US Birthrate Continues to Decline

[midcan5]

Interesting topic, coming from a Catholic family of too many it is easy to understand why. Being dirt poor ain't a good place to be - children are expensive.

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2026/is-the-us-birth-rate-declining

 

[Marener]

And it didn’t pass because the two parties didn’t want it to pass for fear of losing support and not getting re-elected. That is why term limits for Congress could help push them to do the right tough decisions. But I am not sure that would help.

I am really disgusted by both sides of the aisle and don’t think there are solutions if we don’t demand term limits, demand a balanced budget, demand big money out of politics, demand Congress is not allowed to do insider trading, demand that lobbyist to be curtailed on what they do to sway congressional members.

We need reform so we can reform.

Term limits won't change anything because the problem is with the electorate.

You're right that the country is increasingly dysfunctional. Who would want to raise kids in such a dysfunctional country?

 

[JohnDB]

You think their only purpose is to be a mother.

No wonder women think you guys are assholes.

Now you have added something I've never said, implied or inferred
OR
YOU have now put limitations on what women can accomplish.

Which is it? (So I can demonstrate how ridiculous you are)

 

[Marener]

Now you have added something I've never said, implied or inferred
OR
YOU have now put limitations on what women can accomplish.

Which is it? (So I can demonstrate how ridiculous you are)

Absolutely implied.

You want them to find "true happiness and meaning in becoming a mother" implies that without becoming a mother, they will not have true happiness and meaning.

Why don't you further show that I'm right by explaining what you mean when you say they've been "sold a lie"? What is this "lie" exactly?

 

[SweetTea]

And yet the wealthy are consistently increasing their share of wealth as inequality has widened dramatically in the last 50 years.

Yes, most wealthy people are wealthy for a reason. They make good financial decisions.

It's definitely the same thing. You've said that you don't want to pay higher taxes because you want a fancy car, fancy private schools, fancy house, fancy SECOND house, fancy vacations.

Opposing higher taxes is a stance on government size, efficiency and fairness, not just personal luxury.

But you attack young people for not wanting children so that they can have the same things.

I oppose higher taxes and may enjoy more disposable income when they are lower. The extra consumption is a byproduct.

If someone says “I’m not having kids so I can afford a better lifestyle,” the consumption is the point of the decision itself.

If someone opposes higher taxes, they may indeed enjoy more disposable income—but their stated reasoning is often about policy design (government size, efficiency, incentives). The extra consumption is a byproduct.

The only difference is that you are screwing over future generations who will have to pay higher taxes with fewer benefits and young people aren't hurting anyone.

I never said young people were hurting anyone. If they make the choice not to have children because they want to have more fun and more luxuries, that is their choice. I didn’t make that choice and I do have to make financial concessions to pay for my children’s needs. Private schools and college savings aren’t cheap.

Young people telling me that I must pay more taxes and cut either “luxuries” or from my children’s needs so they can have more money for luxuries is a bit disingenuous.

Because I am a responsible parent, if taxes were raised to a much higher level, I would be cutting my “luxuries” first, not from my children’s needs.

 

[Papageorgio]

I'm just reflecting the reality that we do not engage with biological sex, but with expressed gender.

Gender can mean different things to different people at different times in different places. There is no "definition" because it is a concept rather than a fact.

Concepts are fine, I have no issue with it. Transracial and transpecies are concepts as well, I know a guy who identifies with him being Johnny Cash, he used to come into my business, no issue with want to feel.

My issue is when males, claim they identify as females and are allowed access to female locker rooms, or males that claim they identify as females amd compete in female sports, there by denying women equal competition or males that claim to identify as females and are allowed into female prisons.

To me that is disrespectful to women. Because those man, never experienced what it is really like to be a female, so they are not the same.

 

[Marener]

The largest decline in births comes from teenage girls. Which apparently is now a problem on the right?

 

[JohnDB]

Interesting topic, coming from a Catholic family of too many it is easy to understand why. Being dirt poor ain't a good place to be - children are expensive.

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2026/is-the-us-birth-rate-declining

Oh I'm not even going to disagree that the cost of raising children from the birthing process to educating them has risen exponentially. (Over 10X in the past 20 years).

However....large families are a choice of lifestyle made by your parents. I know a family that has chosen that. They drive a passenger van to church on Sundays with usually one or two out from colds picked up at school. 6 kids are no joke.
But it's their life and lifestyle by choice. I'm not knocking it. The kids and parents are happy and seem well adjusted. Nothing strange about them. They both married with the ideal of a large family and lots of kids.

However....for most this is not the plan.

 

[Papageorgio]

Term limits won't change anything because the problem is with the electorate.

You're right that the country is increasingly dysfunctional. Who would want to raise kids in such a dysfunctional country?

Term limits would force career politicians out of office, thus they can change their focus from being re-elected to what the originally wanted to accomplish.

What’s do you believe is wrong with the electorate?

 

[Marener]

Concepts are fine, I have no issue with it. Transracial and transpecies are concepts as well, I know a guy who identifies with him being Johnny Cash, he used to come into my business, no issue with want to feel.

My issue is when males, claim they identify as females and are allowed access to female locker rooms, or males that claim they identify as females amd compete in female sports, there by denying women equal competition or males that claim to identify as females and are allowed into female prisons.

To me that is disrespectful to women. Because those man, never experienced what it is really like to be a female, so they are not the same.

