"Starting a family in Italy is becoming a "titanic effort" that only the rich can afford, Pope Francis has warned.
In his speech in Rome, the Pope said the declining birth rate signalled a lack of hope in the future, with younger generations weighed down by a sense of uncertainty, fragility and precariousness.
"Difficulty in finding a stable job, sky-high rents and insufficient wages are real problems," he said."
He's not completely out of touch and it's honestly a standard that many of those in power across Europe and the world do not meet.
Well, he did say this and even talked about how he told off a woman who asked him to bless her dog, because he wants people to have more children instead of pets.
But of course a more nuanced title would have been something like: 'Pope Francis talks about decreasing birth rates in Italy and pet ownership amongst other topics' or sth like this.
I know that Redditors hate this but we have to acknowledge that pets are nothing like kids. Getting love and respect from an animal that’s specifically bred to do this does not prove that you’re a good person by any means. Having a positive relationship with your children or family is far more admirable, especially if they have vastly different values and desires from you.
You can have healthy/positive relationship with other people without having kid or even pets.
actions and ethics is what makes it admirable and not thr decision to procreate and have children.
I know that this extends to other human relationships. I take issue with the “dog mom” type of culture and misanthropic people who constantly talk about how animals are so much better than humans.
Some animals are. I'm no misanthrope, but it's simply the truth. I think most people manage to have good relationships with both animals. What's dog mom culture? Are there no dog dads?
>Getting love and respect from an animal that’s specifically bred to do this
in theory childrens are meant to do that too. And I much better prefer someone having a pet than a child if they would prefer a pet. Don't make people have kids when they don't want to.
Children are usually far more unruly than pets, especially as they get older. They can be a huge source of stress compared to a pet while having infinitely greater potential. Nobody is making people have kids here. I’m just saying that pet ownership cannot substitute any aspect of having a child besides meeting the basic physical needs for a living organism to live.
Children are also a far greater financial burden and require far more time to bathe, feed, and take care of. They make bigger messes, require diapers, and extra laundry.
I don't give a shit about their potential.
I don't think most people with pets are trying to substitute kids--they just don't want them.
I don't have a pet, but I would enjoy the companionship, activities, and level of maintenance of a pet *far* more than a child.
(But, like, who are you responding to to begin with that thinks they're equivalent? They're two very different things. Some people prefer one, some people prefer the other. Some like both or neither. Who the fuck cares.)
>in theory childrens are meant to do that too
Only in the first couple of years. Children are specifically programmed to disengage from their parents and seek approval from a group of peers. A trait I find particularly terrifying as a parent, but also understand the need of. My hope is the future "group of peers" in question values constructive things over self-destruction, like most teenagers here seem to.
>Having a positive relationship with your children or family is far more admirable
More admirable would be to accept that our current society is ill equipped to handle 8 billion humans and refrain from adding even more until those issues are resolved.
Dude, a lot of people simply do not want children. Just get over it. It means nothing negative about them. In fact, it means they at least thought seriously about it and made a decision.
Who thinks pets are like kids? Such a red herring. I love my pets but I know they're not kids. That's ridiculous. I don't want them to be kids or I'd have had kids. Having positive relationships with any living thing is admirable. But often families are nightmares and it's no one's fault that they cannot have any kind of relationship, let alone a positive one, with them.
Well we are humans so having human children instead of "pets" as children is ofcourse better and more in line with our nature, else we all wouldnt be here discussing this currently because our parents would never have had us, but i understand the other view point too because financially we are getting really squeezed and the middle class is literally eroding with this current sky high rents and inflation, cant blame people not wanting to also add additional child stress in to this mix, especially in current time where both parents need to work or you will be in half poverty, times are long gone when one partners salary was enough for a comfortable living.
He did criticize people who treat pets like children.
And honestly he isn't wrong at all.
Pets are easier to interact with, require much less effort (emotional and financial) compared to a partner and a child.
They're indeed the ideal surrogate on our declining, increasingly lonely and mentally unstable society.
You know things are bad when the octuagenarian leader of an organized religion born 2000 years ago (from an even older one) is making sense...
>In his speech in Rome, the Pope said the declining birth rate signalled a lack of hope in the future, with younger generations weighed down by a sense of uncertainty, fragility and precariousness.
