> There is generally an inverse correlation between monetary income and the total fertility rate within and between nations.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam...

> In 2021, the birth rate in the United States was highest in families that had under 10,000 U.S. dollars in income per year

And a few thousands more links.

▲

dominotw 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> How about “I love children but having kids is super expensive”?

always surprises me when ppl say this when they clearly observe the opposite in action. whats going on here.

▲

doubled112 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Every mouth to feed costs more. Baby formula seems like a racket. Diapers are expensive.

My oldest will need a laptop for school next year. It isn't optional or provided.

Maybe you need a bigger car because car seats take up a lot of room.

What if your kid decides they want to join a sports team? A friend of a friend told me they did the math on a year of competitive swimming. It was $10,000 by the time they were done with equipment and travel.

A trip to the dentist for my family of four is about $1000 for just cleanings. Braces for my oldest were $3000 if I could pay cash or $4000 to finance. You could skip dental care, but some might consider that neglect.

What if the school tells you to get your child tested? That costs about $3000 in my part of the world. Half of the kids on my block are neurodivergent somehow. What do you do?

In a less well off part of the world, most of these "concerns" probably disappear. I think we have pretty high expectations of parents that aren't poor.

▲

knorker 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Your arguments (explanations?) would seem way more relevant if they didn't go 100% counter to observation.

I don't know why you're trying to explain an outcome that is opposite of the observed outcome.

Are you saying that while more money is correlated with less fertility (the fact), that somehow even more money will reverse the trend and start going the other way?

Based on observed data, one could almost make the case that if only billionaires start stealing from the poor even more, then birth rates should go up.

	▲	doubled112 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It wasn't really supposed to be about money vs fertility rates. I was trying to provide some observed examples of why having more money might mean more expensive kids. Or how being poor means the cost and expectations are lower. I've always believed that it isn't money itself, but access to healthcare and education that lower fertility rates. Money correlates really strongly with access to healthcare and education. Having good education and healthcare leads to birth control and maybe an abortion if the BC fails. When a family of three is making $15K a year, do you believe baby four, five and six were planned out in agonizing detail? Or do you think maybe they weren't planned at all? And I do believe more money going around would help. If the perspective is "I can't afford it", those who are doing OK will not have children if they can help it.

▲

eloisant 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The highest income you have, the more pressured you are to give them an expensive education, activities, etc. Everyone want their kids to do at least as well as themselves.

So it's expensive no matter what income bracket you're in.