low corporate wages mean high corporate profits which means higher stock price which is the only thing that matters to anyone.

You’re really missing the point that it’s not all about wages. Economic security means that you can feel confident you’ll have a job for the foreseeable future and that if you get fired, you can find another job and keep moving forward I life.

People these days are scared the next economic meltdown is right around the corner. The oligarchs don’t care. They’re going to win either way. So if the people running the economy don’t care, how can we have any sense of security? And if we don’t have a sense of economic security, can you feel comfortable having kids?

This is a result of the flooded labor pool, that you support and I oppose. You again, are on teh side of the employers and against the workers.

It's the result of weak labor policies and lack of commitment to their workforce, with a incentive structure to cut costs in order to push the stock price up.

Just, **** off. Ok. There is a limit to how much of your leftard shit talk I can put up with in a single serving. you shit talking asshole.

You're being emotional again. I don't know how old you are but this is a pretty modern economy.

Or maybe if the situation was a ******* TENTH as bad as you pretend it was, she should just have taken an uber and gotten the **** out of there.

That she insisted on the family car, and refused to give an estimated return time, was her being a *****.

He didn't need the car. He just wanted to prevent her from having it. The way he kept demanding her respect was pathetic.

It's totally unsurprising that you can't see the emotional abuse in this relationship.

Moreover, don't forget that his response to this whole thing was to bemoan the fact that he couldn't legally trap her in a marriage and continue to be emotionally abusive. Yet again, about control.

Good old Charlie Kirk wants to remind us that a man works hard to provide for his family and it is disgusting for a wife to "undermine" him by voting in a way he disapproves.

Ron Filipkowski (@ronaldfilipkowski) on Threads

Charlie Kirk is upset that Republican women may “undermine their husbands” and secretly vote for Harris while telling their husbands they voted for Trump, even though the husband “works his tail off to make sure that she can have a nice life.”

www.threads.com

 

[Correll]

So you say, but maybe you're just exposed to the fringe by your manosphere media bubble.

Nope.

40 years is hardly sudden.

Replacement rate seemed to be a pretty rational standard.


"Should" doesn't mean that it did. The post-great recession had a number of factors that we didn't necessarily predict. For example, housing never really caught up, making home ownership more difficult for young people. The gig economy became very prevalent during this time.

Im concerned enough to be talking about it. I'd rather find out the reason rather than just trying to blame women for everything.

You are refusing to consider that women could be doing anything wrong. You are an asshole.

What did they say? Something outrageous like telling members of the military they shouldn't follow illegal orders?

Illiberal democracies use political power to enforce limitations on speech expressly to maintain power (among other things). The British have strict rules about being nice to each other, but it really doesn't have much to do with maintaining political power.

Lefties say shit like "being nice" and then bring the hammer down on their political enemies.

It's hardly surprising these are the women that the manosphere would promote, given how it corroborates their narrative.

They are women saying the same kind of retarded anti-man shit you are saying. ie the shit that feminism teaches them about men.

Seems to me that hypergamy reflects historical norms of marriage. Not sure how it promotes "hook up culture", given the goal of hypergamy is secure social status through marriage...

Historical norm is a woman marrying a man who is her social equal. Then stating together.

Hypergamy encourages women to aim high. And they can KIND OF do that, ie they can get laid. Maybe even have a baby.

But no marriage, not one that lasts.

AND it shuts out the majority of men who are not the top twenty per cent.

Would you like to address this, or would you like pretend to be retarded and fail to understand my points?

I'm well aware that men have long tried to blame their failings on women.

Low skill manual labor will always be low wage because these jobs are ultimately low value and low productivity. I'm really talking more about the middle class.

Same thing. Immigration doesn't really affect the wages of most Americans. Maybe if you're a roofer or a dishwasher. Anyone working in corporate America doesn't really give a shit.

Yeah, that's retarded. Tens of millions of third world workers, in our work force, is a major factor to supress wages.

YOu are a lying asshole.

You can want whatever you want, doesn't mean you're willing to do anything about it. Low corporate wages mean high corporate profits which means higher stock price which is the only thing that matters to anyone.

Errr, I've been voting opposite that, for decades now. So, you are full of shit.

YOU are voting for low corporate wages and higher stock prices, so maybe saying that makes you feel better about it.

But that's on you, not me.

You’re really missing the point that it’s not all about wages. Economic security means that you can feel confident you’ll have a job for the foreseeable future and that if you get fired, you can find another job and keep moving forward I life.

You're still the one voting for the status quo that you are bitching about.

Sooooooo, take it up with yourself.