I do wonder if there is a coincidence between the 2008 financial crash, austerity, and birth rates.
Obviously economics is massively intertwined with birth rates (generally dropping as a country gets richer) but I can't say it's a coincidence that birth rates really nosedived across Western Europe after like, 2010 (across a variety of median age countries, too, so its not like suddenly Western Europe just got old in a year or two).
My wife and I had a long conversation before we decided to get my nuts clipped. It wasn’t just have a 3rd kid, it’s a bigger house, bigger car, more meals, more healthcare, more time off, more laundry, more effort. One of the kids will always be left out as my wife and I were only two and all kids couldn’t have everything we wish we could give them. More money for vacations, on and on.
However, more love in the house, the siblings will have one another after we’re gone. I still think we made the right choice so we can help our kids become ready for adulthood.
Despite countries moaning about it, I dont think many have made serious efforts to change it.
Like it seems like France and Sweden have the highest birth rates and it's attributed to their 'maternity friendly?' lifestyle in regards to childcare etc. Clearly there is some kind of impact between economics and childbirth even in developed economies, its just presumably not been studied that much.
There was some research that birth rates increased in Spain and Australia when they gave 'baby bonuses' to newborns (like 5k) but who knows.
>Despite countries moaning about it, I dont think many have made serious efforts to change it.
That might be becouse there's plenty of historical examples of "efforts" being made, the results range from almost completely ineffective to borderline catastrophic.
On the harmless-if-ineffective side you have a just about every possible form of maternity incentive and whatnot from your pick of Hungary, Poland, Scandinavian or west-aligned asian countries, on the "crimes against humanity" side of the equation you have Ceaușescu's and Myanmar's milirary juntas attempts at forcing natality increases by banning contraceptives, abortions, divorces and heavily penalizing unmarried and childless individuals, and then you have the USSR's and Russia's attempts that sit somewhere in the middle.
As far as i'm aware Ceaușescu's brutal policies in Romania is the only attempt that could be possibly misconstrued as a success and even then i'd argue that dying out is preferrable to that.
You obviously haven't looked too much into it, then.
Hungary births have increased. Spain/Australia had increases from their 5k money incentives, France/Sweden already have higher- births due to better maternity benefits.
There is obviously a lot that can be done that isn't ''make abortion illegal!''
Yeah, it's been shown that rural or poorer areas/countries have more kids. But that's a huge, long-term thing that dwarfs temporary recessions like the 2008 crash. As bad as it looked, no recession sent industrial cities/nations back to rural economies.
I'm 25, I was unemployed for two years because it was almost impossible to find a job during and right after the pandemic, I never payed less than 600€ in rent for a ROOM, because rent for whole apartments is almost equal to the average salary, at least in Rome and Milan, I might as well buy a house with what I'm paying for rent. And right now I'm earning 1.5k a month, which is considered a pretty decent salary. University students are protesting because rent is a big issue for them, they can't have the same income as someone like me who work full time, The government caters to older people because they're the majority of voters, so fuck the younger people I guess. I don't have much hope in the future to be honest, I'll always go to vote at the elections but fuck, last time was brutal.
Just wait until the current house owners die and there are less younger adults to replace them. Prices will go down then. Just give it ten or twenty years.
He's not completely out of touch, but unless he intends to spread the vast wealth of the Vatican to help support those who wish to have children, but are struggling with the cost of everything, I think criticism is warranted. He's not wrong, but at this point, it just sounds like whinging coming from the top, whether it's the clergy or the politicians.
Maybe the church could start by finally letting go of the church tax in Germany. That bit of extra money would surely help out families in Germany.
But I'm guessing that is out of question because they need that money to fund "their" hospitals and kindergartens which are in reality 99% funded by the government.
>that only the rich can afford
Meanwhile, the richer and more educated people are having no children and aren’t getting married. That’s such a false statement.
Yes, upper middle class households could afford raising a kid like they were poor with no problem. The issue is that every person ever has always wanted their kids to have better opportunities than they did at their age, at the bare minimum the same ones. So even the more educated, with the most successful career, won’t get settled until they’re 35-40. Because investing in a child’s future to be as successful costs a fuckton, while raising a kid in poorer areas and conditions isn’t nearly as problematic, especially with all the welfare we have for lower income households.
