Won't someone please think of the boomers?!
1y 8mon ago by poptalk.scrubbles.tech/u/scrubbles in childfree from poptalk.scrubbles.tech
In another timeline where boomers didn't destroy the housing market, didn't ignore climate change, and didn't continue to vote for regressive policies, maybe they'd have grandchildren.
At some point, us millennials need to also start taking that responsibility. Our oldest cohort is definitely at an age where we are starting to take over power. We won't be able to blame boomers for shit for long.
I'm sorry but the collapse of the housing market and lack of action against climate change has way more to do with the commodification/privitization of housing and energy (as well as labor exploitation in the case of fossil fuels) than some arbitrary generational definition.
Don't let yourself be convinced to blame fellow workers for the consequences of corporate and state action.
My point was that they've continually voted against their own interests (and against the interests of the rest of their class, which is why they now don't have grandchildren). I will continue to blame them for that at the very least, as they've continually proven that they enjoy the corporate and state inaction (because they've always voted to keep it up).
It should also be noted that this is a post about boomers, so of course people are going to bring them up in the comments.
I was told it's all those immigrants vault. It was on my TV last night so it must be true!
It should also be noted that this is a post about boomers, so of course people are going to bring them up in the comments.
Of course and I expected that. I only bothered commenting because I see a lot of media attempting to use boomers as a scapegoat for severe structural issues. I feel it is our responsibility to rebuke this reactionary rhetoric when we see it. Yes boomers often vote against their own class interest but we must also understand they grew up in a time where propaganda was rapidly becoming more effective and increasingly privatized. Which is to say that the propaganda machine served the rich and their interest. They are severely brainwashed especially in the imperial core. Its easy to be angry at them for letting this happen but we must remember who did the brainwashing. Falling for their scapegoats makes us like dogs fighting over bones thrown by meat
You’re being charitable. You need to remind yourself though that pretty much all of them voted for Reagan because Carter had the audacity to say that we can fix a lot of problems by consuming less. This was a generation that fully believed that they could do a consumerism without end.
Young folks have been priced out of housing & healthcare, you can be fired from your job on a whim, food is astronomically expensive, the political climate is tense, your basic human rights could be rescinded at any time, the future of the planet is being murdered by shitty capitalists with 0 regard for human life....
I mean, who wouldn't want to bring a child into this world right now?
Eat shit.
I'm hunting for a new job for the second time in less than a year, and I'm honestly a skilled professional with over 10 years of experience, with a lot of proof that I do great work. The labor market is stupid right now, just down right stupid. Full of executives searching for short term profits rather than anyone wanting to actually run a company well. That's alone is a huge reason, on top of everything else. I don't even know if I'll have stable employment, and that means I don't know if I'll have stable health insurance - so genuinely what are any actual incentives to my generation to have kids? Literally are there any beyond just "you have a kid now"
I'm a software engineer currently trying to find employment, and it's so bad I'm wondering if I'll just have to do something else for a while.
My last company basically fired all their US devs, and outsourced to foreign countries for cheaper.
I am a computing director. My take: software dev has been over saturated for the last 12-15 years but people keep seeing dollar signs in their eyes. My advice: learn a business skill like project management. It will allow you to work in any location.
I have 7 years professional experience, and I'm even getting passed over for positions listed as requiring 1-3 years. It's wild right now.
I'm thinking about just going back to school, while the market is complete shit.
There are always different parts of the stack to work in. I started in the backend database land. Then, moved to general application dev with a side of web. Now, I do embedded. Never stop learning ;]
That works too. A degree is a reset button on your career. I’d suggest either specializing in something niche to make you more desirable or doing something very different so that you have more options.
What languages/specialties, Doc?
Backend and platform/devops. I've worked a lot in Python, building out APIs from the ground up. Lots of cloud and serverless stuff. That being said, is only the most recent fraction of my resume.
I'll keep an ear out and DM you if I hear of anything. I know that my company is currently really only hiring in APAC but, that might change in a few months.
Hey, thanks! I appreciate it, even just the thought.
Not a worry! We're all in this together.
It's shit, right? I'm so sorry. I hope that stability comes to you very soon.
Reject tradition. You have no obligation to sacrifice your well-being because some old, out-of-touch fuckwads want something life-changing from you. Can't even afford groceries.
