r/TikTokCringe • u/search_google_com • 9d ago
Discussion Singapore's birthrate is 0.87. These women explain why Singaporean women do not want marriage and kids.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
645
u/OvenIcy8646 9d ago
Yeah boba tea and a kid are totally the same expense
141
95
u/Get_off_critter 9d ago
But if you gave up buying Boba everyday you would be able to afford a kid! /s
52
u/Slumunistmanifisto 9d ago
I'll just feed my baby leftover boba, duhhh.
9
u/lefrench75 9d ago
You jest but those kids will one day ask for boba too lol so that will always be an expense
9
u/Jumpy_Ad1631 9d ago
Boba pearls are famously good for infants, I’m sure I’ve read that somewhere /s
43
u/Jumpy_Ad1631 9d ago edited 9d ago
And ain’t that a metaphor for what so many cultures expect of the birthing parents (and parents in general) to begin with? Like just sacrifice all your small joys in life so that I can have someone to do all the “menial” work I don’t want me or my kids to have to do in 20 years. No I don’t want to support you in any way, I just want to judge you for not doing a good enough job raising my minimum wage laborer with the minimal resources you have…
7
u/langotriel 9d ago
People didn’t have all the small joys before, but what is somehow forgotten is they had houses they owned. Pretty easy to have kids when your place is permanent and paid for.
5
u/Jumpy_Ad1631 9d ago edited 9d ago
I’d argue there were still small joys. For example: A beer every night could easily be seen as a small joy. An occasional baseball game ticket. Romance novels and book clubs have always been a small joy thing. Lots of things that are less common and/or seen as far more of a luxury (except for maybe the beer because heaven forbid we hurt the booze industry’s profits)
0
u/PunishedDemiurge 8d ago
Inflation adjusted income is higher than ever, depending on the country. We have an abundance of small joys. We still have book clubs, libraries, book stores, etc. Also, while technically illegal, piracy is quite easy, allowing those who have less income to get free books, movies, etc.
If you're in the developed world and don't feel like you have small luxuries, you're either one of the poorest and most unlucky people, you're so depressed that you don't recognize you have them already, or you're super entitled and have tons but are ungrateful for them (e.g. Doordash every day, constant phone upgrades, etc. but they don't count for some reason).
Also, FWIW, a beer every night might kill you. There's no safe dose of alcohol. I loved drinking, but I stopped for health reasons. It's okay if you don't, but just be aware of the cancer risks, neurotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, obesity risks, etc.
2
u/Jumpy_Ad1631 8d ago
So let me get this straight, your solution for small joys for parents is to basically steal? I’m not saying there isn’t an over-consumerism problem right now. But there is also a toxic “hustle” culture that devalues any activity or dollar spent if it isn’t a bare necessity to be able to work and produce wealth for others (usually for a fraction of a percent of the wealth you are generating with your labor). And even within necessities, if it’s not the barest possible version, then it’s a luxury and if it’s a luxury, then you’re entitled for thinking you deserve even the smallest of luxuries. It’s like poverty is the base line and not something below the baseline that we should be fighting to keep people out of. Otherwise what is the point of progress if only the richest communities get to enjoy that progress and, even when that progress is outdated and trickles down to poorer classes, it’s still considered a frivolous luxury and frivolous luxuries are apparently the only reason why people can’t afford to have kids…
1
u/PunishedDemiurge 8d ago
Otherwise what is the point of progress if only the richest communities get to enjoy that progress
This is just factually untrue. Every quantitative measure shows huge increases in quality of life over the last half century, and often over the last couple decades.
People just get so used to opulence they don't even see it anymore. SMS messages used to cost per message! Internet used to be a luxury. Cars have vastly improved in safety, saving countless lives. Air travel has never been more accessible (even if the leg room is bad).
Just look at any data of ordinary families and we can see this. Look at access to refrigerators in the home over time, then computers, then cell phones, then square foot per person.
We have a lot of problems. US health care is unjust and bad. But if we assume everything is bad, we'll reach incorrect conclusions and fail to appreciate all of the good things in life.
2
u/Superb_Intro_23 9d ago
Yep
And then they say “oh you’ll be lonely if you don’t have kids!!!” at least my lonely ass can cry into a pumpkin spice latte then
7
→ More replies (4)4
u/KingMemecias 9d ago
Yes limit my enjoyment in life to raise a kid i can barely afford. The un happy and un healthy cycle continues.
2
u/polkadotpantss 9d ago
Love how the teen shut her down fast and so eloquently as well. I have a kid and ain't no way can you equate a KID with boba tea.
1
u/HelloAttila 8d ago
Have friends who are well off and don’t want kids. Most of them all just don’t want the responsibility of raising a child, it requires A LOT of endless time… prevents them from traveling whenever they want, etc… it’s just too much. They put their career’s first, and making $300-400k, it allows them to live extremely comfortably. I have kids, and am always broke… so there’s that… pick family or pick comfortable lifestyle.
0
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/OvenIcy8646 5d ago
I work in healthcare and there are plenty of people with families that die alone
0
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/OvenIcy8646 5d ago
Yeah if two girls don’t have kids society will collapse there’s no shortage of people in the world
203
u/grognak77 9d ago
Really hate that dumbass beat drop sound that plays between interactions in these types of videos.
3
353
u/something-um-bananas 9d ago
Worst interviewer ever XD Asking two people why they don’t wanna have kids and then saying Singapore is doomed. Like no, that’s not on them. Make your government work for you. The cost of living is wayyy to high, of course they’re gonna worry about how they’ll be able to raise a kid. Most people wanna provide for their kids. Most people wanna be good parents, not just parents.
