I have long been deeply skeptical of the Chicago school of economics, and the presumption of it that there is an economic explanation for nearly every human phenomenon. So it is with a bit of trepidation that I risk indulging in such, for there seems to me a rather simple explanation for the decline in fertility (i.e. birthrates) across countries around the world. In the post WWII era almost every advanced nation has at some point seen a startling decline in population growth which has in many places gone below the replacement rate and is plunging the country into population decline. Of all of the explanations I have seen for this, I have not seen the one that seems to me the most obvious – children flipped from being an asset to a family to being a liability. We now very much think about the expense of raising children versus the old down-on-the-farm tradition of having more hands to contribute to the family welfare. From a consumption standpoint, children are luxury goods! It would be economically irrational to deliberately increase liabilities; so as long as this condition persists, there will be no baby boom.
What makes this interesting is how economics is both cause and effect, smaller families the consequence of the cost of child rearing, and the developing demographic contraction (absent offsetting immigration) impacting economic growth. The generosity of welfare programs is predicated upon a robust base of taxpaying workers and that base is shrinking. The great argument of economic growth is that everyone can have an increase over what they had in the past; the only catch with that is that humans are more concerned with how they stand relative to other people in the present than with the actual improvement in their own condition. If the economy ceases to grow because population is static or shrinking – that’s a whole new ballgame.
Which leads me to equality and the not-entirely-surprising evolution into equity. Harrison Bergeron predicted this, as did 1984. In fact there isn’t any reason for equality, as imagined anywhere from 50 to 200 years ago, to be conserved as an inviolable concept. Over that entire time, the application of equality was indeed expanded to classes of people formerly excluded from it (and as had been the trajectory ever since the Magna Carta, which only secured baronial rights against the Sovereign). Since equality, in almost any circumstance runs counter to easily observed reality, it is an artificial construct we impose upon society and like a Frankenstein’s monster, it takes on a life of its own. And no one, but no one, is going to argue for a limited equality, even if that’s what was once the core of the concept. We are trapped by our own beliefs.
Of course it takes an outside, objective judge to enforce such equality – our very own Diana Moon Glampers. We’re painfully aware of those who imagine themselves fit for that role. Hamilton was distrusted by his fellow Founders because he had an arch-conservative desire for a neo-aristocracy. It should be little wonder that his reputation be so high these days within the progressive-sphere. Equality can only be truly achieved and enforced by an unequal, privileged elite. Of course they aren’t equal, they’re better, but they make sure that the common person isn’t troubled by the sight of someone better off than himself (provided there are no pesky photographers hanging around The French Laundry). And thus equality is eaten by itself (through that need for enforcement), just as the revolution always eats its young.
One thing the Anglo-American tradition is terribly wrong about is universality – because universality ignores locality, the specificity of culture. This is best illustrated in the failure of capitalist economics to take root in cultures that don’t share the precepts of Anglo-American culture. We have all kinds of names to describe what we consider to be mutant forms of capitalism, but all of that stems from the ill-conceived conceit that our idea of capitalism is universal. We have the same problem when it comes to our form of government, and the export thereof. The rest of Western thought doesn’t make quite the same error, and thus you get continental Romanticism and nationalism (or as in the case of Spain – de-nationalization). You also see why Anglo colonialism was actually different than Continental colonialism – not better necessarily, but different. Given that America was born out of anti-colonial sentiment (or resentment), you can also see how the redeemer of the colonial world mentality grew (Wilson to FDR) even as it was in conflict with the American interest to dominate (from Manifest Destiny and Banana-wars to Cold War and Liberal Global Order). Perhaps the best expression of the motives (and conflict within them) ever given was in the movie The Coca-Cola Kid. The protagonist says: The world will not be truly free until Coke is available everywhere. It is delivered without a trace of irony and with absolute earnestness (and could there be a more perfect expression of American character).
