Regarding the comments on three bedroom units, an observation I have made is that the third bedroom can be used to accommodate grandparents. If both parents are working and they don’t live in the same town as their parents then it is more difficult, especially when other childcare option are not working.
The discussion about cultural change was interesting. When I was growing I was told not to have children too young. I’m telling my children to not put off having children for too long.
My observation is most of the community are unaware of the reduced fertility rate and people are surprised when I mention it. Public awareness would help.
Finally, and this is a bit out there, high density living is very artificial. If people have grown up in a less dense environment maybe the higher density environment reduces fertility for some. Those who can reproduce in a high density environment may then produce children who can. Perhaps we underestimate the impact of being connected to nature.
I appreciate your feedback on the guest's discussion, particularly regarding the thesis that zoning encourages high fertility. While I remain skeptical of this idea based on my personal experiences growing up in Dhaka, Bangladesh—one of the densest cities in the world—I acknowledge that fertility is influenced by multiple factors, with higher religiosity likely playing a significant role in the relatively high fertility rates observed.
Regarding the comment about lawns encouraging family activities, I am also skeptical. In my view, private lawns might actually promote more helicopter parenting. In Dhaka, parents often send their kids to the roof of their apartment building or to a local park to play. If children can access green spaces without leaving their homes, parents might be less inclined to let their kids go outside, driven by concerns about safety that are often amplified by media portrayals of external dangers.
I agree with the guest that environmentalism can be misguided. As a libertarian, I support deregulating housing to facilitate both infill development in city centers and suburban development at the edges of cities. I would even consider supporting more non-market housing options for young families if they prove to be more cost-effective than baby bonuses, although I remain personally skeptical of this approach. Singapore, for instance, has a majority of its population living in non-market housing, and despite government efforts to encourage births for over 30 years, including organizing cruise ship mixers, these initiatives have not significantly boosted fertility rates.
The point about the challenges of raising kids in your 20s is relevant, likely due to the modern economy's emphasis on upskilling and career development. The 20s and early 30s are crucial for building a resume, even if it means accepting lower wages temporarily. Historically, during the first industrial revolution, the average age of marriage declined in many European countries because the industrial revolution eliminated high-skill artisan jobs and created numerous low-skilled factory jobs, reducing the incentive for young people to invest in skills and encouraging earlier marriages. If AI enhances the productivity of less-skilled workers to match that of highly skilled workers, a similar trend might emerge, although the impact of AI may be limited to certain professions.
In my country, urban professionals have found a way out of the skill development to low fertility trap by having men in their mid to late 30s marry women in their early to mid-20s. While I find this practice strange and doubt its scalability to other countries or its long-term viability in Bangladesh, it highlights a cultural adaptation to economic pressures.
I still believe that helicopter parenting significantly impacts fertility rates, contributing to the low fertility seen in East Asia. Contrary to many pro-natalists, I think parenting should be devalued, promoting a "good enough" parenting culture instead.
Regarding the aging population, a crucial reform could be to cut all government healthcare and pensions for individuals who had fewer than two children. If people choose not to have children, they should have saved money for their retirement. This reform would reduce government spending and lower taxes on the young, which could have a slightly pro-natalist effect.
Has Japanese worker productivity kept up, so that it reflects in higher incomes for Japanese people? Because ordinary Japanese people are not wealthy by global standards. Japanese GDP per capita has been stagnant, oscillating around USD $40,000 since 1990. I also understand that anybody who receives the pension from the Japanese government gets the equivalent of AUD $300 a fortnight! This is substantially lower than the AUD $1,100 that Aussie pensioners get a fortnight. If retired Japanese citizens don’t own their own house and don’t have a family to take care of them in retirement, they live in poverty. These are some of the hidden costs of a society with an inverted population pyramid that doesn’t grow.
I suspect density does reduce fertility but having to save for many years before you buy a place does too; for a jurisdiction like Australia where increasing density offers a chance to reduce prices, there is a possibility that the two net out.
But if this concept holds, that rule of thumb will only apply in the transition phase. Once apartments are the dominant urban form, presumably you're at a new steady state of low fertility and then prices will depend on supply, demand, and lifetime incomes.
I wonder if there's specific design choices in homes that affect fertility decisions. it would be great to have the most efficient possible homes that allow the most kids. Many small bedrooms instead of a few big ones?
We’ve worked hard for our big home and we’re not downsizing. FTG, and the young ones can work like a b*^ch like we had too to buy our home! We have four adult daughters and they’re out there having a go. Our huge house suits our lifestyle as we have friends and family from all over Australia and the world regularly visiting and staying to enjoy our area in SE QLD. Sick of people thinking we have to be forced out of our home. Funny though, our daughters aren’t interested in having children, yet, due to expensive childcare costs.