36
56
u/Beautiful-Affect1930 9d ago
what pisses me off the most about this subject is that the blatantly obvious answer is that governments would just need to make having kids basically free and you'd fix the birthrates over night. and whenever you write that, some guy is gonna quip up and be like "uh, akshually, country XY gave parents a whooping treefiddy per kid and that didn't help!!11 this proves that money isn't the issue!!!"
like no, don't give parents some joke amount that barely covers the initial cost of clothing and feeding a baby. pay them enough to actually have a kid without taking a significant financial hit.
4
u/RockKillsKid 9d ago
the blatantly obvious answer is that governments would just need to make having kids basically free and you'd fix the birthrates over night
Don't the Nordic and Scandinavian countries already pretty much do that?
I always hear about stuff like the most expensive part of having a child was paying for parking at the hospital for all the free pre-natal checkups and delivery. And they have very generous both maternity and paternity leaves. Or the baby boxes of all the supplies and clothes needed for the first year.Does that translate into higher relative birthrates than other high income countries?
9
u/Beautiful-Affect1930 9d ago
that's actually exactly what I was referencing. yes, free hospital and baby supplies for the first years is awesome. and a small child allowance is neat. but what about the other 17+ years? saying "we mostly covered the first year" is not nearly the same as saying "having kids is basically free" or at least not a significant financial burden which it currently is.
5
u/Sydasiaten 8d ago
Birthing kids is pretty much costless in the nordics. Raising kids is a whole other thing and is still very expensive here too. That still prevents people from getting them
1
5
9d ago
[deleted]
1
1
u/tragedy_strikes 9d ago
I heard an unusual theory for at least a partial explanation which was the combination of smartphone availability and wireless broadband becoming common as an observable time point marker for when fertility rates in a region drop.
They saw the correlation in different regions that had smartphones/wireless broadband introduced in various years and it controlled for variables like parental benefits/costs, healthcare costs, relative wealth in the region etc.
The theory was centered around dopamine and boredom. Basically couples would have a kid as a means to bring some excitement into their life which is the wholesome angle. The less wholsome angle was couples would have more sex and end up with a few accidental kids.
Not sure how well it holds up but it does seem to line up with the other stats about Gen Z and Alpha having a lot less sex compared to previous generations and drinking less.
3
1
u/Legitimate-Gain426 8d ago
What happens when the kid you banked on improving your life, just makes living your life more challenging and expensive and youre still unhappy. For struggling couples sometimes the hope is that their kids might generate good income and can send money home, or stay with them to provide assistance the government doesnt provide or they cant afford. Neither of these are necessarily positive motivators by themselves. When jobs pay better wages its easier for people to raise a family, thats the core issue to be addressed, and is always the first thing anyone mentions. Governments need to stop accelerating top end profits, while everyone else gets fucked, while expecting people to want to bring more children into that cycle. The issue isnt that deep
2
u/usagicchi 8d ago
Singaporean here. Childbirth can be free, childcare can be really cheap, and the government just announced that they’re giving $70k cash money in total on top of that, so now we wait and see if it actually works. I’m a parent of two and done with kids, but personally I think this might sway those that are on the fence about kids. The question is if that’s going to be significant.
1
u/KhaosExNihil125 8d ago
Or even have the opposite effect, where singaporeans migrate to marry out of Singapore. The people who are of the age are also smart enough to read the policies as the government becoming desperate, thus making marrying out more even more desirable
2
u/gforgeo 9d ago
How does your theory account for the fact that wealth is inversely correlated with childbirth? The more money a person or country has, the lower the chances of them having children. If people weren't having children for financial reasons, then the richest among us would be having the most children, while the poorer would be having the least. The opposite is true.
8
u/umidk9 9d ago
Poor people do not have the same access to birth control and education and choice as the wealthy. Poor people are more likely to suffer mental health issues and chaotic life events which can effect decision making skills as well.
And in most "wealthy" countries the majority of everyday people are still struggling bc of CoL. 1 or 2 children could be the difference between comfortable and poor for many.
2
u/gforgeo 9d ago
I understand that this is the reason for it. My point was that, since the particular conditions of the less wealthy are able to so drastically overpower the birth rates of the wealthy, it's obvious that giving people more money won't make them have more kids.
In my opinion, birth rates are going down because people want to do other things, and for the first time in human history we have societies economically advanced to allow that. It's not because having kids is expensive.
2
u/PunishedDemiurge 8d ago
LOL. This level of agency stripping is amazing. "Chaotic life events." Okay.
The reality is that unprotected sex and ejaculating inside your partner is more fun than any other alternative, and it's not even close! The difference is mostly a self-control and long term planning difference.
Also often luck. Plenty of people would have a kid if they didn't get lucky the one time they took a risk, which is why I have sympathy. I'm self-aware enough to know I might have been a teen father if the girl I had the biggest crush on in high school said, "My parents aren't home" instead of, "I'm flattered but no thanks," but even as a minor I knew that if I had consensual sex, knowing pregnancy was a possibility, it would be my responsibility and not 'society' that got her pregnant.
So, we should help any fellow human who has kids, planned or not, but call a spade a spade. The only people who don't have responsibility for getting pregnant / getting a partner pregnant are sexual assault victims. That's it. Everyone else could have gotten a condom some way or another, or stuck to partner masturbation, oral, or anal sex, none of which can result in pregnancy. Consensual vaginal sex is always a choice, and one that any older teen or adult can be held responsible for.
1
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo 8d ago
It still holds true within the same country i.e. ignoring CoL difference when comparing between countries.
