this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
56 points (87.8% liked)

News

30803 readers
3361 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 23 points 6 hours ago

Opting out of reproduction is one of the smartest and most impactful things that the average person can do right now.

The world is an absolute dumpster fire, and the situation only seems to be deteriorating.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

U.S. fertility rate is actually up the last few years, still below replacement level, but up.

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/usa/united-states/fertility-rate

[–] Jolly_Platypus@lemmy.world 34 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

If you want people to have more babies, at least try to do something about the climate emergency and pay a livable wage. Until then, fuck off.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 hours ago

If the income wasn't moved up so high to all those hoarders we'd be off to a good start ..

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 10 points 8 hours ago

Lots of things we could do to encourage having children in the US. Like providing socialized healthcare. Investing in education. Higher salaries. Better work benefits.

But we don’t do any of these things. Quite the opposite. And yet the powers that be still expect us to want more kids?

[–] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 72 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I have no idea why anyone would subject children to this life right now. Women are losing autonomy, racism runs rampant. War criminals are nominating for Peace Prizes. Shit just all around sucks.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 28 points 10 hours ago

Having children now would be pretty cruel unless you’re stupid rich. And even then, the future for that lot might be real bleak too.

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

Ever seen Idocracy? Some people are still having babies.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 43 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

What a shite article. Reads like a pro-natalism opinion piece instead of news. I gave up about 2/3 of the way through.

Goes on and on pointing the finger at women, as if men don’t want to have babies either. Has a very “it’s all your fault” tone. Then whines that baby boomers are aging out of the workforce.

Dumbass, there’s a reason they are called “boomers” - they were born during a period when there were an unusually large number of births. Boomers are the exception not the rule.

And the Trump administration has been putting everyone out of work (have you seen all the layoffs this week?), so it’s probably a good thing there will be less people in the workforce since there are equally less jobs available.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 18 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We are realistically looking at losing 2-10% of the total human population over the next 25 years due to hunger caused by simultaneously bread basket collapse. Going out of our way to engineer more births is just adding to the number of victims. Wealthy countries can either adapt their economies to an older population, or they can rely on immigration. But deliberately engineering more people is suicidal. We are on the eve of what history will know as the Great Hunger. It is depressingly obvious that our leaders really haven't internalized the state of the world and what is rapidly approaching.

[–] Jolly_Platypus@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

We are realistically looking at losing 2-10% of the total human population over the next 25 years

Look at the optimist over here. You're wayyy low. Hope you're right though. 33 - 50% in my view.

https://lemmy.world/c/nthe

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 hours ago

After reading your comment, I felt I had to see what this horrible article was like. I’m afraid I had a completely different read than you did. I found it pretty well balanced, and even a bit liberal leaning. It did not seem to shy away from, subtly, calling out the rich assholes who want us all to breed so they have more workers to enslave. And also the politicians who want us to breed so they have more people to conscript into their armies. Not saying NPR hasn’t gone to shite. They pretty much have from what I gather; I stopped listening a long time ago. But I didn’t think this article was at all objectionable, frankly. Agree to disagree. Cheers!

[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 13 points 9 hours ago

Oh fuck off, you want more babies make them yourselves, assholes! Or, hear me out, allow more immigration so you don't have to force people to make babies against their will.

[–] SoupBrick@pawb.social 19 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Copying my comment from another post with this same article:

The US' population growth has been sustained by immigration. Guess what is being discouraged by the actions of the current administration?

Who tf is going to have money for children when there is so much financial uncertainty and the job market is this bad?

https://www.visaverge.com/immigration/u-s-immigrant-population-drives-all-growth-for-first-time-since-1850/

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 12 points 10 hours ago

Emma Waters, with the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, agrees it's time for a national conversation about birth rates and the choices families are making. "We're going to have more adults than we have children to replace them, and that will heavily impact things like our military readiness, GDP and economic growth in the United States."

It’s almost like the Heritage foundation didn’t at all think through their push for rabid anti-immigration policies, combined with their perceived necessity for increased breeding on behalf of the poors.

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 8 points 9 hours ago

No point in the fascists having access to yet more easily-brainwashed young folks.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 14 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What's ironic is the same people advocating for policies that, basically make it flat out stupid to have kids in this world... are also the ones like "why no one want kids".

OK so yeah the worlds shifted from where one income working 40 hours a week can comfortably afford a 3-4 bedroom house and food for 4+... to you'll be lucky if 2 incomes is enough to afford a shitty one bedroom apartment unless you both are also swimming in school debt. If your 2 incomes happens to be enough to raise kids... well good luck actually raising them as paying someone to take care of your kids is likely equal to your smaller income (at which point you aren't actually making a second income, but trading off to get away from your kids).

So yeah the 2 options are... 1. Give up this "Infinate growth everywhere". can't both have us working more and more for less and less... also cut out all safety nets, then expect us to invest in kids, who we also never will see because were always working...

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Well, let’s be real; pull off the ‘why no one want kids’ mask and you get the actual things they’re saying: ‘why no one want to make white babies because Great Replacement Theory’ and ‘why no one want to be bound to poor working conditions and wage slavery’.

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 12 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

If only we didn't have to permanently increase production until the end of time. Maybe then a shrinking labor, and consumption base wouldn't a big deal. Its too bad thats not possible whatsoever right?

[–] Zier@fedia.io 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Good for Women. No one wants to have a baby with an incel!

[–] RedPostItNote@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

Incels need to grapple with the fact that women are so easy for them to give up….

[–] the_q@lemmy.zip 8 points 10 hours ago

"If these Jezebels don't make more cattle who will work at McDonald's?"