<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why don&#8217;t more people have more children?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/</link>
	<description>Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:24:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-3/#comment-157808</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157808</guid>
		<description>How about &quot;not fungible&quot; instead of &quot;intangible&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>How about &#8220;not fungible&#8221; instead of &#8220;intangible&#8221;?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin James</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157791</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:50:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157791</guid>
		<description>John Emerson,

Thanks for the comment. 

I think that having kids is irrational.  I also think that irrationality is very hard to explain and very hard to live without.  I guess its the same way with kids.

I will quibble with you about children being only an intangible benefit.  What is more tangible than a person?

I&#039;ve only burned money in a fire once at scout camp.  If certainly was an intangible joy to watch the thrifty people cringe.  I haven&#039;t made a habit of it, but it is liberating.  Same goes for bras I hear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John Emerson,</p>

	<p>Thanks for the comment.</p>

	<p>I think that having kids is irrational.  I also think that irrationality is very hard to explain and very hard to live without.  I guess its the same way with kids.</p>

	<p>I will quibble with you about children being only an intangible benefit.  What is more tangible than a person?</p>

	<p>I&#8217;ve only burned money in a fire once at scout camp.  If certainly was an intangible joy to watch the thrifty people cringe.  I haven&#8217;t made a habit of it, but it is liberating.  Same goes for bras I hear.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157776</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 03:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157776</guid>
		<description>Thank you, Martin, for reassuring me about economics&#039; capacity for rationalization. And the quality of your condescension is really high too.  

So just what is it that makes childraising more rational than making cash bonfires?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thank you, Martin, for reassuring me about economics&#8217; capacity for rationalization. And the quality of your condescension is really high too.</p>

	<p>So just what is it that makes childraising more rational than making cash bonfires?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandon Berg</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157773</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandon Berg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 03:42:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157773</guid>
		<description>Minerva (28):
&lt;i&gt;The dismantling of the welfare state and the loss of industries one could build a life on only contribute to this but there’s more to it I’m sure.&lt;/i&gt;

Huh? First, I&#039;m very skeptical of the idea that there has been any dismantling of the welfare state. But beyond that, correlations just don&#039;t work out. Birth rates are lower in Europe than in the US, and Europe has more lavish welfare benefits. And I suspect that in the US it&#039;s the people in the upper income brackets who are having fewer children.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Minerva (28):<br />
<i>The dismantling of the welfare state and the loss of industries one could build a life on only contribute to this but there&#8217;s more to it I&#8217;m sure.</i></p>

	<p>Huh? First, I&#8217;m very skeptical of the idea that there has been any dismantling of the welfare state. But beyond that, correlations just don&#8217;t work out. Birth rates are lower in Europe than in the US, and Europe has more lavish welfare benefits. And I suspect that in the US it&#8217;s the people in the upper income brackets who are having fewer children.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin James</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157771</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 03:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157771</guid>
		<description>What a completely self-centered discussion, isn&#039;t it wonderful!

1. I think there is some confusion about what economically rational means.  Doesn&#039;t it just mean that you can order your preferences and that you will try to arrange them in ways that to maximize your preferences at the least cost?

No where does that seem to rule out preferring pain over pleasure; that&#039;s folk psychology not economics.  If one person prefers children to all other choices and another person prefers not having children to all other choices, that is no statement about economic irrationality, its only a statement about the relative elasticity of the demand for children.

2.  I&#039;ve met a few people that I thought should have fewer children, but I&#039;ve never met anyone that didn&#039;t want to have kids, that I thought was making a poor choice.  They always seem a little shorted on soul.

3. The degree to which hedonism is asscociated with rationality in most comments here is astounding - doesn&#039;t anybody distrust their body anymore?

4. Its so quaint the social pressure some people here express about class status and job satisfaction. Keep up the hard work!

5. People who think there is no drive for children outside of sex, must explain the big bucks infertile couples shell out for fertility treatment.

6. If the preference for children remains the same among educated women, in the long run the world will be made up of women with an 8th grade education and a per capita GDP of about $5,000.00. Look at the statistics and do the math.

If that doesn&#039;t please you blame mother nature and the math not those in other cultures that it pleases just fine.

7. The best thing about being drunk is that it reminds you that you are a thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>What a completely self-centered discussion, isn&#8217;t it wonderful!</p>

	<p>1. I think there is some confusion about what economically rational means.  Doesn&#8217;t it just mean that you can order your preferences and that you will try to arrange them in ways that to maximize your preferences at the least cost?</p>

	<p>No where does that seem to rule out preferring pain over pleasure; that&#8217;s folk psychology not economics.  If one person prefers children to all other choices and another person prefers not having children to all other choices, that is no statement about economic irrationality, its only a statement about the relative elasticity of the demand for children.</p>

	<p>2.  I&#8217;ve met a few people that I thought should have fewer children, but I&#8217;ve never met anyone that didn&#8217;t want to have kids, that I thought was making a poor choice.  They always seem a little shorted on soul.</p>

	<p>3. The degree to which hedonism is asscociated with rationality in most comments here is astounding &#8211; doesn&#8217;t anybody distrust their body anymore?</p>