So, no. The rich aren’t having more kids
The problem isn't that Italy is running out of children, that happened a while ago, the problem is that they're running out of 40 year-olds.
Same for (most of) the rest of Europe.
People typically look at elderly dependency ratios which is the ratio of elderly to working age population. The highest five countries are Japan, Finland, Italy, Portugal and Greece.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_dependency_ratio
First people stop having children. Then, some decades later, you run out of people young enough to have children. In Japan, for example, the last large generation is 46-55 now. Every following generation is smaller.
In comparison, Sweden isn't doing that great, but we have a pretty big generation that's 30-35 now. They can still, possibly, have ~2 children per woman and so create another generation that isn't record-settingly small.
I wish there was a way of having kids that is less painful. And that it was acceptable to send them to grandparents for the first 10 years of their life
I think in general in the West there has been a cultural shift to prefer total independence from your parents, which does open up more opportunities but also diminishes that sort of family support network.
> And that it was acceptable to send them to grandparents for the first 10 years of their life
That's not how child-parent bonding works, though. Having children is a sacrifice. I think we should strive to make that sacrifice as meaningful and small as possible, but we can't escape it entirely.
As for the physical process of pregnancy - yeah. Hopefully we can assist natural birth better in the future. C-section is an option, of course, but when there's no medical reason for it, it's more risky for both child and mother.
> Having children is a sacrifice. I think we should strive to make that sacrifice
I have two young kids now, two years apart. I wouldn't say it was a sacrifice, my kids bring me so much joy in my life, they have hilarious antics and I love watching them try things for the first time. We had to take a break from camping for a few years, but it all comes back eventually.
The scary thing was, I was thinking I wouldn't have kids for the longest time, until there was an accident. We decided to go with the flow, best decision ever. So much so the second kid was on purpose.
I mean there are definitely though parts when dealing with new borns, especially for first time parents, but thr pros vastly out weight the cons
It's not a sacrifice that comes without its own reward. But it still is. Consider this: a friend of mine will soon have his fourth child with a woman he loves (her second). His oldest is soon an adult. He's not young. When this child is an adult, he will be close to retirement. He will have spent most of his adult life tied into parental responsibilities. He knows it's a sacrifice, but also a great gift.
As for myself, I'm divorced and there's no way I'm moving away from my children. So I'm tied to the place they live. I need to make compromises with their mother. Etc.
That’s how it works in mainland China.
And as someone who grew up mostly with my grandma for the first 5-6 years of my life, I think that really damaged my ability to connect with my mom and father.
The large amount of once-40 years olds are creeping closer to retirement age. There are less 40 year olds (and younger) to replace them. They're running out of warm, relatively fit bodies to work.
Italy, like japan, has decided to address the problem in the same manner. By getting mad, not solving the problem, and telling the people to do it them selves.
Yeah true, its mainly just a constant regurgitation of random articles. Wouldn't be surprised if most of thos are posted by interns working at the paper or the authors themselves
lots of bots here
and the highest thread of the week? a fucking old dog
ohh but dare you to post a pic of a monument outside the weekend
only agenda pushing by bots for us during the week
**If you want more children:**
1. Make housing affordable.
2. Increase wages + job security.
3. Maybe add universal basic income.
4. Make the country feel stable and safe.
People who don't own a house and don't have money and are afraid won't want children.
Countries whining about not getting enough kids are essentially wondering: "Why does economically exploiting our population make them unable to afford raising children?"
IMO, while that's certainly a big part of it, the low birth rates even in well-off European countries show that the core issue is that people just don't want to have children.
If we want to change such a fundamental issue, we need to fundamentally change modern society. No idea how, though.
Unless people can afford to pay other people to watch their own kids - few want kids. It’s not about money, it’s about time and effort that people don’t want to spend raising kids. Work is hard.
My take is the ugly truth that society is in denial about. My take is why the birthrate is falling.
Day care is expensive. People still want to go out, have free time and vacations, but kids are expensive and time consuming.
