Growing share of childless adults in U.S. don’t expect to ever have children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in a dystopian hellscape and nothing proves it more than this.

+1. There will be major regrets over this when it’s really too late.

This. I am 55 and have 2 children who are grown now. This country's support of families is pretty much nonexistent. I spend a lot of time thinking about how/ whether DH and I will be able to help our kids if they have children, because honestly without extended family support I don't know how young people of average means can do it.

An aging society is a failing one. Medicare and Social Security don't work without young people paying in. Japan is in such crisis right now they are actually opening up immigration, which is shocking to anyone who knows how racist/xenophobic Japan is.

I thought 🇺🇸 was the most racist place on earth. That’s what tnc, kendi, and 1619 project told me

It's what you heard, not what they said.

+1

It’s too depressing to bring kids into this world when so many Americans are willfully ignorant like that.

[Anonymous]

ANd please stop asking when they'll have kids or when I'm going to be a grandparent. It's rude.

If they do, I plan on babysitting when I can so they can continue their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in a dystopian hellscape and nothing proves it more than this.

+1. There will be major regrets over this when it’s really too late.

This. I am 55 and have 2 children who are grown now. This country's support of families is pretty much nonexistent. I spend a lot of time thinking about how/ whether DH and I will be able to help our kids if they have children, because honestly without extended family support I don't know how young people of average means can do it.

An aging society is a failing one. Medicare and Social Security don't work without young people paying in. Japan is in such crisis right now they are actually opening up immigration, which is shocking to anyone who knows how racist/xenophobic Japan is.

I thought 🇺🇸 was the most racist place on earth. That’s what tnc, kendi, and 1619 project told me

It's what you heard, not what they said.

+1

It’s too depressing to bring kids into this world when so many Americans are willfully ignorant like that.

I wish I know the breadth and depth of the ignorance here. I would have reconsidered having children. But they have become emboldened lately and are showing the stupid so much more. Sigh.

[Anonymous]

I would have said this in my 20s. Late 30s I had two kids. Who knows? Some may change their minds.

[Anonymous]

Fence sitter here who felt the urge once I found my soulmate, had one kid, then decided to stop at one.

It's money and childcare availability, in large part, but it's also our insane parenting culture where everything has to be about the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ANd please stop asking when they'll have kids or when I'm going to be a grandparent. It's rude.

If they do, I plan on babysitting when I can so they can continue their jobs.

My parents claimed they’d help us with childcare too and didn’t. Payed over 3k a month for two in daycare which delayed buying a home and limited what we could spend on otherwise. No maternity at all (Fed) so spent at least five years with no vacation longer than a 3-4 day weekend. Always had to work over holidays due to lack of vacation bc all was spent on maternity leave.
It was depressing. And no parental help nearby so any night out costs $$$ between sitter and dinner / movie/ show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ANd please stop asking when they'll have kids or when I'm going to be a grandparent. It's rude.

If they do, I plan on babysitting when I can so they can continue their jobs.

My parents claimed they’d help us with childcare too and didn’t. Payed over 3k a month for two in daycare which delayed buying a home and limited what we could spend on otherwise. No maternity at all (Fed) so spent at least five years with no vacation longer than a 3-4 day weekend. Always had to work over holidays due to lack of vacation bc all was spent on maternity leave.
It was depressing. And no parental help nearby so any night out costs $$$ between sitter and dinner / movie/ show.

Yep, this is a factor. My mom always said she'd help with childcare (and she did! For a few months when my daughter was an infant). But 1) she does not want to live where we live, 2) I don't feel it's fair to demand she be a super-involved grandma nanny when I would never be willing to do that myself, and 3) "free" childcare from a grandparent comes at a mental cost, lol; my mother is a wonderful person but we disagree starkly on many parenting things.

I will say, the private sector is catching up to the rest of the world in terms of paid leave. I have male colleagues who took ~2-3 months paternity leave paid, and women who have taken 6 months. It's not Europe, but it's getting closer in some parts of the white-collar job market. Also Feds get paid family leave now.

[Anonymous]

The biggest threat to humanity today is The Population Bomb; it’s likely to starve us all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biggest threat to humanity today is The Population Bomb; it’s likely to starve us all!

