> The modern model is totally unsustainable/not scalable, but I'm not sure what the alternative should be.

It's by design. Kids don't produce capital for the elites. We peasants aren't supposed to have kids, just waste away grinding so that those in power can accumulate more power, because they can pay others and have as many kids as they want, but we from the middle class will struggle with one or two. It's a form of indirect classist populational control enforced by purchase power.

▲

doix 12 hours ago | parent [-]

> Kids don't produce capital for the elites.

Kids eventually grow up and "start producing capital". It's definitely beneficial for the "elite" in the long term for people to have kids.

	▲	denkmoon 11 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Have you ever seen an "elite" think beyond the edge of the quarter? Lords of the Ashes all.
	▲	gchamonlive 12 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Maternity leave is 4 months where I live, with many women afraid to express their desire to have kids in their jobs fearing they would be fired. Daycare is prohibitively expensive. A good education too. Sure they grow up to join the workforce eventually, but 16-18 years doesn't show up in the quarterly reports, so the elites don't like it. I could be wrong, most likely am, but that's what I see and that's what these hostile practices represent.
	▲	throwawaypath 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		>Kids eventually grow up and "start producing capital". They can grow up in third-world countries where elites don't have to spend a dime. Then they lobby to import them by the millions to "start producing capital".
	▲	mschuster91 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> It's definitely beneficial for the "elite" in the long term for people to have kids. Why? The elites bank on AI and robots doing everything in the future. The plebs have no place in the visions of Musk, Thiel, Altman and the rest of the wankers.