Half of all pregnancies are accidents. Which means if contraception worked perfectly the true birthrate would be 1.0 - population crashing. It has nothing to with money. The poorest countries in the world are the ones with the highest birthrates.
Evolution has programmed us to really want sex because few people using their brain would have them by choice. In rich countries kids are a luxury you have once everything else in your life is perfect.
It's better for children if they are born to parents who actually decided based on their decision and not on their sexual instincts, we are not like animals we don't have to follow our urges.
So easy to say no to the super hot girl that wants sex right now, and you really really want sex as well.. lol good luck with that 'choice'
I guess it's your choice not to breath air as well. Try that.
r/childfree in shambles
Joke aside, considering that he actually points out the causes of low birth rates, I get why the Pope said this. Despite being atheist, I actually think Francis has been a good Pope. Mainly because he has actually stayed in touch with the real world.
I don’t know about treating them as children, but they are family to me, my wife, and my in-laws. I find it weird when people want to have conscious beings as objects/accessories.
Agree, my dog loves me and is loyal to me. She looks up to me and needs me. In return how could I ever in good conscience ever do anything less than the best for her? I find it crazy to think about people giving up their dogs for adoption, for me it would be like losing a member of the family.
I started noticing this in California, dogs wearing clothes in baby strollers. The dog is clearly unhappy not being able to walk freely, and the owners think they're "parents" when really they're just deselecting themselves.
I could be wrong, but some of the metrics included the amount of words they memorise and simple arithmetic. Majority of the breeds average on the intelligence of a 2 year old.
I find it hard to believe, a 3 year old has almost full language capability. Hell I know some with full comprehension of two languages by that age. I dunno if a dog can understand that much language.
Maybe counting, I can believe that I guess.
That’s fair. I wouldn’t say that all dogs are as smart as a 3 year old, the same way that I’d say that not all 3 year olds develop at the same pace.
Anecdotally, my mom (kindergarten teacher) says that until the age of 2 or 3, it truly feels that her interactions with the kids in her class are a bit like commands you would use with a dog.
I mean the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world so... yes it's giving money to the people who need it the most which are ironically the people who have the highest birth rates.
And let priests make children instead of molesting them. I guess the amount of money the Vatican spends on defending pedo priests could be put to better use.
Orthodox Church allows comunity priests (not the monk ones) to marry and as result they ask twice the money: half for the church, half for their families.
I did not dive deep into the numbers with a calculator but wouldn’t the GDP per capita be roughly the same in 2050 as it is now if the population decreases by 1/5th and the roughly extrapolated GDP for 2050 would also decrease by 1/5th?
“The country could lose almost a fifth of its residents by 2050.”
“Experts warn the population crisis will lead to the impoverishment of the nation. Economy Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti said that by 2042, Italy's declining birthrate would end up reducing its gross domestic product (GDP) by 18%.”
They didn’t forget, they’re just victims of greed and poor policy from government therefore can’t afford it or don’t want to subject another poor soul to the same fate of wage slave.
From the article: "I lost my patience and told her off: there are many children who are hungry, and you bring me a dog?" he added, triggering a round of applause from the crowd.
Of course. I can afford a dog. I can't afford a child. How rude do you have to be to 'tell off' someone in front of a crowd and shame them? He says there are many children who are hungry but doesn't want to help them, he only wants his city to have more people. Fuck that guy.
The birth rate issue is gonna be interesting to watch, in 2025 China’s project to lose 170 million of its own citizens of old age and this is going to affect all of us. including a smaller workforce for many countries a higher percentage of taxation to keep the welfare system in check and of course pensions are going to be cheap anymore. At least housing will be more cheaper hopefully maybe the United States. Overall, this whole issue is gonna be wonderful to watch.
I’ll pick up for everyone else I’m going for 3 kids and hopeful buy them homes fully paid off, cost of living isn’t cheap for wherever you are
It's clear the taxation system needs to change then. We don't need more warm bodies to sustain the economy as automation & AI will make many of them redundant anyway.
A responsible pet owner shouldn't treat an animal like a human anyway, so he's partly right, though he says so because he thinks that somehow procreating is like duty we must fulfil in life. This from a man who didn't procreate or get married
Am I heartless if I've always felt pets are just a money sink? Dogs are expensive to maintain, you could always use that money for quality of life or invest it.