Its true

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think about, purely from a financial perspective, I am doing way, way worse than my friends who did not have kids (chosen not to or just couldn't because of biology, relationships, circumstances, etc).

It is an interesting thing to see right now since I'm in the thick of it, but US society doesn't encourage having children. If anything, there are economic disincentives built into the economy. No paid leave after having a child, an expensive childcare framework that is regulated to high hell by the government (for safety reasons, is unquestionably a good thing) with no financial support of the government (which people endless dispute as to whether it is shitty or not). Tax benefits are minimal. College savings programs aren't deductible federally and student loan interest is subject to income limits that drive people out of being able to take the deductions. Factor in the caps on SALT deductions (local property taxes pay for schools and surprise, the federal government DOESN'T want to encourage this I guess) and well...here we are.

This. We have policies that do not encourage having children. And we tell people that no one else should have to pay for their kids, and if you want kids, it's an individual lifestyle choice and you shouldn't expect anyone to help you. So, now that there is less social pressure to have kids (especially on women), I don't know why we'd be surprised that a lot of people aren't planning to have kids. We've basically said that having kids is only for rich people with a lot of support -- so people who aren't that are saying, "Okay."

I have well off friends in Canada who got paid for either six or 12 months of staying home after they had their kids (can't remember which). They went on some big trip during that time. It made having kids look so much more appealing than what I see here in the US - a measly few weeks of leave, all that time spent messy and depressed with no help unless you get super lucky and are rich enough for a nanny or have involved grandparents. Then there's daycare, endless sports, impossible to pay for college, etc.

I am 48 and chose not to have kids. I couldn't fathom how I'd ever ever ever realistically make it work. If I'd really wanted them I could have - my sibling has two, and we're similar enough that at least I have that model to go on - but it just seems to effing hard.

I’m Canadian, living in Toronto. The key words in your comment are “well off”. Yes, overall our policies are better, but having children is still very difficult for those who aren’t wealthy.

I'm sure it is - Canada is expensive, too! I was just blown away by what they were able to do during their state-sanctioned family time. It sure looked like the opposite of the grind I see in the US.

Living in Canada does not mean that you get paid to stay home when you or your spouse gives birth. It is entirely dependent on your career, if you’re lucky enough to have one. And your friends were able to take a trip because they had a lot of money.
Your example is nothing like the experience of 99 percent of Canadian parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think about, purely from a financial perspective, I am doing way, way worse than my friends who did not have kids (chosen not to or just couldn't because of biology, relationships, circumstances, etc).

It is an interesting thing to see right now since I'm in the thick of it, but US society doesn't encourage having children. If anything, there are economic disincentives built into the economy. No paid leave after having a child, an expensive childcare framework that is regulated to high hell by the government (for safety reasons, is unquestionably a good thing) with no financial support of the government (which people endless dispute as to whether it is shitty or not). Tax benefits are minimal. College savings programs aren't deductible federally and student loan interest is subject to income limits that drive people out of being able to take the deductions. Factor in the caps on SALT deductions (local property taxes pay for schools and surprise, the federal government DOESN'T want to encourage this I guess) and well...here we are.

This. We have policies that do not encourage having children. And we tell people that no one else should have to pay for their kids, and if you want kids, it's an individual lifestyle choice and you shouldn't expect anyone to help you. So, now that there is less social pressure to have kids (especially on women), I don't know why we'd be surprised that a lot of people aren't planning to have kids. We've basically said that having kids is only for rich people with a lot of support -- so people who aren't that are saying, "Okay."

I have well off friends in Canada who got paid for either six or 12 months of staying home after they had their kids (can't remember which). They went on some big trip during that time. It made having kids look so much more appealing than what I see here in the US - a measly few weeks of leave, all that time spent messy and depressed with no help unless you get super lucky and are rich enough for a nanny or have involved grandparents. Then there's daycare, endless sports, impossible to pay for college, etc.

I am 48 and chose not to have kids. I couldn't fathom how I'd ever ever ever realistically make it work. If I'd really wanted them I could have - my sibling has two, and we're similar enough that at least I have that model to go on - but it just seems to effing hard.