The great value to the world that America once provided, was a safety valve – a domain where the misfits within the old country could emigrate. They could uproot and find opportunity and happiness in a country that sold itself, and them, on a set of ideals. I don’t think most immigrants truly believed that they themselves would be treated as equals (which they certainly hadn’t been in their own culture), but they had the hope that their children would. For generations this actually worked, but I think those times are as in the past as Jim Crow. The extent to which an economy grows, built on and providing opportunity, is a reflection of the regard for the future that is culturally grounded.
Of course I’m just another random idiot on the internet, it’s pretty likely that I’m wrong.
March 5, 1836: “God Created Men and Sam Colt Made Them Equal!” (Old West Adage)
As a soon to be great grandfather I sort of agree. I had 2 kids, of which 1 had 3, 1 had 0. My three grand daughters, all college grads, middle upper 20s, have no kids, though the youngest is pregnant but will probably stop at 2, the other 2 girls, who knows?
They told me there would be no math portion of the quiz.
“Soon to be great-grandfather”?
That is wonderful news.
“they had the hope that their children would. For generations this actually worked, but I think those times are as in the past ”
Perhaps a bit too cynical? My grandkids know, play with, and admire many second generation Asians, Hispanics, Indians whose parents came to America seeking a better world. If not all Colored Peoples see the hope for their following generations, then perhaps it has to do with the continual marginalization and grouping of folks into “us vs. them” on the basis of characteristics that have nothing to do with merit.
/looks again at the inflatable yard ornament down the street from me for Ramadan.
There’s still families coming over and assimilating.
We still got it boys, we can ruin other cultures.
Ruined? Or made betterer?
Nothing is made better with inflatable yard decorations.
Indeed, replacing the nothingness is an improvement. Good use of the empty space.
“Nothing is made better with inflatable yard decorations.”
QFT
Wrong.
Totally awesome.
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/091/284/eso_es_racista.gif
See! BETTERER!
There’s something so fitting here in blue collar rust belt suburbia about the inflatable yard decorations. At least those come down and get put up in a rotation. There is a house down the street that has a wooden AT-AT and shuttle in the yard that’s always out. During the lockdown years, they even put a fucking fabric mask on the AT-AT.
Is that a stoop goose for nerds?
I hate them.
GT:
One of these, just made of wood, and only ~10-11 feet tall.
Sean:
Me too. I have never met them, but that fabric mask cemented my opinion of them.
I can’t tell if the mask is sarcastic or not.
rhywun:
Based on later additions to the display (that included a %current thing% sign about ‘vid), I don’t think so.
Aw, rats. That was how I read it.
The current administration is certainly doing its best to convince them that there is no hope for them.
“the continual marginalization and grouping of folks into “us vs. them” on the basis of characteristics that have nothing to do with merit”
In the spirit of JI’s argument that our notion of equality is itself far from universal, perhaps our notion of merit is also far from universal. In a nutshell, we see merit as what you can do, and actually do, without regard for who you are. In other cultures, who you are (race, class, religion, nationality, etc.) is a large part of what merit you have. In the corporate world, in fact, merit has both elements – can you do the job, and are you a good “fit”?
I refer to Hamilton as America’s Founding Statist.
^
One thing the Anglo-American tradition is terribly wrong about is universality – because universality ignores locality, the specificity of culture.
I’d say there is a universal human conceit, driven by ego, which allows people to assume everybody should agree with them, however egregiously wrong they might be.
Sorry, JI, sorry everyone. I’m nearly violating the 30 minute rule – I thought Dave Smith was going to run on the LP ticket after an article I read last night, so I broke open all the champagne bottles in the house and even worse, forgot to invite anyone over. Then after, I realized the article I read was clearly dated 2021, so ah….fuck. Back to Trump and the child sniffer.
Back to JI …. and those “weirdos” who traveled here – they could possibly find themselves “masters” , so to speak. If they could invent a new lug nut or threshing unit, they might find that the “new” manner of value did not require name or former place, but rather competence. (Note: my derivation of JI’s comment, not his.)