They can foster a child if they want one around so badly. Or go sit at a park. Or volunteer at the church nursery or something, ffs.
bingo. The SO and I have talked about it, and we decided if we regret it a bit later and it's too late, adoption is always a valid choice. After all, we're not bringing new life in so we don't have to feel guilty about that, but instead we would be giving a home to someone else who needs one. However, there are still many, many negatives as to why we don't want to or simply can't right now.
The parts of the world with the most population growth are generally also the poorest. Richer countries have fewer children, and within those countries richer people have fewer children.
I'm not saying that your concerns about your quality of life are invalid or that they aren't the reason you personally don't want children, but they don't explain this general phenomenon.
Kids are a retirement strategy in poorer countries, they are the opposite in richer ones.
Retirement strategy?
China, India, Syria...
Why the fuck would China or India need to meet replacement rates? They're the most overpopulated places on Earth. This is called progress.
Once again Gen-X is ignored. It's Gen-X hitting grandparenting age.
My two kids probably won't be parents, and I'm ok with that. I want them to be happy more than I want to enjoy grandkids. Whatever they choose, I'll be happy with.
I felt pressure from Boomer parents to have kids, and I didn't want to do the same to my kids. That's a hard nope.
Seems like old = boomers and young = millennials for journalist and a lot of people
People are having kids later in life, and the youngest millennials are only ~29.
Millennials are predominantly the children of Boomers, so that’s why these two generations are basing singled out.
Gen-X were called the a Baby Bust generation for a reason; there aren’t enough of them around in order to swap population metrics compared to what came directly before and after.
Yeah this is a good point. Young boomers are, what, 65?
About 59 I think.
Once again Gen-X is ignored.
I will maintain, as I always do, that getting lumped in with the wrong group and ignored is the most Gen-X thing going right now.
With that, I conclude: whatever ::eye roll::.
I mean you can still have grandkids. I've heard they're great deep fried with a light cornmeal batter and a creamy dill sauce.
Ah, the middle child of the generations.
Gen X is normally described as 1965-1980 so 44 to 59 years old.
Average age of mothers first birth right now is 27. It was around 25 for most of Gen X. So 25 + 27 = 52. Yeah new grandparents are not boomers.
maybe if gen x did something we wouldn't be forgetting about them /s (i kid i kid)
but seriously, go get into the government or something, you guys are the prime age for entering the government right now.
Told my mom if she wants grandkids she better stop voting for conservatives. Didn't work, and a deal's a deal.
I mean, she's a boomer, if she said she had I still wouldn't trust her.
Boomers: "Reality can be anything I want."
she better stop voting for conservatives
Democrats have won the popular vote in the last seven of eight elections. If everyone struck this deal, I would expect to see significantly more grandkids than we're getting.
But also, states like California and New York and Massachusetts are seeing grandkid-gaps bigger than anything you'll find in Utah or Ohio or South Carolina. If conservatives are causing the problem, you would expect to see more Gen Alphas in the bluer states, wouldn't you?
The poorer families in those states make do better than poorer families in red states, but not enough to support having kids
Maybe next time leave the ladder behind instead of taking it with you.
The wealthier Boomers left behind millions of tiny little ladders specifically for their kids to climb.
The poorer Boomers died before hitting retirement age, or died in debt, or bankrupted themselves paying for end-of-life health care, or got scammed or otherwise denuded of their accumulated wealth.
Incidentally, its the wealthier Boomers who continue to set national policy from the board rooms and lobbying offices established by their own parents and grandparents. Meanwhile the poorer and more isolated Boomers are left to drown in their own poverty, ineffectually raging at the collapse of neighborhoods and the destitution of their pension funds and the deterioration of their suburban homes, unless their children and grandchildren are able to help them out at the end of their days.
Folks like to pretend this is one generation pitted against another. But its selection bias. The only members of the Boomer generation you hear from are the ones that came out on top. The rest have been killed in the wars or poisoned by industrial waste and lead pollution or foreclosed into homelessness to die on the streets or confined to digital communities like Facebook where they're drowned out by waves of misinformation accounts. Legions of dead Boomers never got to decide how the current generations live. They were burned up and thrown out, just like the current generation of bourgeois GenXers and Millennials and Zoomers plan to do with the rest of us.
They all came out on top. Even the poorest boomer right now today living in the street had a better shot at the American dream than all but the most lucky of youth right now.
Yes some fucked up or got screwed over but as a vast majority even these people supported and continue to support the same people who have put them there in the first place.