I’m Canadian, living in Toronto. The key words in your comment are “well off”. Yes, overall our policies are better, but having children is still very difficult for those who aren’t wealthy.

I'm sure it is - Canada is expensive, too! I was just blown away by what they were able to do during their state-sanctioned family time. It sure looked like the opposite of the grind I see in the US.

Living in Canada does not mean that you get paid to stay home when you or your spouse gives birth. It is entirely dependent on your career, if you’re lucky enough to have one. And your friends were able to take a trip because they had a lot of money.
Your example is nothing like the experience of 99 percent of Canadian parents.

+1 I'm so tired of this board posting baseless facts about benefits abroad and skipping some rather salient points.

You don't get paid for 12 months of leave in Canada. You are entitled to four months of paid leave at a maximum of $400/wk - up to 55% of your salary (USD to CAD). After that you're on your own.

Similarly in the U.K. - you get six weeks of maternity benefits at 70% of full pay. Every week after that is a maximum of $150/wk (USD to GBP) up until 50-ish week or so.

Translation - if you can't survive on a payout of $400/month in the UK and nothing past the first four months of $1,600/month in Canada, you don't get to take a year off. Especially considering the high cost of living in Canada.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think about, purely from a financial perspective, I am doing way, way worse than my friends who did not have kids (chosen not to or just couldn't because of biology, relationships, circumstances, etc).

It is an interesting thing to see right now since I'm in the thick of it, but US society doesn't encourage having children. If anything, there are economic disincentives built into the economy. No paid leave after having a child, an expensive childcare framework that is regulated to high hell by the government (for safety reasons, is unquestionably a good thing) with no financial support of the government (which people endless dispute as to whether it is shitty or not). Tax benefits are minimal. College savings programs aren't deductible federally and student loan interest is subject to income limits that drive people out of being able to take the deductions. Factor in the caps on SALT deductions (local property taxes pay for schools and surprise, the federal government DOESN'T want to encourage this I guess) and well...here we are.

This. We have policies that do not encourage having children. And we tell people that no one else should have to pay for their kids, and if you want kids, it's an individual lifestyle choice and you shouldn't expect anyone to help you. So, now that there is less social pressure to have kids (especially on women), I don't know why we'd be surprised that a lot of people aren't planning to have kids. We've basically said that having kids is only for rich people with a lot of support -- so people who aren't that are saying, "Okay."

I have well off friends in Canada who got paid for either six or 12 months of staying home after they had their kids (can't remember which). They went on some big trip during that time. It made having kids look so much more appealing than what I see here in the US - a measly few weeks of leave, all that time spent messy and depressed with no help unless you get super lucky and are rich enough for a nanny or have involved grandparents. Then there's daycare, endless sports, impossible to pay for college, etc.

I am 48 and chose not to have kids. I couldn't fathom how I'd ever ever ever realistically make it work. If I'd really wanted them I could have - my sibling has two, and we're similar enough that at least I have that model to go on - but it just seems to effing hard.

I’m Canadian, living in Toronto. The key words in your comment are “well off”. Yes, overall our policies are better, but having children is still very difficult for those who aren’t wealthy.

I'm sure it is - Canada is expensive, too! I was just blown away by what they were able to do during their state-sanctioned family time. It sure looked like the opposite of the grind I see in the US.

Living in Canada does not mean that you get paid to stay home when you or your spouse gives birth. It is entirely dependent on your career, if you’re lucky enough to have one. And your friends were able to take a trip because they had a lot of money.
Your example is nothing like the experience of 99 percent of Canadian parents.

+1 I'm so tired of this board posting baseless facts about benefits abroad and skipping some rather salient points.

You don't get paid for 12 months of leave in Canada. You are entitled to four months of paid leave at a maximum of $400/wk - up to 55% of your salary (USD to CAD). After that you're on your own.

Similarly in the U.K. - you get six weeks of maternity benefits at 70% of full pay. Every week after that is a maximum of $150/wk (USD to GBP) up until 50-ish week or so.

Translation - if you can't survive on a payout of $400/month in the UK and nothing past the first four months of $1,600/month in Canada, you don't get to take a year off. Especially considering the high cost of living in Canada.