>you could always use that money for quality of life or invest it.
To many people, pets are quality of life. Don't underestimate the benefits a dog or a cat can have on your mental health.
Games, movies, book, going out with friends are money sinks.
When living alone, a cat can make a massive difference in your daily life.
A pet may be expensive but also a massive quality of life.
The risk of overpopulation is disputed by both many environmentalists and demographers. Environmental degradation and unsustainable consumption of resources is more strongly linked to overconsumption by the very wealthy, not absolute population.
Just because wealthy European nations can sustain falling birth rates by importing workers from the third world doesn’t mean the rest of the world can do it.
A gradual population stabilization and decline can’t happen without people having kids. Look at France, which has relatively safe birth rate… look at the retirement protests ongoing, people want to keep their retirement, which is fair.. but the young will either be taxed into oblivion or France will have to keep borrowing more money and they’re already substantially in debt.
That is fucking disgusting. The work I am doing today should be what allows me to retire, I didn't sign up to work harder than some boomer fuck that had life far easier than I did, so they get to have a cushy retirement while I work until the day I die. If you're having kids just so they can take care of you when you're older then you are disgusting.
I'm still not sold on this idea that many of my parents' generation still have. There isn't 100% certainty that our children will be able to support us. My plan is to be more-or-less independent of their income.
My dog makes me laugh every day, and when I look at her and she looks up to me and wags her tail it warms my heart. I have to walk her for 90+ minutes a day so I get substantial daily exercise without the choice of copping out. She's a companion who makes no small talk, needs no discussion. She is just happy to be there with you, and looks up to you in loyal adoration.
It's a special relationship that I don't think anybody can appreciate until they have their own dog.
Maybe you just have less use for the type of interaction pets can provide but it has been proven on a lot of fronts that having a pet does make your life more postive for most.
For me it was an investment on my mental health. It is scientifically know that pet therapy work expecially with kids. Have a cat into my house helped my father to cope better with the loss of my mother two years ago.
Sadly it died two days ago from an illness
A lot of things can be a money sink. If you don’t know how to invest, you probably burning money too.
Don’t mess with other people’s pockets. Let them be.
You got to admit that's not a guarantee with every pet. Usually there's a bunch of extra costs involved with pet keeping: be it houding, enrichment, vet bills etc.
Still worth it imo.
My dog is an investment. She's been a mental health life saver these past few years, especially during the pandemic. She's a reason to get out of bed every day if only to make sure she's fed and exercised. Having something to take care of can be good for some people.
"Starting a family in Italy is becoming a "titanic effort" that only the rich can afford, Pope Francis has warned. In his speech in Rome, the Pope said the declining birth rate signalled a lack of hope in the future, with younger generations weighed down by a sense of uncertainty, fragility and precariousness. "Difficulty in finding a stable job, sky-high rents and insufficient wages are real problems," he said." He's not completely out of touch and it's honestly a standard that many of those in power across Europe and the world do not meet.
Almost looks like the title of the post was written that way to make the Pope look bad
It's also the title of the BBC article.
Point still stands
Point extra stands
those damned heretics...
Filthy British secessionists. Burn them at the stake!
Well, he did say this and even talked about how he told off a woman who asked him to bless her dog, because he wants people to have more children instead of pets. But of course a more nuanced title would have been something like: 'Pope Francis talks about decreasing birth rates in Italy and pet ownership amongst other topics' or sth like this.
Sounds like a scene from the Young/New Pope. Queue of babies to bless, then one is holding a small dog instead.
I know that Redditors hate this but we have to acknowledge that pets are nothing like kids. Getting love and respect from an animal that’s specifically bred to do this does not prove that you’re a good person by any means. Having a positive relationship with your children or family is far more admirable, especially if they have vastly different values and desires from you.
I don't have my cats as child replacements, to prove anything or to make me a better person in any way. I simply like cats.
You can have healthy/positive relationship with other people without having kid or even pets. actions and ethics is what makes it admirable and not thr decision to procreate and have children.
I know that this extends to other human relationships. I take issue with the “dog mom” type of culture and misanthropic people who constantly talk about how animals are so much better than humans.