Yeah, in case it wasn’t clear, I have massive respect for ‘those’ people. Particularly in contrast to our native born entitled dumbasses.
Wait, staying on-topic actually, Dave Smith was on Timcast last night and he had a rant about families/communities being torn apart by big government that fits the theme of JI’s article.
It started when Dave said abortion underwrites the entire modern culture of the left. Around the 40 minute mark I believe.
Hamilton was distrusted by his fellow Founders because he had an arch-conservative desire for a neo-aristocracy.
The aspirations of a mongrel?
Nice essay, JI. I agree with a lot of your observations, but I wonder what effect easy money, birth control and institutional capture had on optimism and therefore birth rates. If people are conditioned to consume rather than produce, it stands to reason that multiple kids are too expensive. And if there are doubts about the future, the result is the same.
Personally, I wish we hadn’t stopped at two.
Somewhat different conditions in other countries but similar post war fecundity.
Are we talking about wives?
Under different circumstances I may have had more but alas…
Haha!
No, one is plenty!
Birth control is the real key, including abortion but mainly the pill. It opened up options for women other than mother. Also, moving from an agricultural to industrial to a service economy opened up opportunities for women. Faced with a panoply of choices and a chance to increase household income by 73% (haha), they chose work over kids.
Tundra, I’d add “easy credit” to your list. That more than anything else conditioned people to consumption. Then add the hard sell on getting people into college by taking on more debt.
I’d add that our current levels of consumption could be termed gluttony. The ruling elite in the west have been selling the seven deadly sins as virtues for the last 50 years, and seem to ramp up the sales pitch every year. So the result isn’t all that surprising.
Birth control bent the arc of society and history in ways we can’t understand. It struck at core values and institutions (whether those needed to be undermined, I won’t say, but I think it’s undeniable that it undermined a great many values and institutions). I think its a straight line from birth control to single motherhood (well, maybe a roundabout line), the rise of unhappiness and mental illness in women (and to some extent men), and even to the current trans madness. It fundamentally transformed, not just women’s body chemistry, but the most basic human relationships.
Giving humans birth control is like giving a chimp a satchel full of grenades – shit is going to get blown up, you don’t know what, but its going to get blown up.
I’ve said this for years.
Doesn’t that happen anytime people move from rural to urban areas?
I’ve seen this argument for years, that children used to be treasured for the labor they could provide on the farm or whatever, but they are not needed for that as much anymore. (Or not allowed as much or as soon anymore. Hot take: the birthing crash is due to child labor laws!)
Also pre nanny state they would take care of you in your old age.
Now Medicaid “takes care” of you in the nursing home.
I’ve always thought that was a little too economically reductive.
“All men are created equal” is patently false. Therefor, the entirety of the American Experiment is a cheat and a swindle.
According to twitter you are supposed to say “grift.”
Yes, it is. Or doomed to fail eventually because the mirage can’t be sustained.
In what sense? Equal ability? No. Equal station? No. Natural rights? Absolutely. Unfortunately that idea has been perverted and misinterpreted. Obviously equal application of natural rights by power brokers (state, warlords, whatever) is the issue.
We are created equal only in the lowest common denominator sense.
Not at all. It never meant to mean that all men are created with equal natural gifts, or anything like that.
There’s a commercial for Southern New Hampshire U, one of the ones going all-in for online education, in which a commencement speaker claims talent is somehow distributed equally. Few things inspire me to yell at the TV, but that nonsense always sets me off.
I yelled at that one too. He basically says the opposite of reality. It’s infuriating.
The wife and I both cringe at the commercial with the 13 year-old girl celebrating her mustache.
Oh god is that the Amazon one? Just saw that the other day and I could only SMDH.