People these days are scared the next economic meltdown is right around the corner. The oligarchs don’t care. They’re going to win either way. So if the people running the economy don’t care, how can we have any sense of security? And if we don’t have a sense of economic security, can you feel comfortable having kids?

YOu are still the one on the side of the oligarchs. So, why are you telling me this?

I voted for CHANGE. And I am willing to do some again and again.

It's the result of weak labor policies and lack of commitment to their workforce, with a incentive structure to cut costs in order to push the stock price up.

You're being emotional again. I don't know how old you are but this is a pretty modern economy.

Irrelevant shit talk from the asshole on the side of the oligarchs.

He didn't need the car. He just wanted to prevent her from having it. The way he kept demanding her respect was pathetic.

It's totally unsurprising that you can't see the emotional abuse in this relationship.

Moreover, don't forget that his response to this whole thing was to bemoan the fact that he couldn't legally trap her in a marriage and continue to be emotionally abusive. Yet again, about control.

Funny how the woman wanting the car and expecting the man to take being the one stuck, isn't controlling, or entitled.

You are just an anti-male asshole.

Good old Charlie Kirk wants to remind us that a man works hard to provide for his family and it is disgusting for a wife to "undermine" him by voting in a way he disapproves.

Ron Filipkowski (@ronaldfilipkowski) on Threads

Charlie Kirk is upset that Republican women may “undermine their husbands” and secretly vote for Harris while telling their husbands they voted for Trump, even though the husband “works his tail off to make sure that she can have a nice life.”

www.threads.com

But hey, you people killed him so you proved who the better man was.

 

[Marener]

You are refusing to consider that women could be doing anything wrong. You are an asshole.

Probably seems like that because I’m not willing to blame feminism for anything because it suits your own personal desires to subjugate women.

They are women saying the same kind of retarded anti-man shit you are saying. ie the shit that feminism teaches them about men.

And there are men in the manosphere who think Hitler was a pretty cool alpha and that women shouldn’t be able to vote.

You need to get off the internet and go touch grass.

Historical norm is a woman marrying a man who is her social equal. Then stating together.

Hypergamy encourages women to aim high. And they can KIND OF do that, ie they can get laid. Maybe even have a baby.

The desire to marry someone of a higher social status is not new. Did you ever hear of this story called Cinderella?

AND it shuts out the majority of men who are not the top twenty per cent.

It doesn’t since it’s only a slim minority of women who won’t date a man just because he makes less.

Errr, I've been voting opposite that, for decades now. So, you are full of shit.

The closest you’d come to voting opposite corporate interests is Mamdami and Sanders.

The Trump administration is full of corporate oligarchs and actively working to make them richer and more powerful. What did you expect when you elected a billionaire?

YOU are voting for low corporate wages and higher stock prices, so maybe saying that makes you feel better about it.

But that's on you, not me.

Everyone is voting for corporate profits because no one has any idea what to do about situation.

You're still the one voting for the status quo that you are bitching about.

Absent a full overthrow of the current economic system, everyone is voting for the status quo.

I voted for CHANGE. And I am willing to do some again and again.

You voted for lower corporate taxes, deregulation, more monopolization, and so much more.

Little benefits the middle class Americans but does make Elon, Theil and a bunch of Trump’s sociopathic buddies richer.

Funny how the woman wanting the car and expecting the man to take being the one stuck, isn't controlling, or entitled.

She needed the car and he didn’t. You want to put his potential need for the car above her actual need for the car?

You are just an anti-male asshole.

I’m against terrible people and the manosphere has been built largely to tell men that it’s okay for them to be terrible people. And when women don’t want to be married and have babies with the terrible men, the manosphere makes sure that they don’t ever have to have the uncomfortable feeling that they might be wrong.

 

[Correll]

Probably seems like that because I’m not willing to blame feminism for anything because it suits your own personal desires to subjugate women.

Here you ignore EVERYTHING, and try to make it personal about me. **** YOU.

And there are men in the manosphere who think Hitler was a pretty cool alpha and that women shouldn’t be able to vote.

Note how I have been discussing what women do as a group, or generally. I have NOT went looking for examples of the most vile or stupid women and then tried to pretend that they defined all women.

Because only a dishonest bad actor, ie a complete asshole would do that.

You need to get off the internet and go touch grass.

The desire to marry someone of a higher social status is not new. Did you ever hear of this story called Cinderella?

THe mechanisms that allow women to think it is a realistic goal, are new. So we see a situation where 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of men.