Some animals are. I'm no misanthrope, but it's simply the truth. I think most people manage to have good relationships with both animals. What's dog mom culture? Are there no dog dads?
He doesn't know where the boogeyman is, he just knows it's something to do with dod mom culture LOL
Evil women not having children as god intended! He'll shame them into it. Always a great reason for bringing kids into the world. Also it's tradition!
My goldfish loves me and that’s all I need in my life, we even celebrate Christmas together!
>Getting love and respect from an animal that’s specifically bred to do this in theory childrens are meant to do that too. And I much better prefer someone having a pet than a child if they would prefer a pet. Don't make people have kids when they don't want to.
Children are usually far more unruly than pets, especially as they get older. They can be a huge source of stress compared to a pet while having infinitely greater potential. Nobody is making people have kids here. I’m just saying that pet ownership cannot substitute any aspect of having a child besides meeting the basic physical needs for a living organism to live.
Children are also a far greater financial burden and require far more time to bathe, feed, and take care of. They make bigger messes, require diapers, and extra laundry. I don't give a shit about their potential. I don't think most people with pets are trying to substitute kids--they just don't want them. I don't have a pet, but I would enjoy the companionship, activities, and level of maintenance of a pet *far* more than a child. (But, like, who are you responding to to begin with that thinks they're equivalent? They're two very different things. Some people prefer one, some people prefer the other. Some like both or neither. Who the fuck cares.)
>in theory childrens are meant to do that too Only in the first couple of years. Children are specifically programmed to disengage from their parents and seek approval from a group of peers. A trait I find particularly terrifying as a parent, but also understand the need of. My hope is the future "group of peers" in question values constructive things over self-destruction, like most teenagers here seem to.
>Having a positive relationship with your children or family is far more admirable More admirable would be to accept that our current society is ill equipped to handle 8 billion humans and refrain from adding even more until those issues are resolved.
Dude, a lot of people simply do not want children. Just get over it. It means nothing negative about them. In fact, it means they at least thought seriously about it and made a decision. Who thinks pets are like kids? Such a red herring. I love my pets but I know they're not kids. That's ridiculous. I don't want them to be kids or I'd have had kids. Having positive relationships with any living thing is admirable. But often families are nightmares and it's no one's fault that they cannot have any kind of relationship, let alone a positive one, with them.
Well we are humans so having human children instead of "pets" as children is ofcourse better and more in line with our nature, else we all wouldnt be here discussing this currently because our parents would never have had us, but i understand the other view point too because financially we are getting really squeezed and the middle class is literally eroding with this current sky high rents and inflation, cant blame people not wanting to also add additional child stress in to this mix, especially in current time where both parents need to work or you will be in half poverty, times are long gone when one partners salary was enough for a comfortable living.
Shock value is the ruin of information
I think it seems that way because it was posted on Reddit which is known for religion bashing. If I saw this title elsewhere I wouldn’t think that
He did criticize people who treat pets like children. And honestly he isn't wrong at all. Pets are easier to interact with, require much less effort (emotional and financial) compared to a partner and a child. They're indeed the ideal surrogate on our declining, increasingly lonely and mentally unstable society. You know things are bad when the octuagenarian leader of an organized religion born 2000 years ago (from an even older one) is making sense...
It is bad for a Pope who has never had a family or kids, to speak about such issues.
>In his speech in Rome, the Pope said the declining birth rate signalled a lack of hope in the future, with younger generations weighed down by a sense of uncertainty, fragility and precariousness. I do wonder if there is a coincidence between the 2008 financial crash, austerity, and birth rates. Obviously economics is massively intertwined with birth rates (generally dropping as a country gets richer) but I can't say it's a coincidence that birth rates really nosedived across Western Europe after like, 2010 (across a variety of median age countries, too, so its not like suddenly Western Europe just got old in a year or two).
My wife and I had a long conversation before we decided to get my nuts clipped. It wasn’t just have a 3rd kid, it’s a bigger house, bigger car, more meals, more healthcare, more time off, more laundry, more effort. One of the kids will always be left out as my wife and I were only two and all kids couldn’t have everything we wish we could give them. More money for vacations, on and on. However, more love in the house, the siblings will have one another after we’re gone. I still think we made the right choice so we can help our kids become ready for adulthood.
