If people were wise about relationships, what would the fertility rate be?

Maybe its just because I live in a middle class suburb of Kansas City in the “bible belt” but I see plenty of people who do want a traditional marriage and family. Most people own cars designed around children. When developments are built they have playgrounds and pools. People buy a home based on the quality of the schools.

I think alot of us go thru a stage where we enjoy our young and carefree days in our early 20’s when we live in an apartment have do the bar and club stuff and have several relationships. But somewhere past around age 27 we decide we want to start settling down and looking for something permanent.

Sure they do. But how long does that all last? An athlete? That stops by around 22. Astronaut? There are maybe 20 in the whole country. Scientist? Sitting in a lab all day gets boring after awhile. Career? The rat race isnt all so great after awhile.

How about women who have a genuine desire to be mothers? Or men to be fathers?

Also many women start wonderful careers AFTER their kids are grown.

There are also advantages for children raised in families with lots of siblings that cannot be measured by dollars.

A second child isnt double the cost of the first and a 3rd or 4th, you just kind of fit them in.

Interesting that you say 27, as that is the exact age I have noticed in online dating when women start becoming interested in an actual relationship. Until then, it’s about finding a guy who will help her look good to her friends and help her have fun.

**Urbanredneck **I should make clear I’m not saying there is anything wrong with having a family or that doing so is illogical or unjustifiable. The OP isn’t about that; it’s about why there is some trend towards not doing so. And the statistics show that to be the case, no matter your personal experience.

I think you said the reason. In any case, fertility in the US is a little below replacement. Japan is quite far below it.

In my line of work as an interpreter (most of which is medical), I encounter lots of Japanese people here in Indianapolis with two or even three kids. I don’t think I’ve ever seen four. But the people who come here tend to have the better jobs. They can afford the kids.

So environment does play a big role in what you see.

You know I’ve known guys who have met a woman in their early 20’s who they fell in love with and some even proposed to but got turned down. Why? The ladies basically said they didnt want to be tied down at this point in their lives.

And in some ways this makes sense. You are not the same person at 30 you were at age 20. A person does alot of growing up and developing in their 20’s as they grow thru the various stages of careers and relationships.

Yeah I live inOverland Park Kansas. One of top rated communities in the country for raising a family. Most families have 2 kids but having 3,4 or even more kids is not uncommon and really not even that much harder than just raising one. If you have the house, the yard, the van, heck just have another! You just go from man to man to zone defense.

There are 3 Korean families in my neighborhood and one Filipino.

So yes, location is a big issue. It would be very tough to raise a family in a big city.

According to this news release, spending on education among top 10% families increased. But it doesn’t say by how much. I checked the guy’s CV and it says he submitted what appears to be a shitty paper (I looked at BLS data and saw a thing!), but I checked the journal and it was never published.

Fox News has a better summary: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/30/as-affluent-parents-accelerate-spending-on-kids-education-wealth-gap-could.html

Doesn’t really answer the question. I could probably pull data from the BLS CES, but I’d have to dig.

Dont let the thought of a college education keep you from having kids.

And sitting in a house all day changing diapers ever gets interesting? Taking care of children isn’t all so great after awhile.

It does make sense. The problem is that this modern, sensible way of thinking is not conducive to actually, you know, making babies and stuff.

The modern, sensible way get you better quality citizens for the 21st century, people with educations and the ability to use that training. Mass production of babies gets higher numbers of peasants and cannon fodder. It’s great for a world that needs tons of mindless labor (and possibly a permanent underclass) to survive. It’s not so great if we want a society that places value on the individual or the idea that everyone is entitled to equal rights and a minimum quality of life.

I have known women who turned such men down and when they got to the “marrying age” found slim pickings. (And men as well TBF.)

Having it all has always been a scam IMO. You make a choice; and accept that it will have certain consequences that you would dislike, but on balance you want it.

You change diapers maybe 5-6 times a day and that takes maybe 3-4 minutes. It’s not the end of the world to see a little poo. Most kids potty train from 18 months to 2 years or so.

In the meantime toddlers can actually be alot of fun.

Again it’s not the end of the world and I dont like it when kids are treated like little parasites or something. Children represent the future of our society. Whatever happened to “it takes a village”?

Toddlers are only fun if you like toddlers (or are a pedophile). It takes a village died when parents started demanding the exclusive right to control and discipline their children (and frequently slacking off in that department). I come from a culture that does truly believe “it takes a village” or more precisely “it takes a tribe” to raise a child. Our systems of child raising is communal within the extended family and very different from the nuclear model.

And only well raised, children who become mature, competent, responsible adults represent the future of our society. Feral brats will destroy our society.

I am not talking about “mass production,” lol. I am talking about keeping fertility at replacement level or maybe a little below if a particular country wants to reduce its population. Right now, we have countries with cratering fertility and declining and aging populations. It has to be reversed eventually, or the countries will literally die. (It’s not a theoretical issue with Japan, which has no history of mass immigration. The loss and aging of the population is already having many social effects, most of them negative.)