Good (20 minute) interview with Dierdre McCloskey on this wherein she critiques both equality of outcome and equality of opportunity. She uses the idea of “permission” but in a positive sense: https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-daily-podcast/equalities-outcome/opportunity/permission
Break is over, back to the salt mine.
Nice choice of front page graphic Tonio.
We are already living in Charles Stross dystopia?
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/134/451/820/playable/1e2f03768f7d1ae0.mp4
LOL
The real doll from Big & Rich’s “Save a Horse” has fallen on hard times.
Sooooooo….Reason is livestreaming a discussion about banning TikTok which includes, uh, Taylor Lorenz.
Of all the people opposed to the legislation, they pick Taylor Fuckin’ Lorenz?
You’re not joking.
JFC
Maybe they’re looking to ditch ENB?
Tired rotation?
Where the rubber meets the ‘ro?
Will Taylor make a sammich?
Is that like a 3-way?
Sent a rough sketch of my thoughts about art influencing culture to Tom Woods last night. It seemed all right to me last night, but now, looking at it in daylight, I’m like, “I’m an idiot.” It’s disjointed and though the thoughts are loosely connected TO ME, I didn’t do a good job of connecting the dots for the reader.
They don’t know what you’re doing; Babe, it must be art.
Usually, the fiction I write late at night kills. Nonfiction, not so much.
The solution is simple. You’re going to have to make it sexier.
Yeah; look at how Sugarfree writes sex into stories.
When you look into the abyss, the SF writing looks back into you.
I did note that my biggest fan base is lefty progs because they can overlook the message in an entertaining story, but righties won’t tolerate the sex and language to get to the message.
I thought the righties simply don’t admit to reading it?
But … how would I know that?
I get mail saying “This is filthy,” but I don’t get mail saying, “Don’t tell anybody but…”
Yeah, measuring the “I don’t want anyone to know I like this” crowd is pretty difficult.
You are thinking specifically of the Baptist righties.
I get mail saying “This is filthy,” but I don’t get mail saying, “Don’t tell anybody but…”
That’s the same thing.
Not necessarily bad…
“This is filthy! I almost finished before I could finish. ”
Five stars.
Hm.
Not wrong.
Brian Regan on art:
https://youtu.be/6S4W7ehXh1M
I’ve missed the old neighborhood’s local pizza place. So much better than what I can get closer to the house.
And there goes my mood. I hate these Engineering Demand meetings. Too many people get invited and it feels like a hostile meeting – even when I’m just here as a technical reference. I’d hate to be the person asking for a solution.
Was discussing William S. Burroughs with a coworker over lunch. Was unaware of the company connection or this bit from Wiki:
Burroughs’ parents sold the rights to his grandfather’s invention and had no share in the Burroughs Corporation. Shortly before the 1929 stock market crash, they sold their stock for $200,000 (equivalent to approximately $3,200,000 in today’s funds).
Huh, didn’t know that either. I remember having to learn how to use one of those old fashioned Burroughs adding machines in Junior High for an intro to business class.
Good essay. I’m there with you on a lot of it. I wrap a lot of it under the inevitable outcomes of “Progressivism-the-religion”. Welfare state, control, etc.
Progressivism is a logical outcome of the Enlightenment, that’s the kicker (in the nuts).
Well y’all have heard me say it before, but I think it’s rather what you get when you take Western Christian Culture and remove all the actual Christianity (the supernatural parts). Basically Machen’s “Christianity and Liberalism” argument. “Progressivism” is modern religion left when “Liberal Christianity” (to use the term as he was dealing with it 100 years ago) quits pretending.
― Cormac McCarthy, Blood Meridian, or the Evening Redness in the West
Thanks for writing. I like that we can be entertained, horrified, educated, and challenged to think here.
Reading this, it seems the American ideal is much like Christianity, corrupted and perverted into something entirely different from the original idea. I guess that’s what time + human nature will do.