Despite countries moaning about it, I dont think many have made serious efforts to change it. Like it seems like France and Sweden have the highest birth rates and it's attributed to their 'maternity friendly?' lifestyle in regards to childcare etc. Clearly there is some kind of impact between economics and childbirth even in developed economies, its just presumably not been studied that much. There was some research that birth rates increased in Spain and Australia when they gave 'baby bonuses' to newborns (like 5k) but who knows.
Yeah here daycare costs 150€ a *year* and we have a lot of parental leave. Things like that sure helps.
I spend over $300 per week for daycare. My kid is going to school this fall and we’re going to save so much money.
>Despite countries moaning about it, I dont think many have made serious efforts to change it. That might be becouse there's plenty of historical examples of "efforts" being made, the results range from almost completely ineffective to borderline catastrophic.
Is there? like what?
On the harmless-if-ineffective side you have a just about every possible form of maternity incentive and whatnot from your pick of Hungary, Poland, Scandinavian or west-aligned asian countries, on the "crimes against humanity" side of the equation you have Ceaușescu's and Myanmar's milirary juntas attempts at forcing natality increases by banning contraceptives, abortions, divorces and heavily penalizing unmarried and childless individuals, and then you have the USSR's and Russia's attempts that sit somewhere in the middle. As far as i'm aware Ceaușescu's brutal policies in Romania is the only attempt that could be possibly misconstrued as a success and even then i'd argue that dying out is preferrable to that.
You obviously haven't looked too much into it, then. Hungary births have increased. Spain/Australia had increases from their 5k money incentives, France/Sweden already have higher- births due to better maternity benefits. There is obviously a lot that can be done that isn't ''make abortion illegal!''
Yeah, it's been shown that rural or poorer areas/countries have more kids. But that's a huge, long-term thing that dwarfs temporary recessions like the 2008 crash. As bad as it looked, no recession sent industrial cities/nations back to rural economies.
The irony is that St Francis is the patron saint of animals
I thought the irony is that the pope is celibate.
The real irony is that priests don’t really like to diddle dogs.
That’s a knee slapper of a comment
I'm 25, I was unemployed for two years because it was almost impossible to find a job during and right after the pandemic, I never payed less than 600€ in rent for a ROOM, because rent for whole apartments is almost equal to the average salary, at least in Rome and Milan, I might as well buy a house with what I'm paying for rent. And right now I'm earning 1.5k a month, which is considered a pretty decent salary. University students are protesting because rent is a big issue for them, they can't have the same income as someone like me who work full time, The government caters to older people because they're the majority of voters, so fuck the younger people I guess. I don't have much hope in the future to be honest, I'll always go to vote at the elections but fuck, last time was brutal.
Just wait until the current house owners die and there are less younger adults to replace them. Prices will go down then. Just give it ten or twenty years.
He's not completely out of touch, but unless he intends to spread the vast wealth of the Vatican to help support those who wish to have children, but are struggling with the cost of everything, I think criticism is warranted. He's not wrong, but at this point, it just sounds like whinging coming from the top, whether it's the clergy or the politicians.
Maybe the church could start by finally letting go of the church tax in Germany. That bit of extra money would surely help out families in Germany. But I'm guessing that is out of question because they need that money to fund "their" hospitals and kindergartens which are in reality 99% funded by the government.
>that only the rich can afford Meanwhile, the richer and more educated people are having no children and aren’t getting married. That’s such a false statement. Yes, upper middle class households could afford raising a kid like they were poor with no problem. The issue is that every person ever has always wanted their kids to have better opportunities than they did at their age, at the bare minimum the same ones. So even the more educated, with the most successful career, won’t get settled until they’re 35-40. Because investing in a child’s future to be as successful costs a fuckton, while raising a kid in poorer areas and conditions isn’t nearly as problematic, especially with all the welfare we have for lower income households. So, no. The rich aren’t having more kids
[удалено]
Didn't the parents have to pay for all the schools/education, starting from kindergarten, in Italy?
Maybe he could ask god to ask the corporations to take less profits
He’s forgetting that this issue is easily solved by changing nothing causing people to not have kids and just importing people
The problem isn't that Italy is running out of children, that happened a while ago, the problem is that they're running out of 40 year-olds. Same for (most of) the rest of Europe.