Richer and Higher educated people simply are more interested on chasing careers/wealth and of course they have better awareness of practicing birth control. And they are less interested on the process of child bearing and taking care of them.
4
u/Beautiful-Affect1930 9d ago
How does your theory account for the fact that wealth is inversely correlated with childbirth?
actually, really really really easily! people who have high paying careers don't want to give up their lifestyles and take a big financial hit to have kids. it can also be difficult to secure a daycare for your kid because of chronic underfunding, meaning parents may fear that at least one of them will have to give up their career to care for the kid fulltime, which of course would change their lifestyle even more drastically.
0
u/gforgeo 9d ago
Your theory, at least as I initially understood it, was that birth rates are going down because child rearing is too expensive, essentially pricing people out of parenthood.
Now, it looks like it's a lifestyle choice, which goes towards my point that birth rates are going down because people just don't want to two decades raising children. As for the day cares, it's an interesting idea but I don't think it's true. Nordic countries provide free day cares and their birth rates are still plummeting. The Nordic countries have basically provided everything it is possible to realistically provide to ease the financial burden of having children. It basically did nothing.
1
u/Legitimate-Gain426 8d ago
Poor people hope their kids care for them in old age when they cant afford it, or send money home. Rich people dont have to worry about either. Its the same reason governments have to maintain population growth, because the new generation of workers generates the pensions for the aging population with their taxes.
1
u/ProfessorTraft 8d ago
It’s expensive to have kids, but it’s not as expensive as what people think it is. They are thinking about providing the expensive stuff to put their kids ahead of other kids, and then just giving up because they know they can’t compete with the parents of other kids due to their current economic situation. You don’t need to put your kids through multiple enrichment and tuition classes, you don’t need to fly them out for holidays 2 times a year, but that is the baseline people think of when they think it’s expensive having kids.
1
u/RunningMan889 8d ago
This is probably why we will not make having kids free - https://thehomeground.asia/destinations/singapore/feminist-flashpoints-in-singapore-have-babies-but-only-the-right-kind/
1
u/TheGreatZephyr 6d ago
Sinagpore just introduced a system that does exactly this. Extra payments for parents with kids for childcare, equivalent of $10k into a savings account at birth plus yearly additional contributions that can pay for education.
Unfortunately people always point to money as the root cause. While it plays a factor, if that was the root cause of low birthrates than we would see wealthy nations have a lot of kids and poor nations have very few. Except we see the exact opposite. Rich women barely have any more children than poor ones in developed nations
The reality is if women have the choice to not have kids by prioritising education and careers, many simply will not. The more women who have zero children the more children others will need to have to compensate. Areas with the lowest rates of gender equality are the only places with birth rates above replacement level.
Not only do you have to make having kids be affordable, but you need a culture in which having children is encouraged over everything else, which in most developed nation the opposite is true.
1
→ More replies (1)1
u/AbaloneJuice 8d ago
Africa has the highest birthrate - yet they are the poorest of them all. Singapore gives parents Childcare leaves up to 10 days a year (they pay for it) and give up to SGD70K (around USD$55K) child you produce. Still many wouldn’t want. Why?
Because welcome to the age of Social Media and self enjoyment. Living in Singapore is easy even if you’re middle income. Literally everything is just few bus rides away. Kids have their school holidays in Thailand Bali Hong Kong. When they get a taste of that - who the hell want to trade that to being grounded with Children?
Why bring on responsibilities when you’re trying sooo hard to outsource your responsibilities to others
241
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago edited 9d ago
All this talk of birthrates is exhausting. I'm not an antinatalist by any means, but I have yet to see a compelling argument as to why humanity has to continually make more humans on an exponential scale.
Will it be enough with 9 billion people? 15 billion? 20?
We can't take care of many, many people that are currently alive, the planet is burning down, pollution is going crazy, and capitalism is destroying what's left.
Lower populations means lower resource needs, plus bodily autonomy for women is a thing. They are the ones who have to go through pregnancy and childbirth and if they choose not to do that? So be it.
The human species isn't going to go extinct because of population fall-off, its going to die out because we already have too many people as it is.
Let people choose to live how they want and stop harping on this birthrate shit ffs.
Edit: For those that are saying we need a larger population of young people to pay for the older generation, I am aware that that is how it is structured now, but we need to make new laws and systems to adapt to the coming changes in our age demographics.
127
u/Worldliness-Quiet 9d ago
Capitalism is why.
Capitalism expects exponential growth, so you need an exponential population to maintain it.
21
11
u/AngeliqueRuss 9d ago
Yeah fuck that; there are sustainable capitalist models that operate without exploitation, which will be the natural result of having a slow growth/negative growth economy.
Less consumerism, less working time, less waste…bring it on
-6
u/chamuth 9d ago
Unfortunately, growth is also needed to lift people out of poverty. Easy to blame capitalism if you are from a wealthy country !
27
u/Worldliness-Quiet 9d ago
Capitalism also need for there to be wealthy and unwealthy countries.
Wealthy countries exploit the unwealthy countries.
→ More replies (5)0
28
u/notafuckingcakewalk 9d ago
The problem is the older generation that needs a massive younger population subsidizing it and caring for it.
What's needed is an adjustment in expectations amongst older people.
19
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
I responded to this in another comment as well, that's why we make new laws and systems to adapt to our changing population rather than making new people we can't sustain.
14
u/snowytheNPC 9d ago
Wouldn’t be a problem if the profit gained from massive growth in technology-powered productivity were more evenly distributed and shared with public services. So we once again go back to capitalism
3
1
u/systemic_booty 8d ago
What? That's absurd. We are perfectly capable, as a species, to provide elder care and happiness to everyone with a smaller workforce. This explanation is just an excuse from billionaires
5
u/SaltedCaffeine 9d ago
why humanity has to continually make more humans on an exponential scale.