Nuthin’ up muh sleeve…
The Biden administration will put nearly $600 million toward drought resilience and upgrades to water infrastructure, Interior Department officials announced Wednesday.
The administration will disperse nearly $585 million in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to 83 water projects in 11 states, Deputy Interior Secretary Tommy Beaudreau said on a call with reporters.
Every major river basin under the Bureau of Reclamation’s (BOR) jurisdiction is represented in the projects selected, according to the Interior Department, with funding going to Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota and Washington projects.
The projects include those aimed at improving water treatment infrastructure for tribal nations, upgrading hydropower equipment and project buildings, and replacing aging components. The largest single award will go to California’s Central Valley, set to receive $65.9 million to modernize the Trinity River Fish Hatchery, where building infrastructure has remained in continuous use for six decades. This includes funds to replace corroded piping, upgrade the filtration system and install a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition system.
The magic hat is getting quite a workout.
Water projects used to be RFK Jr’s main hobby horse. As soon as he says he’s running for POTUS, the existing POTUS announces this to counter the challenger’s complaints.
Infrastructure legislation passed under the Biden administration has put just under $13 billion toward drought resilience and water infrastructure. This includes $4.6 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act and $8.3 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for BOR projects, which the administration has collectively touted as the largest government investment in drought resilience in U.S. history.
The Interior Department previously allocated $240 million for water infrastructure upgrades through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for fiscal 2022.
And we’ve still got checks!
Happy days are here again.
Which one of you is this?
I put a rock in front of the green electrical box so my wife wouldn’t take out power to the entire neighborhood again…
Sorry, my wife only took out our mailbox.
Lol.
“again”
*snicker*
Need to keep back hoes out of the hands of some of the neighbors. My green box is surrounded by trees.
Point of order….
I believe the term is ‘bottom bitch’ and not ‘back hoe’.
And if your box is that color, maybe see a doctor.
For the first time in my life, I live in a house without a fire hydrant next to the driveway. I saw more people almost hit (or in some cases almost miss) those when they were backing out/pulling into the driveway.
I thought you were going to say you no longer have a place to lift your leg.
Random thoughts on people and nations
Nations blow and people suck.
Magna Carta, which only secured baronial rights against the Sovereign
I remember when a certain subset of Sovereign Citizen-types used to point to the Magna Carta as a magic document that would solve all of the problems with government.
Hamilton was distrusted by his fellow Founders because he had an arch-conservative desire for a neo-aristocracy.
And they was right.
(provided there are no pesky photographers hanging around The French Laundry
It wasn’t him.
Of course I’m just another random idiot on the internet, it’s pretty likely that I’m wrong.
Random idiots on the Internet being wrong? What’s next? The Sun rising in the East?
😉
On a serious note, nice article.
The English used to have themselves a very nice, for the time, constitution that guaranteed their rights. One of the points of the American Revolution was securing those rights for the colonists.
WRT lawn ornaments: the Greeks do it proper.
Bathtub Mary or nothing!
A guy down in the village has one made from a large satellite dish.
I get mail saying “This is filthy,” but I don’t get mail saying, “Don’t tell anybody but…”
What dreadful, awful smut. Why are you taking so long to write a sequel?
Yeah, if they think it’s filthy, it’s because they read it, because they bought it.
“The food here is terrible, and such small portions!”
My first thought too.
When Dave Barry wrote “Big Trouble”, he apologized in a forward for the characters in the story using bad language. He said he didn’t want the characters in his story to use bad language, but they ignored him and went ahead and cussed. A lot.
The West is totally the good guy team:
https://twitter.com/mazzenilsson/status/1643714775317192707
.
I was wondering whatever happened to those Crank Yankers guys. Though this isn’t as funny as the one with the hemorrhoids.
“Hola, Homosaurus: Biden Admin Shells Out Six Figures To Translate Gay Dictionary Into Spanish”
https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/hola-homosaurus-biden-admin-shells-out-six-figures-to-translate-gay-dictionary-into-spanish/
I’m so jaded I’m just happy they didn’t spend more.