That leaves out the majority of men, including the AVERAGE, or NORMAL guys, and teaches the PRINCE CHARMINGS, that they can be players and treat women like dirt and get away with it.

That is what we see. That supports the bad fertility numbers and the declining birthrate.

That is not good for anyone.

Would you like to address the issue now, or continue to play dumb, like an asshole?

It doesn’t since it’s only a slim minority of women who won’t date a man just because he makes less.

Twenty percent is not a slim minority. It is very significant.

The closest you’d come to voting opposite corporate interests is Mamdami and Sanders.

We all saw the corporate interests and the oligarchs align with you and yours.

They/you supported Hillary. They/you supported Biden. They/you supported Harris.


This bit where you just deny the recent history we all lived though, is you being a lying asshole.

The Trump administration is full of corporate oligarchs and actively working to make them richer and more powerful. What did you expect when you elected a billionaire?

Here the leftard, who is a complete supporter of the idea that the GOP is racist and that white male politicians look out for their fellow white men, now reveals that as a marxist he believes in CLASS WARFARE.

These ideas are in complete contradiction. Either the white oligarchs are racist who are looking out for their fellow white men, OR they are evil oligarchs who are waging class warfare on the working man, regardless of skin color.

It can't be both. But the lefty believes both.

Talking to them is like talking to a madman. Liberalism really IS a mental disorder.

Everyone is voting for corporate profits because no one has any idea what to do about situation.

MAGA voted for change. That you can't admit or respect that, even if you disagree with it, is you being a complete asshole.

Absent a full overthrow of the current economic system, everyone is voting for the status quo.

You voted for lower corporate taxes, deregulation, more monopolization, and so much more.

I voted for mass deportations of cheap third world labor and an ending of "FREE TRADE".

Those together would be quite a nice change to the status quo.

YOu are a lying piece of shit.

Little benefits the middle class Americans but does make Elon, Theil and a bunch of Trump’s sociopathic buddies richer.

She needed the car and he didn’t. You want to put his potential need for the car above her actual need for the car?

She could have used an UBER. Your attempt to PROVE verbal abuse, failed.

Yet you are stonewalling, because you are a dishonest asshole.

You "believe women" even though you know that quite often, they lie.


Because you are happy to throw men under the bus, if it advances the leftard agenda.

I’m against terrible people and the manosphere has been built largely to tell men that it’s okay for them to be terrible people. And when women don’t want to be married and have babies with the terrible men, the manosphere makes sure that they don’t ever have to have the uncomfortable feeling that they might be wrong.

My position is that the dating market has been damaged by bad ideas and bad actions.

Specifically, FEMINIST IDEAS/POLICIES and women practicing hypergamy.


You, and all leftards, refuse to consider any possible fault for women. YOu insist that all problems must be from MEN.


You are sexist assholes. **** YOU ALL.

 

[initforme]

People perhaps just aren't as interested in dating and having to adjust their schedules around it. They have more important things to do, like working. Then on weekends they want quiet time.

 

[Correll]

People perhaps just aren't as interested in dating and having to adjust their schedules around it. They have more important things to do, like working. Then on weekends they want quiet time.

That's dumb.

I saw a clip online recently, a young man made the point that you have to really abuse mammals, to get then to stop breeding.

Good point.

 

[initforme]

That's dumb.

I saw a clip online recently, a young man made the point that you have to really abuse mammals, to get then to stop breeding.

Good point.

Dating is a boring. Unexciting endeavor.

 

[Correll]

Dating is a boring. Unexciting endeavor.

What an useless quip.

This is a real problem. For some reasons LEFTIES are on the SIDE OF THE PROBLEM.

They are in this thread, running DEFENSE FOR THE PROBLEM, so that the problem can continue to exist and continue to hurt people and to hurt society as a whole.


WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?

 

[Divine Wind]

There are lots of things affecting birth rates and it varies from place to place.

In my opinion, the biggest issue in this country is that no one thinks society gives a **** about you anymore. Who wants to have kids in a society where no one gives a shit anymore?

MAGA morons only care about keeping women pregnant, not helping them with babies and raising children. Otherwise they'd be supporting child care, schools, healthcare and lowering grocery prices.

Trump Says He Doesn’t Care “Even a Little Bit” About People’s Finances

The president made a jaw-dropping confession when asked about the impacts of the Iran war.

newrepublic.com

Trump Says He Doesn’t Care “Even a Little Bit” About People’s Finances​

The president made a jaw-dropping confession when asked about the impacts of the Iran war.​

 

[Divine Wind]

WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?

Too many MAGA morons. I support assisted suicide for them.