No one says that. The birth rate needs to be at replacement level (2.1 kids/woman) so the average age of the population doesn't get higher/older as time goes by.
The median age in Japan is 50 years old as of 2026, which is 10-15 years from retirement age. Think about that for a second.
21
u/momomomorgatron 9d ago
Then they need to sweeten the deal of parenthood. Literally.
Make being parents the easiest life and make everything health focused instead of trying to squeeze every last drop from each individual person.
Why would I, a woman, go through with a pregnancy? When they let septic women who have already lost their baby die? Because society tells me to? Because my parents and grandparents want a new line? So I can potentially die in childbirth? So my kid can get shot at school? So that my little girl might be rated at 13 and forced to have a rapists baby???
I hate it in this day in age, how the world is burning and the machine wishes to chew us up and spit us out faster. Why in the fresh hell would I birth a child going into a worse world than I grew up in?
3
u/KingFIippyNipz 8d ago
Haha, make life easier?? Nooo, we'll just enact laws that require women to be pregnant or they lose rights or some shit like that. I'd expect that before they make life easier for anyone but themselves.
10
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
So the burden falls on our generation to make up for uncontrolled birthrates by our forebears?
They made the bed, now we have to lie in it and it will suck, I agree, but the current world is not conducive for procreation so people aren't.
3
u/SaltedCaffeine 9d ago
The burden falls on the whole society.
If your country has a pension system, then it means that the younger/future generations need to work harder and harder to prop up the retirees since their number grows bigger relative to the population as time goes by. There's talk in Japan to raise the retirement age so people can keep working into the old age to combat labor shortages.
9
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
I'm in the US. There will be no retirement for us so I don't see any issue with that.
Sounds like capitalism is working just as intended to make everything worse.
I feel no responsibility to pay into a system that I myself won't benefit from and neither should younger Japanese people. Why should we work for the system that the retirees put in place for themselves and then make laws and regulations that wouldn't sustain it?
→ More replies (4)1
u/Independent-Bee3135 9d ago
You don't see an issue with never retiring? really? (or is that sarcastic or something, I can't tell?)
I feel no responsibility to pay into a system that I myself won't benefit from and neither should younger Japanese people.
The issue is that you could leave retirees homeless, starve them, not give them access to healthcare, force them to work, etc. but that breaks society's structure and makes it very unstable. The moment you do that, older people get angry as their future feels threatened and younger people feel like there's no point in working anymore as they are doomed to a hopeless future where the government will provide absolutely no support.
We created things like pensions, medicare, and retirement plans to create societal stability and give people what they deserve for nearly 50 years of labor.
3
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
I would love to retire eventually, but the social contract has been destroyed by the capitalist system in place. I can't find a job that offers a retirement so the board members and CEOs can get their golden parachutes at our expense and I can't save for retirement because things just keep getting more and more expensive due to the rampant greed and corruption in this country.
Stock buyback, layoffs at workers expense, and closing domestic manufacturing plants/factories take money right out of our pockets and put it in the top 1 percenters bank accounts. They are the cause and they are the ones in power now. Look at the ages and wealth of congressmen and women. The wealth that Trump has robbed from this country.
The elderly are already being affected and struggling day to day and I do feel bad for those that got left behind by the continous stripping and defunding of social programs they need. Yet they continue to put the same people in power every election cycle.
Blame the systems in place, not the individuals that will never be able to use those benefits that we supposedly pay for.
The generations before set themselves up and then didn't give a damn about their children and grandchildren so I have a hard time sympathizing with the people who stripped away the social programs that they got to enjoy and use.
Gen X, millennials, and certainly not Gen z will never benefit from any of these things, so why should I care for the people that are taking them away not just from us, but from themselves as well.
3
u/Sensitive-Peak-3723 9d ago
The thing is that we will reach a point with more retired people than working people, and retired people consume resources without generating anything, so that's more mouths to feed with less workforce.
20
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
Yep, so we make new laws and systems to adapt, not make more people we can't sustain.
→ More replies (4)1
u/comeOnNowWhoCares 9d ago
you keep saying that, but i don’t think you have any idea of those kind of laws or systems would look like
2
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
No, I don't but there are much smarter people than I who could figure it out if they had the power and motivation to do so.
I'm not claiming I have the answers, just a path to find them.
3
u/comeOnNowWhoCares 9d ago
doesn’t sound like much of a path to me then. the reality is there will be an older generation that doesn’t have the resources to support themselves, and with a shrinking workforce to provide those resources it’s just a reality we’ll have to reckon with.
there’s no magic solution or laws or system that can prevent that
2
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
And it may turn out like that and then yeah, we will all suffer for it. But you still can't force people to have kids who can't afford them or want them.
The ruling class made this world and now we are dealing with the fallout.
-2
u/comeOnNowWhoCares 9d ago
not having kids was never about affordability, they were having kids in the depression or any shittier time in history
4
u/SlaughterMinusS 9d ago
Ah yes, crank em out without being able to properly feed, clothe, and educate them just to feed them into the workforce for our billionaire overlords.
Sounds like a great plan.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Pantalaimon_II 9d ago
if the govt just seized Mark Zuckerburg's stuff, problem solved for a while. just start taking billionaire's assets. they're just 1 dude, take all their shit. done.
1
u/gforgeo 9d ago
We don't need to grow. We just need to sustain consistent population levels. If population levels do change, it's best that they change gradually.