Just tear it all down. No more government. Everyone will pack heat and solve their own problems. I can’t take much more stupid, wasteful spending. Even if it is just a step above monopoly money.
Of all of the explanations I have seen for this, I have not seen the one that seems to me the most obvious – children flipped from being an asset to a family to being a liability. We now very much think about the expense of raising children versus the old down-on-the-farm tradition of having more hands to contribute to the family welfare. From a consumption standpoint, children are luxury goods!
I might agree. I would say though it’s more the perception of being a liability than reality. Propaganda all the way down.
The Cathedral wants women in the labor pool and to destroy the nuclear family. Children are obstacles to both of these goals, so lower birth rates is the goal. Accordingly, every narrative is presented as children being an expensive burden that will destroy your earnings and ruin your professional life.
I think a lot of people are buying into this. But a lot aren’t. It goes back to the tradwife discussion from the other day. Multiple kids are easily affordable for the average family. It means sacrificing luxury goods and carefully evaluating where your home will be. But very easily doable. I have 4 kids and am the sole breadwinner. I do quite well professionally but not anything out of the ordinary. My kids may not have everything they want, but they lack for nothing they need. And, I think mostly due to homeschooling, their wants are quite modest and reasonable so they may indeed have everything they want anyways.
I’m afraid you prove the point on children being a liability with your attention to the trade-offs. Others trade off differently.
That’s fair. I meant that children are being presented as financial burden beyond tradeoff of luxury items and into necessities.
Like the latest number of needing something like nearly $900,000 to raise a kid to 18. Setting luxury tradeoffs aside, that number puts multiple children beyond the sheer capability of most people. If they buy into it.
Well, when parents can no longer leave their 12-year-olds at home alone (e.g. and etc.)…
OK, one other thing very briefly on the “then vs. us” thing – I use the term “de-reconciliation” as the main weapon of the culture war.
For the last, what, 20 years, that’s THE theme. For basically all of American history, different forms of reconciliation have been absolutely key. Assimilation of immigrants, restoring unity after War Between the States, elimination of statutory racial segregation, etc. Now at literally every turn, the Progs are aggressively de-reconciling ALL of it.
This is no more or less true now than it was during the post-war baby boom. We were already an industrial society in 1946. The Silents weren’t producing the Boomers because they needed more hands on the farm. IMO, the more likely explanation for the plummeting fertility rate is a nihilistic and libertine culture combined with the pill and socially permissible abortion. They didn’t nickname Boomers “the me generation” for nothing, and they found themselves the first generation in history able to indulge their libertinism without consequence.
War produces its own effect on birth rates, at least for the short term. Also the technological changes facilitating control of contraception expanded in the 50s.
It’s true the post-war baby boom may have been an outlier, but those cultural and technological changes likely played as large a role as economics. Particularly considering the strength of the post-war economy in the US. Boomers were probably better economically able to afford children than any other generation in history to that point. There had to be other factors in their collectively deciding to have fewer children.
The Italians preceded us into declining fecundity, the Mexicans trail us. Neither of those are close to being carbon copies of our post war culture.
Fuuuuuuck. Jury duty again.
*open envelope*
“This is not a summons.”
WTF?
They’re looking for volunteers?
It’s not the pre-summons questionnaire?
Seems so. It’s been so long I don’t remember receiving such a thing before.
What happens if you don’t go?
“This is not a summons.”
That means it’s a warrant.
It’s a Christmas miracle!
I keep getting those things from the province, and I keep responding by saying “I was a student-at-law when I was younger,” which is an automatic disqualification for jury duty (don’t ask me why).
But do you think they’d somehow, oh, I don’t know, perhaps enter my response into some “potential jury pool” database so they don’t send me those damn things again?
Yeah, me neither.