this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
140 points (95.5% liked)

News

23267 readers
3010 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • China is one of the world's most unaffordable places to raise a child, a Beijing think tank says.
  • The cost of raising a child compared to GDP per capita is 6.3 times in China, but 4.11 in the US, it said.
  • The cost of raising a child is sinking China's already falling birth rate, the researchers said.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wahming@monyet.cc 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Still increasing population, but the rate at which we are increasing has slowed.

Yes, that's the definition of a decreasing birth rate. If it continues to decrease (it's happening worldwide, and nobody's figured out how to reverse the trend yet), we hit peak population this century and start declining.

https://archive.ph/YjTq7

This is a very interesting read for anybody who wants to know more about the topic

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

I think I know how to reverse the trend. Make the world a not shit place, make it so the world isn't literally ending around us, and provide financial security so people feel safe raising children.

That being said, dunno why we would actually want more people until we head to space.

[–] bo5on@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I really wish the article did more to support it's position that a declining population is bad for human progress towards the back half of this century. Seems like a pretty important pillar of the discussion but it has maybe two throw away sentences with references to papers that are actually unrelated to its claim.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I really wish the article did more to support it’s position that a declining population is bad for human progress towards the back half of this century.

Meh, that didn't bother me. That wasn't the purpose of the article to delve into every implication of the data, and doing so would call into question the motive for posting the factual information it was providing with some of its audience. They kept if fairly objective and left the more subjective questions to the readers.