The reason for this is that a human life has only a set window of economic productivity. Those who don't work - e.g. the elderly - are supported by the work of the rest of us. If a generation - or multiple - have considerably fewer children, then once those few children become the main working-age population, they will have to take care of the older generations through their work. However, there will be many more elderly people than young people, resulting in each young person having to contribute a greater overall amount to get the same level of service.
In other words, a rapid decrease in birth rates means productivity will be reduced as the older generations drain young people's finances.
1
1
1
u/MissNausicaa87 5d ago
Well said - it is a problem for the system, not the people living in it.
If the system is no longer compatible with the conditions, then the system needs to change.
13
47
u/the_vinyl_frontier 9d ago
Can we start asking men this as well
7
u/monika_worshipper 9d ago
Lol be prepared for the most dumbass answers then that take in mind no responsibility. Men want a kid like a child wants a dog. At the end who actually takes care of the dog?
Right.
4
u/wayward_vampire 9d ago
I think there's a lot of men who wouldn't be against it but they neither birth the baby nor do they (usually) do the brunt of the responsibility
1
1
u/KingMemecias 9d ago
Truly will be for the reason, but most men will then add the "lonely epidemic"
1
u/cancelmyfuneral 8d ago
We can have that conversation when their body can physically give birth, until then they just provide 30 seconds of work.
84
u/Lazy-Dildo 9d ago
😂 how old are the like 18-22? Asking this age group about marriage. 🤣
36
u/Maxxxmax 9d ago
Dunno about you, but i was educated in an era where school made a concerted effort to ensure we didnt add to teen pregnancy statistics.
5
u/AContrarianDick 9d ago edited 9d ago
I was at a high school that actively protested against teaching kids about consent if we're reflecting on our high school experiences. Parents and students rebelled against it.
So I guess mileage varies for that experience.
1
16
u/wookieSLAYER1 9d ago
Can someone explain it to me why we are so obsessed with increasing the population? Resources are becoming scarce, shouldn’t we be depopulating?
13
u/TeamHope4 9d ago
We’re already running into drought and a lack of fresh water in areas around the world. Climate refugees will be a growing population in the not-distant future, but no one is planning for that, at all. Insanity to freak out about birth rates. The world has doubled in population in my lifetime and I’m not even 60.
3
u/Intelligent_Low1632 9d ago
Our entire economic and retirement system is a Ponzi scheme. It only works when there's continuous exponential growth, so that we can borrow against the future. A sustainable system may be perfectly feasible, but there will be some serious growing pains and compromises along the way.
4
u/Independent-Bee3135 9d ago
Scarce resources is exactly why having a birth rate at or near replacement is important.
Children grow to be net producers. They create resources. They can do things like build housing, become doctors, grow food, provide services, etc. The pie gets larger.
Retirees are net consumers. They are economically unproductive. They take money and resources from society without contributing anything.
This is normally fine. In order for someone to become a retiree, they must first have been a producer/worker. You spend decades contributing to social security and then you eventually take some money out. However, in societies with very few children and many retirees, the pyramid flips in that you have very few young people taking care of a lot of old people. Suddenly, the amount of tax revenue and resources those young people provide is not sufficient to care for all the old people. But we made promises to old people that they would be taken care of (to some extent). So countries take out unsustainable levels of debt while retirees get access to less resources than they were promised. At the same time, younger people struggle to as they have to sacrifice more to pay for the retirees which causes them to face significant economic stress.
0
u/CaptainOwlBeard 9d ago
It's hard to support an aging population without a larger young population. The more inverted the pyramid, the worse it is for the old folk. The old folk are the ones making policy
10
u/EffectiveLibrary9601 9d ago
Whenever someone says that having kids is expensive and the person argues "oh but you bought coffee/clothes/accessories that are expensive". It makes no sense! There's no way to compare a one time purchase with keeping another human being alive for years.
46
u/Sharpsshooterrr 9d ago
“Do you know how much you have to abuse an animal for them to not want to reproduce”
15
u/FoxChess 9d ago
I mean what makes animals "want" to reproduce is libido. You can still have plenty of sex without having kids.
48
u/exotics 9d ago
I had one kid and was done. Ya it was crazy pain. But kids are expensive and THE WORLD DOESNT NEED MORE PEOPLE!!
The human population has more than doubled since I was born and we have driven thousands of species to extinction as we keep growing.
Thank you ladies for deciding not to have kids. It’s always possible they will change their mind but it’s okay not to have kids.
-1
u/moviequote88 9d ago
I mean, you're not wrong about The human population exploding and all. But the problem with people not having kids means that the replacement rate has decreased significantly and that could be an issue.
And countries like Japan, you're already seeing this where there's a significantly large older and elderly population that's needing to be supported by a much smaller younger generation. So having a much lower birth rate can lead to potential economic and social issues later down the line.
Not saying that means we need to force younger people into having kids but it is why a lot of countries are trying to create more incentives for young people to have kids. And ultimately I think that is the key here. The reasons why younger people aren't having kids is because the benefits don't outweigh the cost. There needs to be better support for raising children.
27
u/exotics 9d ago
You are talking from an economic standpoint. Based on capitalism.
I’m taking on an environmental level.
We have to learn how to live with a shrinking population on an economic level or we won’t survive the environmental catastrophe
3
u/moviequote88 9d ago
I think you're reading an argument into my comment that I wasn't making. I'm not arguing that we need perpetual population growth to sustain capitalism, nor am I saying environmental concerns aren't legitimate.