Even the poorest boomer right now today living in the street had a better shot at the American dream
Trying to explain to a sharecropper born in 1945 and dead from cholera or smallpox in 1965 that he had just as good a shot at the "American Dream" as someone born after modern sanitation, public education, and highway mass transit was installed in their municipality forty years later.
But I can't, because that sharecropper was illiterate and also dead.
Maybe they shouldn't horde and partition their wealth from their children and do everything possible to ensure every penny is spent before death.
You're not wrong, but this is more of a class issue than a generational issue, although in this case they certainly intersect. My boomer parents don't have any money; they got screwed over by the 1% just like the rest of us.
"Oh no it's the consequences of my own actions!"
Make college and homes unobtainable.. You get what you get and you don't get upset.
And Boomers allowed those organizations to exist by their votes.
Boomers repealed all the laws on those guys in exchange for better returns on the 401ks and home sales.
They sold humanity to our corporate overlords, they need to be held to account.
They're so anti-socialism: Suspend Medicare for 10 years, let the system sort itself out.
no it's the lack of building supply and market liquidity.
Shit like airbnb is going to have a more influential effect on the market than something like blackrock.
how is the market liquidity like in canada? I know the housing market is in a much worse state, but from i understand, it's the same problem. And if you want to argue for mid density housing, by all means go for it, i'm not against it. But at the end of the day if we built more housing, there would be more liquidity in the market, and people would be buying more houses.
Generally the market will push towards having some level of unmoved product, so it would make sense that there are unsold houses in a desparate market, people just aren't willing to pay for it. If it's too high, nobody buys anything and product simply doesn't move, which from what i understand is roughly where canada is right now.
The US has a similar problem, but it's mostly zoning and NIMBY types out here. Fixing zoning and incentivizing new building would really help.
I want the lions share of the profits of our economy! I want to pull the ladder up behind me! Why aren't these lazy millennials having kids for me!?
You're entitled millennials!
/Vomit
you fucking millennials and your avocado toast cost me grandbebbies!
Shouldn't 'ave fucked up the economy and environment, simple as
Yeah cuz they're hoarding the houses.
Lmfao thanks for ruining our whole society, boomers. Reap what you've sowed.
How dare someone elses wants effect me!!
Make the world a place that will be liveable in 100 years and pay people enough to exist:
A) without children, and B) with children
and boom, problem solved. Statistically, anyway.
Elder millennial here. I had kids, my brother didn’t, and my kids, though young enough to change their minds, are adamant they won’t have kids.
I think the more interesting stat likely unfolding is the marked decrease of great grandparents in a generation.
To be clear this is not a “threat to society” or whatever, people can decide if they want kids or not. Just a shower thought.
The real solution has always been immigration to get more bodies in the country managing the economy. It’ll never happen though.
Doesn't that just kick the can down the road?
No. The world population will hit 10 billion in the year 2040. The only question is whether there will be enough people to keep the first world going or not.
To replace the existing population, you have to throw open the gates and let people in. No country is willing to do that.
You're listening to too much right-wing media. In fact, deportations have increased under Biden compared to Trump.
You didn't put in any numbers which means you don't have them. You're being oppositional for opposition's sake and are not worth further engagement. /out
And the reason why you can't be conversed with is that you are in it for the attack. I have an opinion and your response is "NOOO YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE OF NUMBERS" as if I don't have a right to believe what I believe. Then you made it personal on multiple occasions. What is really happening here is that someone has an opinion that bothers you and you feel insecure as a result and need to attack.
Having sent this message, I will now block you to make sure I never have to encounter you again.
https://www.statista.com/topics/2917/immigration-in-canada/
We have not let in 2 million immigrants in total in any year, let alone just indian ones. Maybe fact-check your stuff before spouting it off?
And no, immigration did not grow by 4x compared to last year. That's absurd.
Guess you shouldn't have been entitled little shits and fucked up the world, then.
Aww. Maybe if they didn’t spend their days treating their kids like their bank accounts and actually voted to help them afford things like housing and health care they’d have grandkids.
Instead they supported ghouls like trump and clinton instead of the guy who wanted to give everybody health care!
Way to focus, Wall Street Journal. We can always count on you for in-depth journalism
/s
Oh they are deep into something, it is just is not as nice smelling as journalism
"You should have kids so you'll have someone who will take care of you when you're older."
Bruh, I'm not subjecting a person to this godforsaken world so I can guilt trip them into babysitting me when I'm old and senile.
as someone who's parents' retirement plan was that - I absolutely agree. There's no way anyone should subject their kids to that level of guilt and stress.