Regarding the comments on three bedroom units, an observation I have made is that the third bedroom can be used to accommodate grandparents. If both parents are working and they don’t live in the same town as their parents then it is more difficult, especially when other childcare option are not working.
The discussion about cultural change was interesting. When I was growing I was told not to have children too young. I’m telling my children to not put off having children for too long.
My observation is most of the community are unaware of the reduced fertility rate and people are surprised when I mention it. Public awareness would help.
Finally, and this is a bit out there, high density living is very artificial. If people have grown up in a less dense environment maybe the higher density environment reduces fertility for some. Those who can reproduce in a high density environment may then produce children who can. Perhaps we underestimate the impact of being connected to nature.
I appreciate your feedback on the guest's discussion, particularly regarding the thesis that zoning encourages high fertility. While I remain skeptical of this idea based on my personal experiences growing up in Dhaka, Bangladesh—one of the densest cities in the world—I acknowledge that fertility is influenced by multiple factors, with higher religiosity likely playing a significant role in the relatively high fertility rates observed.
Regarding the comment about lawns encouraging family activities, I am also skeptical. In my view, private lawns might actually promote more helicopter parenting. In Dhaka, parents often send their kids to the roof of their apartment building or to a local park to play. If children can access green spaces without leaving their homes, parents might be less inclined to let their kids go outside, driven by concerns about safety that are often amplified by media portrayals of external dangers.
I agree with the guest that environmentalism can be misguided. As a libertarian, I support deregulating housing to facilitate both infill development in city centers and suburban development at the edges of cities. I would even consider supporting more non-market housing options for young families if they prove to be more cost-effective than baby bonuses, although I remain personally skeptical of this approach. Singapore, for instance, has a majority of its population living in non-market housing, and despite government efforts to encourage births for over 30 years, including organizing cruise ship mixers, these initiatives have not significantly boosted fertility rates.
The point about the challenges of raising kids in your 20s is relevant, likely due to the modern economy's emphasis on upskilling and career development. The 20s and early 30s are crucial for building a resume, even if it means accepting lower wages temporarily. Historically, during the first industrial revolution, the average age of marriage declined in many European countries because the industrial revolution eliminated high-skill artisan jobs and created numerous low-skilled factory jobs, reducing the incentive for young people to invest in skills and encouraging earlier marriages. If AI enhances the productivity of less-skilled workers to match that of highly skilled workers, a similar trend might emerge, although the impact of AI may be limited to certain professions.
In my country, urban professionals have found a way out of the skill development to low fertility trap by having men in their mid to late 30s marry women in their early to mid-20s. While I find this practice strange and doubt its scalability to other countries or its long-term viability in Bangladesh, it highlights a cultural adaptation to economic pressures.
I still believe that helicopter parenting significantly impacts fertility rates, contributing to the low fertility seen in East Asia. Contrary to many pro-natalists, I think parenting should be devalued, promoting a "good enough" parenting culture instead.
Regarding the aging population, a crucial reform could be to cut all government healthcare and pensions for individuals who had fewer than two children. If people choose not to have children, they should have saved money for their retirement. This reform would reduce government spending and lower taxes on the young, which could have a slightly pro-natalist effect.
Bangladesh being very religious and poor used to counteract the urban-ness, but now their birth rate is falling.
Has Japanese worker productivity kept up, so that it reflects in higher incomes for Japanese people? Because ordinary Japanese people are not wealthy by global standards. Japanese GDP per capita has been stagnant, oscillating around USD $40,000 since 1990. I also understand that anybody who receives the pension from the Japanese government gets the equivalent of AUD $300 a fortnight! This is substantially lower than the AUD $1,100 that Aussie pensioners get a fortnight. If retired Japanese citizens don’t own their own house and don’t have a family to take care of them in retirement, they live in poverty. These are some of the hidden costs of a society with an inverted population pyramid that doesn’t grow.
I suspect density does reduce fertility but having to save for many years before you buy a place does too; for a jurisdiction like Australia where increasing density offers a chance to reduce prices, there is a possibility that the two net out.
But if this concept holds, that rule of thumb will only apply in the transition phase. Once apartments are the dominant urban form, presumably you're at a new steady state of low fertility and then prices will depend on supply, demand, and lifetime incomes.
I wonder if there's specific design choices in homes that affect fertility decisions. it would be great to have the most efficient possible homes that allow the most kids. Many small bedrooms instead of a few big ones?
We’ve worked hard for our big home and we’re not downsizing. FTG, and the young ones can work like a b*^ch like we had too to buy our home! We have four adult daughters and they’re out there having a go. Our huge house suits our lifestyle as we have friends and family from all over Australia and the world regularly visiting and staying to enjoy our area in SE QLD. Sick of people thinking we have to be forced out of our home. Funny though, our daughters aren’t interested in having children, yet, due to expensive childcare costs.