Couples Wanted to Have Children. Rising Costs Are Stopping Them(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Couples Wanted to Have Children. Rising Costs Are Stopping Them
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/26/business/children-rising-costs.html
3 comments
Maybe overthinking it if the poorest people in world can have children.
For the poorest in the world, people with no social safety net, children are your 401k, pension, and social security system. Can't have children? Enjoy starving to death in your golden years. Conversely, many children means a cushy retirement. In ancient times your children were your literal property for your whole life, and that's still generally the idea in poor countries.
Civilized countries decided that forcing poor/elderly childless people to starve wasn't acceptable, so we have these support systems which make childrearing optional. Furthermore, everyone decided to trade single income families for doubling national productivity.
To stop overthinking it and make things simple, all you need to do is get rid of social security and pensions. This immediately changes the math for everyone considering children. Firmly gripping the third rail of politics is super straightforward!
Civilized countries decided that forcing poor/elderly childless people to starve wasn't acceptable, so we have these support systems which make childrearing optional. Furthermore, everyone decided to trade single income families for doubling national productivity.
To stop overthinking it and make things simple, all you need to do is get rid of social security and pensions. This immediately changes the math for everyone considering children. Firmly gripping the third rail of politics is super straightforward!
2000 square foot home, he golfs on the weekends, they spend $600 a month on doggie daycare
They decided not to have kids
A tragedy
Edit: it was 600 a month, not a week
They decided not to have kids
A tragedy
Edit: it was 600 a month, not a week