Bring me behind the barn and shoot me dead instead. Less wasted oxygen, more food for the fauna.
I own two used cars and, after inflation, both of them combined cost me less than the birth of my first kid.
Used? After 20 years children cost well above half a mil. When you factor in all of the food, clothing, sitters, school, trips, and of course college, you've set yourself back by quite a bit
This doesn't even factor in the monetary value of the parent's time
Way more than any car I’ve bought.
Boohoo
The most important generation.
even if I had kids my dad would be excluded from grandparenting due to the trump worship. don't need that kind of influence on the adult family members let alone kids.
Boomers should have thought of the shareholders.
That is, the kids they fucked over with their bullshit ideas and absolute misunderstanding of the world they created.
I'd love to be able to speak with my parents again, but (and I never thought I would ever say this, if you had asked me 10 years ago) I need to see some heads popping out of asses.
Wouldn't this be prime age for boomers to be great grandparents? Unless they mean paying for their grandkids college...
Boomers are 1946-1964. Definitely the older in the generation are in the great grandparent years, especially if they and their kids had kids young, but the younger boomers, especially if they and their kids had their first kids later, will be grandparents.
I wouldn't exactly call that prime time for them to be grandparents, then...
if they had kids at 30 their kids could have kids at 30.
"If" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
And that's still just for the youngest of that generation, not the whole of it... I don't know about you, but I'd hardly call a minority of a minority "prime".
That massive dong is probably another reason for the lack of grandchildren
Those are very expensive. It's what drove me to get a vasectomy
For some reason I'm not surprised about Facebook being explicitly boomer-centric
This shit is so dumb. "Anyone older than me is a Boomer!"
Boomers have been grandparents for some time. GenX as well in many cases.
Correct. Boomers are 60 to 80 now. Them getting grandparents is pretty much over. X is 45 to 60, this is about them, they are in prime grandparents age.
I think the point is that boomers are now 60 to 80, and some of their their children are reaching their 40s without yet having kids, and the boomers are finally realizing it isn't gonna happen.
The "prime grandparenting age" part is just headline fluff.
According to Pew, 85% of Gen X women have had at least one child. This is just boomer doomism.
44 to 60 thank you. I aint no goddam millennial.
The numbers are not hard, sorry mate, there is overlap.
Some people seem to assume it's their right to become grandparents...
So the share that has grandkids is the share that can afford them, right?
We have a new multi-block set of apartments going up in the suburb near me that they're doing the same about. It's going to ruin the town! It's going to lower property values! Won't someone think of the children?!
It was parking lots. It was just parking lots before. It was a place for commuters to drop their car and go into the city. I can't even with these people. The best part is that those apartments will probably bring in more tax revenue than their entire single-family subdivision!
well, there are just more boomers, and less gen x/millenial people. It should follow that there will be less babies lmao.
Granted cost of child raising is still likely to be a more influential factor, it's not the only factor, and we were going to see this anyway so.
Than before?
Boomers should have though of the future of their children. Now they reap what they sowed.
This is kind of whatever... basically white boomer doomism as a result of later childbirth. White people, especially privileged white people, are definitely having less kids, but that's not true for everyone. My theory is that it's because if you grew up with white privilege, you expect to be able to give your child that same level of privilege. If you can't, it seems "impossible." If you grew up poor, you know that you just make it work (if you want to). Like, I grew up poor and am not white. The idea that I "need" to own a house to consider having children is hilarious to me. My parents still rent.
People are having kids. Most people who are younger than 30 are astounded to realize just how many women do have children -- according to Pew, 85% of Gen X women have children. Trends for millennial women are slightly lower but not much. The idea that this is some emergency is just dumb alarmism.
When they polled people aged 18-30 in the 90s and 2010s, and 2020s, the amount of people who said they would never have children is lower than now, but not by much. Some people change their mind and a significant majority of people do have children, especially if you're not white or Asian. There is a very real racial difference though, so I'm not just bringing that up for no reason.
Regardless, it's people's choice. Whenever I see articles like this, it always seems kinda "Great Replacement Theory" adjacent. In my head I always put (white) in the title. I.e., a smaller percentage of (white) baby boomers have grandchildren, and (white) boomers are (scared they're going to be replaced).
Not the best thesis, but people should have kids and more of them. That’s not open for debate.
Why do you say it's not open to debate?