This. It’s so incredibly misleading how parental leave is reported in news articles. There is never any mention of limits on the pay. The average American truly thinks someone in the UK earns their entire $80,000 salary for 12 months

Almost all European countries have a cap as to how much you can earn and it’s usually pretty similar to what an unemployment benefit would be here in the US ($300-400 a week).

In the US, most women (over 75%) have access to short term disability, which is usually 80% of pay. In terms of dollar amounts, most European countries aren’t paying much more out in leave. Women do have the option to stay home later but they usually aren’t receiving their full salary or anything close to it

[Anonymous]

I think there's a less than 50% chance my child will choose to be a parent. And I think the environment, the economy, and politics will all be driving factors. I think this is true of a lot of people under the age of 18. I hope my generation is prepared for a life in which they do not become grandparents, because I know my parents generation was not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think about, purely from a financial perspective, I am doing way, way worse than my friends who did not have kids (chosen not to or just couldn't because of biology, relationships, circumstances, etc).

It is an interesting thing to see right now since I'm in the thick of it, but US society doesn't encourage having children. If anything, there are economic disincentives built into the economy. No paid leave after having a child, an expensive childcare framework that is regulated to high hell by the government (for safety reasons, is unquestionably a good thing) with no financial support of the government (which people endless dispute as to whether it is shitty or not). Tax benefits are minimal. College savings programs aren't deductible federally and student loan interest is subject to income limits that drive people out of being able to take the deductions. Factor in the caps on SALT deductions (local property taxes pay for schools and surprise, the federal government DOESN'T want to encourage this I guess) and well...here we are.

This. We have policies that do not encourage having children. And we tell people that no one else should have to pay for their kids, and if you want kids, it's an individual lifestyle choice and you shouldn't expect anyone to help you. So, now that there is less social pressure to have kids (especially on women), I don't know why we'd be surprised that a lot of people aren't planning to have kids. We've basically said that having kids is only for rich people with a lot of support -- so people who aren't that are saying, "Okay."

I have well off friends in Canada who got paid for either six or 12 months of staying home after they had their kids (can't remember which). They went on some big trip during that time. It made having kids look so much more appealing than what I see here in the US - a measly few weeks of leave, all that time spent messy and depressed with no help unless you get super lucky and are rich enough for a nanny or have involved grandparents. Then there's daycare, endless sports, impossible to pay for college, etc.

I am 48 and chose not to have kids. I couldn't fathom how I'd ever ever ever realistically make it work. If I'd really wanted them I could have - my sibling has two, and we're similar enough that at least I have that model to go on - but it just seems to effing hard.

I’m Canadian, living in Toronto. The key words in your comment are “well off”. Yes, overall our policies are better, but having children is still very difficult for those who aren’t wealthy.

I'm sure it is - Canada is expensive, too! I was just blown away by what they were able to do during their state-sanctioned family time. It sure looked like the opposite of the grind I see in the US.

Living in Canada does not mean that you get paid to stay home when you or your spouse gives birth. It is entirely dependent on your career, if you’re lucky enough to have one. And your friends were able to take a trip because they had a lot of money.
Your example is nothing like the experience of 99 percent of Canadian parents.

+1 I'm so tired of this board posting baseless facts about benefits abroad and skipping some rather salient points.

You don't get paid for 12 months of leave in Canada. You are entitled to four months of paid leave at a maximum of $400/wk - up to 55% of your salary (USD to CAD). After that you're on your own.

Similarly in the U.K. - you get six weeks of maternity benefits at 70% of full pay. Every week after that is a maximum of $150/wk (USD to GBP) up until 50-ish week or so.

Translation - if you can't survive on a payout of $400/month in the UK and nothing past the first four months of $1,600/month in Canada, you don't get to take a year off. Especially considering the high cost of living in Canada.

And if you’re self employed or an independent contractor, you don’t get paid if you don’t work, with a new baby or not.
Basically, if you have a well paid salaried job with benefits and a lot of savings, you’ll be fine. But that isn’t many people. And most Canadians are clustered around a few major cities which are as expensive as the most expensive American cities.

[Anonymous]

You mean women aren’t signing up to marry spoiled, entitled assholes and then get penalized financially, health-wise, and career-wise for having children? Gee, I wonder why.