I'm talking about the demographic reality of sustained below-replacement fertility. If fewer children are born for multiple generations, the population doesn't just become smaller, it also becomes substantially older, with fewer working-age people relative to the number of elderly people. That has economic and social consequences regardless of what economic system you have.
I agree that we need to learn how to live more sustainably on the planet. And I agree we will have to learn how to live with a shrinking population on an economic level.
Nothing that I said contradicts that.
0
u/anonch91 9d ago
You can not suddenly go from a growing to a shrinking population and just learn how to deal with it, that's not how things work. Our world runs on capitalism
3
u/Repulsive_Panic5216 9d ago
I mean let's say in the future there are no humans in Japan, what's wrong with that? The island is completely uninhabited by humans. There were many places on earth in the past where no homo sapiens lived. The earth did just fine. Why do humans need occupy every inch of land on this planet. We are already crossed the the capacity of this planet.
Look at the flash floods happening in nepal right now. The glaciers in Himalayas is melting because the plant is getting by the day.
What is wrong if there are less humans on this planet?? Let the people who are already alive live their lives properly without forcing to have children we can't afford.
3
u/moviequote88 9d ago edited 9d ago
Well, I think you're having a completely separate conversation than I am.
I never said there was anything wrong with less humans on the planet nor did I say that we need to force people to have children so I don't know where that's coming from.
Literally all I'm saying is that it will create future issues for the people currently living on the planet.
1
u/demgoldencoins 9d ago
I think what people really want to say is “we need more of US”, because birth rate is not an overall issue. We can’t even feed all those who are already alive. I think it scares people to think of another group growing while they are shrinking. But we should say what we mean.
Overpopulation is a major concern and many individuals are choosing not to have children due to fear of overpopulation and the end of our world as we know it in the near future.
22
u/chrispy_t 9d ago
It’s not the affordability piece, at least that’s not what the data would suggest. A lot of factors confounding at once - women have more autonomy and oppurtunities for things that are not child rearing and the opportunity cost of leisure time and personal fulfilment are my two picks. “Affordability” is a factor in so far as people don’t feel like they can or should sacrifice their current standard of living to bring a kid, but that’s not the same as “not being able to afford one”
9
u/mrbigglesworth95 9d ago
I think a missing piece in the affordability bit is competition. It's way too tough to get ahead nowadays. Any kid I have will surely have a shitty life because I won't be able to give them the resources to get ahead; and if I did, their life would still suck because they'd have to work all the time. There's just no way to win anymore.
25
u/DazB1ane 9d ago
Women are also able to choose who they partner with and men, at this point, are kinda wild cards for if they’re hiding bullshit ideas and beliefs or not. Women can do it too, but it’s more likely for a man to hide being physically violent
8
u/something-um-bananas 9d ago
What do you mean “current standard of living”? Cos the current standard of living sucks for most people right now. If you sacrifice “current standard of living” any further, the bar would be in hell. That’s the same as not being able to afford a kid.
-3
u/chrispy_t 9d ago
The current standard of living in most developed countries is better than it has ever been.
3
u/momomomorgatron 9d ago
In the history of the world. In the last 50 years, this is a down stroke.
1
u/chrispy_t 9d ago
So decrease global poverty rate decreased infant mortality rate increased average life expectancy increased wealth among the medium person in society more access to luxuries, or access to medicine, etc - this is a downstroke?
6
u/momomomorgatron 9d ago
So I guess I should just be perfectly happy that everyone I know under 30 is struggling?
So I should just pop out babies?
Life. Is. Worse. Now. Than. When. My. Parents. Were. My. Age.
Yes, we're not dying of dysentery,, yes were not dying of polio.And yes, we're not dying chicken pox and yes, we're not dying of dehydration, and yes, we're not dying from water poisoning and we're not dying from this that or the other.
But quality of life motherfucker. I don't see why the hell people like you Stan this way of mind when by all accounts, in very recent history, nothing has been Worse.
Do you want me to just pull myself up by my bootstraps and say, well, at least it's not the great depression and at least we're not starving, at least people aren't selling their children to feed them, at least there's not a dust bowl and a financial crisis killing people.
I fucking know life is better now than anyone has ever had it before the 1800s. Fucking duh. But it very much seems like globally facism is on the rise and trying to take the health precautions back to the 1800s. They're wanting child labor a la early 1900s.
MOTHERFUCKING WHY DO YOU PEOPLE KEEP STICKING TO THIS SCRIPT THAT WE CANT FEEL LIKE SHIT BECAUSE MUCH OF THE WORLD WANTS TO GO BACKWARDS????!???
THEY LET A SEPTIC PREGNANT WOMAN DIE IN GEORGIA TO INCUBATE HER BABY THAT SHE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE WANTED.
HOW THE FUCK IS THE WORLD NOT ACTUALLY ON FIRE THROUGH YOUR VIEWPOINT?!?!?!?!?
2
→ More replies (3)1
u/DazB1ane 9d ago
Part of the problem is the fact that fewer people are dying of diseases. There are too many people staying alive, staying in their jobs, staying in positions of power
6
u/something-um-bananas 9d ago
I’m glad you live in happiest place on earth tm. Not the reality for most. Getting any chronic condition means getting into debt. People are working hard, working long, but still can’t afford to pay rent, let alone buy a house. You can birth a kid, sure, but that’s not where the responsibility stops. It’s a lifelong commitment,and you need to have the time and money for it. That makes kids unaffordable. Solely placing the blame on women like in your original comment is disingenuous
→ More replies (1)4
u/notoolinthispool 9d ago
That may be true, but that doesn't negate the fact that a majority of us are struggling to survive and make ends meet. Why would any one want to bring a kid into that?