LOL 😂
If you want more kids make a world where raising kids is easier, safer, and more affordable. Just stating "That's not open for debate" is such an idiotic non-answer to the problem of people not wanting to have kids. There are reason people feel this way. Fix those reasons and people might feel differently. Not me, but other people would.
| not me
ok so why raise issues about easier, safer, more afforable if they're not your reasons?
Because I have loved ones that are living in this world and it matters to them, therefore it matters to me.
Have those people committed to not have kids until those issues are resolved? And have they set thresholds of easier, safer, more affordable to trigger their child rearing?
Most people don't measure out futuristic measurements for society to get to before they feel comfortable having kids. Plus they will be at a different place and time, so things may change for them to be more comfortable. Reproducing isn't the top priority for them, surviving is. It's like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. After the basic needs are met, they will have more energy to focus on kids.
I'm in my 40s and still don't want kids, so I doubt that will change. The people I know that are young (teens and early 20s) might change their mind, but they aren't lining up to have kids now. Some seem open to changing their minds later, but most of them say probably not.
I feel ya, I've always been a mix of "not ready" and "not wanting". Then my perspective on what fatherhood even is shifted and I was able to unshackle myself from the Christian thing.
That said, if you don't want kids for yourself then what impact are you having on those 20 somethings when you soapbox about how difficult and dangerous the world is?
My impact on them is supportive uncle mostly. I don't try to doom and gloom them with my old jaded take on the world. I know humans will figure this out. It will just be difficult. I tell them to look after each other because no one else will look out for you. Take care of yourself and enjoy your youth, but think for the future. I tell them they might change their mind on kids. I don't want them to just say no to kids cause they see me doing it.
I love being an uncle and older male in their lifes. I enjoyed teaching the younger guys in the military when I was in there for a while. We can accomplish a lot if we can unite and focus on a common goal.
I love to uncle, too. I passed on military entirely and rejected workplace leadership for awhile, but aging into "older male" triggers that itch sometimes. I've always joked that I like to rent not own, now my friends have kids and I got bonus nieces and nephews. It sounds like yours do have someone looking out for them. Good job, man!
Aww 8 billion just isn't enough for you huh?
I'll debate it. The world would be way better off with about 6 billion less people in the world.
Edit: My apologies. I am NOT advocating for eugenics, mass murder, or anything else. My thought of having fewer people is wishful thinking of what a better world would be like if we simply never got to 7 billion people in the first place.
I'm so done with this garbage random eugenics idea that the world should have exactly 1 billion people on it like some pseudoscience perfect number.
Its not a debate if you use feeling and lack any reasoning to get to your starting position.
There world is not some incapable small bubble that can only support some racist perfect population size of your desires.
Whoa, wanting less people via having fewer kids isn't eugenics, it's wishful thinking. I don't subscribe to the idea of forcing people to have fewer kids.
Edit: I can see how it sounds like I am advocating for eugenics in my earlier post. I will update it.
Thanks.
Absolutes with a goal for a future population often appeals to a specific group that I can't stand who appeal to it "being necessary" but often leave themselves out. So I try to push back on it so they know it's not acceptable to take seriously. It's just not an answer.
I know it doesn't go over well in these communities but I don't care. If even it pops up in the back of their head when thinking about "what helps" I want counter words there to say hoping for death of nearly everyone is miserable even if it's an "easy" out for suffering.
Thanks for being able to recognize it as wishful past missed conservation.
I don't think Eugenics or racist is the correct ideas to use here. Less population just means smaller. Not a specific phenotype of human needs to be culled from existance. Just a smaller population.
All biological systems have population limits, and lots of evidence points that humans have passed those limits by quite a bit. Normally, there would be a population collapse due to food scarcity, but humans are capable of pushing those limits with agurcultural science. That doesn't mean that there are not huge determental effects on the world as a whole for there being an never ending exponential growth of people.
Who needs to be the 6 billion to die then?
Edit: Also go ahead and tell me where you get your population size to land use models so that it can be checked to not be still overshoot if you are so worried about how very few people can be supported by apparently this very limited planet.
And show me this exponential growth that hasn't apparently slowed at all with decreasing births
Dude, you will die, everyone will die... Not because I will go and kill you because I decided so but because AGING EXISTS. Simply by having fewer kids the population will decrease fully naturally which was the point of the person you're arguing against. Also you're incredibly ignorant on what the fuck humans do to this planet which is the only one we have, so many ecosystems destroyed, so many species extint, so much of nature gone...