I like to keep perspective. Locker rooms and girls sports is such a small part of society but somehow given an absurd importance.

If the only issue was segregating sports according to biological sex, we could handle that issue. But that's obviously just a motte and bailey defense.

 

[Marener]

Term limits would force career politicians out of office, thus they can change their focus from being re-elected to what the originally wanted to accomplish.

What’s do you believe is wrong with the electorate?

Forcing career politicians out of office accomplishes what exactly? They'll just be replaced by other politicians elected by a people who don't want to cut spending or raise taxes.

The problem with the electorate is that they've become accustomed to getting what they want and not having to pay the price.

 

[JohnDB]

Absolutely implied.

You want them to find "true happiness and meaning in becoming a mother" implies that without becoming a mother, they will not have true happiness and meaning.

Why don't you further show that I'm right by explaining what you mean when you say they've been "sold a lie"? What is this "lie" exactly?

So YOU are limiting what women can or can't do.
Women have ALWAYS had careers, hobbies, and fully enjoyed motherhood. No different from fathers enjoying fatherhood, hobbies, and a career.

YOU are claiming that a person cannot have a full, rich, and rewarding life if they have children. Which is the lie I've been talking about.

A rewarding life has absolutely nothing to do with hobbies or careers. It has everything to do about permanent, long lasting relationships...which also bring about the Holy grail of living: a legacy that lives after you are dead and forgotten.

Thank you for playing....you are ridiculous.

 

[Marener]

Yes, most wealthy people are wealthy for a reason. They make good financial decisions.

Sure. Or they inherited it. Or they were lucky. Or they were subsidized by the government.

Opposing higher taxes is a stance on government size, efficiency and fairness, not just personal luxury.

Tax rates do not define the size of government. Far from it.

There's nothing fair about saddling future generations with tens of trillions of debt.

I oppose higher taxes and may enjoy more disposable income when they are lower. The extra consumption is a byproduct.

No, the extra consumption is the point. You can pretend otherwise, but it's the point.

If someone says “I’m not having kids so I can afford a better lifestyle,” the consumption is the point of the decision itself.

They want the same thing as you.

If someone opposes higher taxes, they may indeed enjoy more disposable income—but their stated reasoning is often about policy design (government size, efficiency, incentives). The extra consumption is a byproduct.

They can say whatever they want, but it's a rationalization. People are good at rationalization. Obviously people want the extra consumption. If they didn't, they wouldn't do it.

Don't pretend as though you didn't already say you don't want higher taxes so you can afford luxuries.

I never said young people were hurting anyone. If they make the choice not to have children because they want to have more fun and more luxuries, that is their choice. I didn’t make that choice and I do have to make financial concessions to pay for my children’s needs. Private schools and college savings aren’t cheap.

Forgive me for not shedding a tear at your "financial concessions" given your status in the 1%.

Young people telling me that I must pay more taxes and cut either “luxuries” or from my children’s needs so they can have more money for luxuries is a bit disingenuous.

Your children don't need private schools or for you to pay for college. Most of the young people you look down on didn't have that.

Young people aren't telling you to cut luxuries so they can have more money for luxuries. That's disingenuous. All I'm doing is pointing out your own hypocrisy.

Because I am a responsible parent, if taxes were raised to a much higher level, I would be cutting my “luxuries” first, not from my children’s needs.

That's nice, but hardly relevant.

 

[Marener]

So YOU are limiting what women can or can't do.
Women have ALWAYS had careers, hobbies, and fully enjoyed motherhood. No different from fathers enjoying fatherhood, hobbies, and a career.

YOU are claiming that a person cannot have a full, rich, and rewarding life if they have children. Which is the lie I've been talking about.

A rewarding life has absolutely nothing to do with hobbies or careers. It has everything to do about permanent, long lasting relationships...which also bring about the Holy grail of living: a legacy that lives after you are dead and forgotten.

Thank you for playing....you are ridiculous.

No one is claiming that women cannot have a full, rich and rewarding life if they have children.

All they're saying is that it's possible to have a full, rich and rewarding life without children. But you don't seem to think that's true.

Having kids is neither necessary nor sufficient to have permanent long lasting relationships.

 

[JohnDB]

No one is claiming that women cannot have a full, rich and rewarding life if they have children.

All they're saying is that it's possible to have a full, rich and rewarding life without children. But you don't seem to think that's true.

Having kids is neither necessary nor sufficient to have permanent long lasting relationships.

And you actually believe that?
How you just contradicted yourself is amazing....but I'll overlook it momentarily.

Is the moon made of green cheese too?

Maybe the moon is now racist and bigoted.

 

[Marener]

And you actually believe that?
How you just contradicted yourself is amazing....but I'll overlook it momentarily.

Is the moon made of green cheese too?

Maybe the moon is now racist and bigoted.

Actually believe what, exactly?

What contradiction did I just express?

 

[JohnDB]

Actually believe what, exactly?

What contradiction did I just express?

Were you hatched?
Dropped on your head at birth?
Or simply incapable of deductive reasoning?

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Marener]

Were you hatched?
Dropped on your head at birth?
Or simply incapable of deductive reasoning?

I think we're done. I did try to have a clear and coherent conversation.

 

[JohnDB]

I think we're done. I did try to have a clear and coherent conversation.

You really were not capable of doing do.

Certain brain functions like logic are requisite to have a conversation. You don't have any.