logoalt Hacker News

submainyesterday at 7:38 PM3 repliesview on HN

I agree. It comes down to the opportunity cost for women to have babies.

On pre-industrialized societies, women have barely a choice. On industrialized ones they do. And it turns out that, when given the choice, they choose not to have babies.


Replies

happytoexplainyesterday at 7:44 PM

The implication of "and it turns out..." is that all else is equal, but clearly it's not. Would women still choose to have babies if they didn't have to work also? I admit that it's basically moot - we can't seem to figure out how to have a society where both members of a couple are free to choose whether or not to work. I'm only pointing out that this trend doesn't mean what you're implying about women's desires.

show 1 reply
evoyesterday at 9:24 PM

Would it make sense to frame this as a Baumol's Cost Disease problem? E.g., the labor of child rearing has been historically offset by the inherent emotional surplus of the task, but the march of productivity in other sectors gradually increases that imputed loss until we reach a breaking point.

show 1 reply
hamdingersyesterday at 7:42 PM

While none of this is wrong, men are also choosing not to have babies, which points to a broader root cause.

show 1 reply