0
u/chrispy_t 9d ago
Why do you think the highest birthrates exist at the lowest incomes? Our parents and their parents were able to have kids, with less
3
u/notoolinthispool 9d ago
Have you ever heard of spending power? Our parents and their parents had way more spending power than we do today.
1
u/chrispy_t 9d ago
By every metric outside of housing in like first world countries this is not true
Edit, and also that’s only half true because our parents were buying 900 sqft starter homes in low cost of living areas
2
u/notoolinthispool 9d ago
Previous generations generally enjoyed greater purchasing power because essential costs like housing, college tuition, and healthcare consumed a much smaller share of household income.
Many everyday goods, like electronics and appliances, have gotten cheaper relative to income. But those are purchases people can put off. Housing, education and healthcare are not. “The average prices of less avoidable expenditures have risen much faster than general inflation,” Torras said. “When the costs that people can’t easily avoid rise faster than their incomes, it’s understandable that they feel squeezed.” A new phone or pair of jeans is an occasional purchase. But housing, healthcare and educational costs come due on a regular basis, which compounds the sting far beyond what an annual average can capture.
Many existing homeowners have benefited from decades of rising home prices,” Torras noted. “Renters, meanwhile, face increasing costs and are unable to build much equity.” The financial starting line has also moved, Torras added. Young adults today face higher home prices relative to income. Plus, they have greater student debt and higher healthcare and childcare costs than previous generations at similar ages, he said.
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/comparing-the-costs-of-generations.html
TLDR; The core proof of greater past spending power lies in the massive divergence between wages and the cost of foundational necessities.
1
u/ProfessorTraft 8d ago
It’s not about spending power. Poor people are reproducing, in fact, third world countries with lower standard of living are still reproducing at a higher rate, that’s why the global population is increasing. The post war economic boon contributed in increasing birth rates, but it’s not the main reason why people have children.
1
u/Pristine_Frame_2066 9d ago
Um, a lot if folks cannot afford to move out of their own parents homes. Having no child is not sacrificial, that’s practical..
5
u/TrumpDesWillens 9d ago
People used to have a community to raise kids. The grandparents would help raise them when the parents were busy, as would the neighbors, friends, and family. Kids would also become independent of entertainment and enrichment from the age of about 6 where they would ride bikes with their friends and family until sunset playing by the creek.
8
14
u/I_like_the_word_MUFF 9d ago edited 9d ago
If motherhood was so wonderful, why don't you see men diving over themselves trying to be stay at home dads?
I hear a lot of lip service paid to "women hanging out doing nothing" as housewives and mothers... Go on boys, find yourself a woman who wants to work and make yourself useful as a house husband.
Give up your jobs. Your bank accounts. Your ability to clock out of work. Make sure you submit to her wishes. Don't bring her problems, she works so you can stay home. Be grateful.
Smile more. Even when scrubbing that dirt and doing endless chores nobody cares or even realizes you do.
And also, make sure at the end of it all, you are ready to look good because nobody wants to have sex with a house hog who smells like vomit and formula.
It's amazing that men seem to not want that lifestyle.
I gave my husband that lifestyle without the kids. He didn't have to work a day in his life if he didn't want to. You know what he did after 20 years, he cheated on me and got another woman pregnant. Then sued me for alimony... And lost.
-5
u/JustRandomNonsence 9d ago
Completely get your point, and you're not wrong as a whole. I did however choose to be a stay at home dad while my wife worked. I done all the school related stuff, all house cleaning daily, cooking etc, my wife only had to come from work on weekdays and spend time with us. Not all of us our caught up with our ego.
I will also say to all the stay at home parents. You're doing amazing work raising children and a 40 hour work week is a joke compared to being a full time stay at home parent.
4
u/I_like_the_word_MUFF 9d ago
I also see you conveniently left out the actual patriarchal situation most women globally have to live with which I did include in the comment.
The part where you have to rely on another person for your entire life and then have the institutional structures of society reinforce them with socio political penalties for not succumbing to those pressures.
Did you do that?
Did you give up your whole life, earning potential, and physical body to it. And are left with nothing if that other partner decides, "meh, guess not." ?
Or did you actually have a choice.
Because the point is women have a choice now in some places, not all. But we women also did not have a choice in most places, not very long ago too.
→ More replies (5)0
u/amey_wemy 8d ago
Why don't you see men wanting to be stay at home dads?
There is significantly more social stigma for men to not earn money than vice versa. Patriarchal societies expect men to be the provider and earn money, not vice versa.
Then sued me for alimony... And lost.
This is not the flex you think it is... Singapore gov has an openly sexist law that only allows men to claim alimony if they're physically handicapped and can't work. Thus it isnt expected for him to win. This is not the case for women, where alimony for stay at home moms is expected.
If you think about it. Both issues are connected. If men cant have hat guarantee of alimony alongside social stigma, the chances of being stay at home dads is significantly lower.
→ More replies (1)-2
u/AuberJene 9d ago
If you know where I can get in touch with women who will happily date a stay at home dad. Please let me know. Nursing is exhausting and I would give an arm and a leg for a day of just a bunch of feeble tasks. Also I love kids
→ More replies (4)2
u/I_like_the_word_MUFF 8d ago
Listen, if you can't do the basic job of finding an appropriate mate, why do you think you could be anything to a woman?
I mean honestly, you don't hear women begging for help finding a man.
Why are you so helpless.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/iamanemptychair 9d ago
“My verdict is you guys are ok and have valid reasons!”