	<p>4. Its so quaint the social pressure some people here express about class status and job satisfaction. Keep up the hard work!</p>

	<p>5. People who think there is no drive for children outside of sex, must explain the big bucks infertile couples shell out for fertility treatment.</p>

	<p>6. If the preference for children remains the same among educated women, in the long run the world will be made up of women with an 8th grade education and a per capita <span class="caps">GDP</span> of about $5,000.00. Look at the statistics and do the math.</p>

	<p>If that doesn&#8217;t please you blame mother nature and the math not those in other cultures that it pleases just fine.</p>

	<p>7. The best thing about being drunk is that it reminds you that you are a thing.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Another Damned Medievalist</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157762</link>
		<dc:creator>Another Damned Medievalist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 01:16:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157762</guid>
		<description>Hmmm .. I, too, have been drunk.  

And I agree that having kids adds a different aspect to one&#039;s life.  But it&#039;s not necessarily better.  I raised a child.  I do wish I&#039;d had more of her earlier years, but I&#039;m very happy that I can focus on being an auntie.  Maybe part of it is that people who know they are probably not cut out to be full-time parents for any number of reasons are now able to resist pressure from their friends and families to breed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hmmm .. I, too, have been drunk.</p>

	<p>And I agree that having kids adds a different aspect to one&#8217;s life.  But it&#8217;s not necessarily better.  I raised a child.  I do wish I&#8217;d had more of her earlier years, but I&#8217;m very happy that I can focus on being an auntie.  Maybe part of it is that people who know they are probably not cut out to be full-time parents for any number of reasons are now able to resist pressure from their friends and families to breed?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157755</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 23:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157755</guid>
		<description>No, nik, I was granting that the decision to have kids might often be genuinely irrational. No hard feelings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>No, nik, I was granting that the decision to have kids might often be genuinely irrational. No hard feelings.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nik</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157752</link>
		<dc:creator>nik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 22:51:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157752</guid>
		<description>John, I do realise people don&#039;t normally decide to have kids in quite the way I presented it. That post wasn&#039;t meant to be taken entirely seriously. Presenting that nugget of argument isolated from the rest of your opinions does misrepresent your views - which is why I didn&#039;t pin it directly on you. I just thought the contrast between the two ideas was cute.

Sorry you felt it was a deliberate distortion, I wouldn&#039;t have posted if that&#039;s what I&#039;d anticipated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John, I do realise people don&#8217;t normally decide to have kids in quite the way I presented it. That post wasn&#8217;t meant to be taken entirely seriously. Presenting that nugget of argument isolated from the rest of your opinions does misrepresent your views &#8211; which is why I didn&#8217;t pin it directly on you. I just thought the contrast between the two ideas was cute.</p>

	<p>Sorry you felt it was a deliberate distortion, I wouldn&#8217;t have posted if that&#8217;s what I&#8217;d anticipated.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157734</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 21:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157734</guid>
		<description>Nik, how is the decision to have kids usually made? It&#039;s an irreversible one and can&#039;t be unmade. How often do potential parents think about the alternative of not having kids? 

In point of fact, the more freely and informedly people (especially women) choose, the fewer kids they have.

I might mention that my target is not childraising, but economic rationality, and economic models which assume a labor supply without accounting for its &quot;production&quot;. Economically rational people need someone else to have the kids, and economically irrational parents make great sacrifices do unrewarded work for the sake of people (their own children, but also their children&#039;s future employers) who pay them nothing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Nik, how is the decision to have kids usually made? It&#8217;s an irreversible one and can&#8217;t be unmade. How often do potential parents think about the alternative of not having kids?</p>

	<p>In point of fact, the more freely and informedly people (especially women) choose, the fewer kids they have.</p>

	<p>I might mention that my target is not childraising, but economic rationality, and economic models which assume a labor supply without accounting for its &#8220;production&#8221;. Economically rational people need someone else to have the kids, and economically irrational parents make great sacrifices do unrewarded work for the sake of people (their own children, but also their children&#8217;s future employers) who pay them nothing.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crooked Timber &#187; &#187; Charles Murray&#8217;s In Our Hands - Left or Right?</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157733</link>
		<dc:creator>Crooked Timber &#187; &#187; Charles Murray&#8217;s In Our Hands - Left or Right?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 21:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157733</guid>
		<description>[...] My own particular worry concerned the effects on fertility and child welfare (because, as is probably no surprise to regular readers, I am obsessively pro-natalist). Nobody receives the grant until they are 21, so, in particular, no child benefit is built in. Murray explains that this will increase the economic penalty for mothers under 21 and, he hopes, increase the pressure from all sides on teenagers (especially poor teenagers) not to have children. He also points out that the grant increases the incentive for teenaged boys to refrain from having children. The grant establishes a known source of income which is immediately accessible to the state, from which child support payments can be garnished; although a 17 year old father does not yet receive the grant, he can begin to owe the payments, and they can be deducted with interest from his grant at a later stage. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>[...] My own particular worry concerned the effects on fertility and child welfare (because, as is probably no surprise to regular readers, I am obsessively pro-natalist). Nobody receives the grant until they are 21, so, in particular, no child benefit is built in. Murray explains that this will increase the economic penalty for mothers under 21 and, he hopes, increase the pressure from all sides on teenagers (especially poor teenagers) not to have children. He also points out that the grant increases the incentive for teenaged boys to refrain from having children. The grant establishes a known source of income which is immediately accessible to the state, from which child support payments can be garnished; although a 17 year old father does not yet receive the grant, he can begin to owe the payments, and they can be deducted with interest from his grant at a later stage. [...]</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nik</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157729</link>
		<dc:creator>nik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 21:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157729</guid>
		<description>Okay, so two schools of thought have been enunciated:

(1) The childfree are behaving irrationally when they don&#039;t have kids, as they don&#039;t have the opportunity to experience the wonders of love for your children (they&#039;re acting on insufficient information when they make their decision).

(2) Parents are behaving irrationally as the &quot;intangible benefits&quot; of children can&#039;t be worth *that* much, and are just invented out of thin air to try and make the decision appear sane in retrospect (they&#039;re irrational, but being irrational, just don&#039;t realise it).

Nothing good is going to come of this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Okay, so two schools of thought have been enunciated:</p>

	<p>(1) The childfree are behaving irrationally when they don&#8217;t have kids, as they don&#8217;t have the opportunity to experience the wonders of love for your children (they&#8217;re acting on insufficient information when they make their decision).</p>

	<p>(2) Parents are behaving irrationally as the &#8220;intangible benefits&#8221; of children can&#8217;t be worth <strong>that</strong> much, and are just invented out of thin air to try and make the decision appear sane in retrospect (they&#8217;re irrational, but being irrational, just don&#8217;t realise it).</p>

	<p>Nothing good is going to come of this.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Miller</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157725</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 20:47:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157725</guid>
		<description>For those who would like to see US data, here is a simple &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/February2006_4.html#jrm3988&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;chart&lt;/a&gt; showing fertility in the US for the 20th century.

And some may be interested to learn that at least a few researchers believe that the decline in fertility was caused, at least in part, by &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/March2005_2.html#jrm3089&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;social security&lt;/a&gt;.

And those who think that drunkeness leads to child bearing may want to contemplate the high birth rates in many Muslim countries where, at least formally, alcohol is forbidden.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>For those who would like to see US data, here is a simple <a href="http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/February2006_4.html#jrm3988" rel="nofollow">chart</a> showing fertility in the US for the 20th century.</p>

	<p>And some may be interested to learn that at least a few researchers believe that the decline in fertility was caused, at least in part, by <a href="http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/March2005_2.html#jrm3089" rel="nofollow">social security</a>.</p>

	<p>And those who think that drunkeness leads to child bearing may want to contemplate the high birth rates in many Muslim countries where, at least formally, alcohol is forbidden.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157723</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 20:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157723</guid>
		<description>If someone finds that they like children upon close contact, that will help. That has happened in my family. But if they find that they don&#039;t like children, it hurts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>If someone finds that they like children upon close contact, that will help. That has happened in my family. But if they find that they don&#8217;t like children, it hurts.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: harry b</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157719</link>
		<dc:creator>harry b</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 20:14:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157719</guid>
		<description>sutton

are you taking what I say a little too seriously? What I&#039;m saying is that I&#039;m not a gossip, and not interested in gossip. Or not much. I may even be exaggerating.

ingrid; the point about the way risk aversion feeds into this is very helpful. I sort-of-agree with the point about close contact not helping very muhc, but it helps a bit, especially if you see a lot of different kinds of people parenting different kinds fo kid (of course, even if you get to know yourself well you don&#039;t know what kind of kid you&#039;ll end up with). Also, the fewer kids there are around the harder it is to raise them (and the harder it looks from the outside) as Laura suggests in her original post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>sutton</p>

	<p>are you taking what I say a little too seriously? What I&#8217;m saying is that I&#8217;m not a gossip, and not interested in gossip. Or not much. I may even be exaggerating.</p>

	<p>ingrid; the point about the way risk aversion feeds into this is very helpful. I sort-of-agree with the point about close contact not helping very muhc, but it helps a bit, especially if you see a lot of different kinds of people parenting different kinds fo kid (of course, even if you get to know yourself well you don&#8217;t know what kind of kid you&#8217;ll end up with). Also, the fewer kids there are around the harder it is to raise them (and the harder it looks from the outside) as Laura suggests in her original post.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Emerson</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/31/why-dont-people-have-more-children/comment-page-2/#comment-157714</link>
		<dc:creator>John Emerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 19:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4733#comment-157714</guid>
		<description>Most religions teach the inferiority of women and subject them to their husbands, while at the same time glorifying motherhood. There are probably exceptions to this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Most religions teach the inferiority of women and subject them to their husbands, while at the same time glorifying motherhood. There are probably exceptions to this.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced

Served from: crookedtimber.org @ 2012-02-13 10:38:57 -->