"@Krauerking@lemy.lol was so preocupied with the question if we could that he didn't stop and ask himself if we should."
It's not about if it's possible to fit so many and more humans on there but about it being a bad idea on so many levels. But again though... How the hell did you manage to forget that aging exists? I can't wrap my head around this one. Bruh.
Waiting for a population to age out as a fix for anything isn't a fix. I'm not unaware I just don't sit around waiting for hopes and prayers of the slow death of billions of people as an answer.
We have now and current reality. Playing make believe doesn't help. And who doesn't have kids? Cause plenty of people will have them anyways despite the obvious issues the planet is facing so how do you stop them?
This entire line of thought of just a decreasing population to a size you think is right is wishful "merciful" eugenics.
Saying you wish we hadn't got here is one thing and not helpful but one can forgive that as we all get mournful of the past. Hoping for it as a future is wrong and out of our control without some awful steps. I won't back down on that.
Edit: and you ignored that you said we are still in exponential increase of population which we are not. Its just an easy excuse for the mentality.
Well for one... you start with a society that doesnt shame people for not having kids. And two encourage people to foster children instead of adding more of their own. And three, improve society by pulling people out of poverty which has statistically reduced people having children.
bro its literally just anti-natalism
Having a specific population goal is not that.
im pretty sure our current meta of expansionism is a specific population goal as well? Does that not count as eugenics?
Does eugenics include using medical technology to save children and people that would've otherwise died to natural causes? How far must we go to prevent the perils of eugenics from coming upon us?
In addition to the financial implications, that's why we're stopping at 2. We get kids, the kids get a sibling, and it's a little below replacement level.
because we artificially increased the amount of food that we produce by doping the very Earth with poison.
to be clear, this only really changes the amount of food produced from a specific harvest, GMO foods are what you are closest to here, but those have very few downsides.
The primary issue here is centralized farming, if we were to decentralize it more, it would be vastly more economical.
Not the best thesis, but people should have kids and more of them. That’s not open for debate.
you know whats not open for debate? Freedom, and liberty.
Go ahead buddy, nobody stopping you.
No one needs to have kids ever, the world will be fine. That's not open for debate. Also, I deserve all the money, chocolate, and sex in the world, that's not open for debate. I like this game!
That’s not open for debate.
I mean, it clearly is. That's a big reason we're seeing conservative leap on the "No Abortions!" bandwagon. They're genuinely convinced of White Replacement Theory and have bought into this argument compelling women to have more children.
The orthodox pro-lifers are winning this fight by leveraging the military power of the state to compel pregnancy.
I was being sarcastic. There's nothing that's not open for debate, just look at flat-earthers.
Fascinating how not having kids leaves me with all my money to buy as much chocolate and sex as I want!
We need to learn to take care of the ones who are already here before we start making more. That's not open for debate.
Personally, I think the solution of "not enough kids" mirrors that of a law proposed decades ago: if a citizen votes in favor of going to war, they're automatically drafted should war be declared.
Republicans/Conservatives the world over want abortion banned, right? Cool, you vote to ban it, you're automatically added to a list to adopt children who cannot be aborted. The individual gets no say in when the adoption happens, they have no say in gender/ethnicity/etc, the government shows up, hands them a baby, and that's now their child. Government can do weekly/regular checks to ensure the child is being raised well enough and that the parent is home enough to watch them. And no limit on how many kids end up in your lap, either.
Oh, that doesn't work with your work schedule/life schedule/etc? Too bad, you wanted to save the unborn babies, now save them. You can't afford 13 newborns all at once? Sure sounds like a you problem, since you didn't support any of the things to make the lives of children better, like abortion/contraception/sex ed, childcare subsidies, school lunch programs, etc.
Problem solved: Conservative Christians get to save all the babies, people can still keep making them without fear of it hindering their lives, and the population continues to grow so the capitalist machine can be fed.
Why?
Go troll harder somewhere else. This is a pretty lame attempt to distract the thread.
people should have kids and more of them
Seems like a personal choice. I can name plenty of people who are trying to have kids and can't. And more than a few who didn't try to have kids but got them anyway. I also see a lot of kids showing up in foster programs, homeless shelters, and prisons.
Perhaps the problem isn't that we don't have enough kids. Perhaps we're just doing a shit job of caring for the kids who already exist.
Ok boomerbreeder.
Read the room. Ya lost