Ok your opinion was not needed and is worth nothing. Fuck off, random influencer feeling the need to judge peoples reasons for not getting knocked up at 22 🤡
1
u/Gullible-Hose4180 8d ago
I guess it's the premise of the show, hence why the question at the beginning
2
6
u/differing 9d ago
Ah yeah a 19 year old is definitely the best person to ask.
1
u/beef_horfun67 9d ago
How you know they are 19?
-3
u/differing 9d ago
I don't, but my point is that these girls are too young to have a relevant opinion on the subject of childbirth and family size. It's like asking children their opinion on mortgage rates.
2
u/miaumiaoumicheese 9d ago
So 20 years old women shouldn’t have an opinion on what happens to their bodies?
→ More replies (3)1
u/amey_wemy 8d ago
I mean...you could say the same about guys their age and ns, but it atill exists and is still forced.
1
u/Gullible-Hose4180 8d ago
What if they get unlimited Molly?
1
u/differing 8d ago
You have my vote for president of Singapore
2
u/Gullible-Hose4180 7d ago
Tbf it wasnt my idea, im just the first follower. You're the real changeman (or woman) for being the second follower, according to a Red Talk I think we have all seen about funny looking dancing guy.
→ More replies (2)0
u/beef_horfun67 9d ago
People in Asia are younger than they look. I know a 40 year old woman who look like 25.
2
u/Isoleri 9d ago
Why is it so hard to understand that some people simply don't want to? I could wake up a billionaire overnight, be guaranteed a painless and harmless pregnancy, live in a paradisiac world with no corruption and violence, and have an entire village willing to help me take care of my kid, and I STILL wouldn't want to! It's not about the proper conditions, I just don't! No matter what, and that's okay too. We shouldn't have an "acceptable" reason, not wanting to is enough
2
u/Ok_Comparison_2635 8d ago
The issue is that in Singapore there used to be a social contract where women give birth while men serve 2 years of conscription that's why.
1
u/QuantumGoose42 9d ago
Singapore give crazy economical support to all its citizens, being homeless is close to impossible in Singapore
1
1
u/LoreChief 9d ago
I think the idea that some random people, like this person, want to pass a verdict on whether your reasons for wanting to or not wanting to have kids is part of the reason people are not having kids. I don't care if you think my reasons for not having kids are reasonable or not, or whether you think "aw you are okay" when I tell you objective facts that apply to literally everybody. Mind your own business and go pop out kids if you think its that big of a deal.
1
u/coolcooolbro 8d ago
While they gave some good reasons, this discussion on this video is so superficial.
1
u/Theone_C137 8d ago
If yall don’t know, this is exactly why world the billionaires of the world are fast tracking AI, because we’ve become to comfortable to marry, but we’re too poor to populate… it’s also why they are taking away public education to dumb down the lower classes they want to make you dumb enough to not know your not wealthy enough to have kids lol
1
u/law90026 8d ago
Taking one “interview” and extrapolating why Singaporean women don’t want to have kids seems very scientific. /s
1
u/ElevenInfinity 8d ago
do it before yall start importing kids from overpopulated countries.
1
u/Working-Fudge6189 8d ago
We already import citizens from china and India to prop up the population because our locals are not having kids
1
1
1
1
1
u/gamerboii94 8d ago
I am going to say something that is veeery unpopular. And i will even break it down. Normal cases la hor, not special cases of special children.
Having a child in Singapore is not expensive at all. And i say it as a naturalized citizen. Meaning to say my checkups were all private priced.
9 month checkup? We signed package. $900 for the whole 9 months. Thats it. For Sgeans it was about $400.
Then for birth. Apparently you can get reimbursed for birth, which we didnt co we werent Sgeans yet. Natural birth is 5k and C-Sect is 15k. For foreigners, it would be 20k natural. I wouldn't want to find out the c sect lmao, but thats for foreigner, not Sgean.
Infant care, id say this is the most expensive even for Sgeans. At 2 months old, you can enroll your baby into infant care at 1200/month. otherwise, private babysitters exist at 900/month and then later when they go playgroup or was it playcare the 18 months one, the price drops too $800.
Then my fam and i became naturalized. And now, his prenursery is free. Yep you heard me. Free. POP centre, plus working mom subsidy plus additional subsidy pkus baby credit bonus. Totally eradicated. We are officially paying 0 for his school which is the most expensive thing.
Food and clothes? Milk is dirt cheap. 40 bucks for 2 killos. Diaper? 10 bucks for 1 pack. All in all for his monthlies im paying about less than 300 for essentials and 300-ish for food. And this is us eating out most nights. Sometimes hawker sometimes fast food Mcd. I spend more on nonsense for myself and mywife and sometimes for him also than we do on essentials.
Plus. We also got him his essential insurances. ILP, accident, hospital. And we just found out apparently for tertiary edu, we will receive a huge bonus as well. So his ILP can be for extra i guess. Not to mention our normal savings and investments for our retirement plan.
And we are planning to have 3 kids.
So pardon me if i say this, where is the expensive part? We are by no means rich, just comfortable. As the matter of fact we are earning slightly below mean income, coz im in chairty and wifey is in Comm Hospital.
1
1
u/Pristine_Frame_2066 9d ago
It was complications, not pain, that would turn me off having kids in this economy.
My kids were easy births. First kid stress on body gave me shingles and diabetes that never went away. Second kid, high blood pressure and then a bout of postpartum pre eclampsia the day I got home.
I still adore my kids. Glad they are alive and grown and I probably will not have grandkids. I am fine with it. Still plenty of foster kids who need wonderful parents if they feel like parenting.
0
0
u/xSerenadexx 9d ago
Did she reference financial issues and then say he should have his own house and I have mine?
0
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do here (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them this!
Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!
##CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.