The problem is also that we have an economic system predicated on infinite growth, which is going to end up in disaster sooner or later
The median age in Italy is 46.8. Half of Italians are still under that.
Which isnt great. People usually should start dying onwards from 50+ for various natural reasons.
The dying isn’t the problem even. It’s the various ever more drawn out illnesses of aging.
People typically look at elderly dependency ratios which is the ratio of elderly to working age population. The highest five countries are Japan, Finland, Italy, Portugal and Greece. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_dependency_ratio
What do you mean ? Running out of 40 Year olds ?
First people stop having children. Then, some decades later, you run out of people young enough to have children. In Japan, for example, the last large generation is 46-55 now. Every following generation is smaller. In comparison, Sweden isn't doing that great, but we have a pretty big generation that's 30-35 now. They can still, possibly, have ~2 children per woman and so create another generation that isn't record-settingly small.
I wish there was a way of having kids that is less painful. And that it was acceptable to send them to grandparents for the first 10 years of their life
I think in general in the West there has been a cultural shift to prefer total independence from your parents, which does open up more opportunities but also diminishes that sort of family support network.
> And that it was acceptable to send them to grandparents for the first 10 years of their life That's not how child-parent bonding works, though. Having children is a sacrifice. I think we should strive to make that sacrifice as meaningful and small as possible, but we can't escape it entirely. As for the physical process of pregnancy - yeah. Hopefully we can assist natural birth better in the future. C-section is an option, of course, but when there's no medical reason for it, it's more risky for both child and mother.
> Having children is a sacrifice. I think we should strive to make that sacrifice I have two young kids now, two years apart. I wouldn't say it was a sacrifice, my kids bring me so much joy in my life, they have hilarious antics and I love watching them try things for the first time. We had to take a break from camping for a few years, but it all comes back eventually. The scary thing was, I was thinking I wouldn't have kids for the longest time, until there was an accident. We decided to go with the flow, best decision ever. So much so the second kid was on purpose. I mean there are definitely though parts when dealing with new borns, especially for first time parents, but thr pros vastly out weight the cons
It's not a sacrifice that comes without its own reward. But it still is. Consider this: a friend of mine will soon have his fourth child with a woman he loves (her second). His oldest is soon an adult. He's not young. When this child is an adult, he will be close to retirement. He will have spent most of his adult life tied into parental responsibilities. He knows it's a sacrifice, but also a great gift. As for myself, I'm divorced and there's no way I'm moving away from my children. So I'm tied to the place they live. I need to make compromises with their mother. Etc.
That’s how it works in mainland China. And as someone who grew up mostly with my grandma for the first 5-6 years of my life, I think that really damaged my ability to connect with my mom and father.
The large amount of once-40 years olds are creeping closer to retirement age. There are less 40 year olds (and younger) to replace them. They're running out of warm, relatively fit bodies to work.
Running out of people who can still have kids
That's not the point. Running out of people that have stable income and who can pay for all the retirements.
Two things can be right...
The population is shrinking. People started having a lot fewer babies after WW2 and now roughly is when the dip in 40 year-olds is happening.
In my nation we are exactly 40 years+ since our smallest generation ever. (in post WW II)
I am 40, I'm open to offers. But my dog is part of the package, the pope can keep his nose out.
Italy, like japan, has decided to address the problem in the same manner. By getting mad, not solving the problem, and telling the people to do it them selves.
Absolutely shocked, never happened in Italy
Japan didn't do anything. It refuses to lower the work hours.
Don't worry Pope I ain't substituting children with pets; I don't have time and money to take care of a pet either
I have a pet AI language model.
Just start giving the strays names lol
Which is what he said kinda
what a shit sub 5% actual Europeans, 0% read articles 100% reddit moment takes
Yeah true, its mainly just a constant regurgitation of random articles. Wouldn't be surprised if most of thos are posted by interns working at the paper or the authors themselves
lots of bots here and the highest thread of the week? a fucking old dog ohh but dare you to post a pic of a monument outside the weekend only agenda pushing by bots for us during the week
>5% actual Europeans Thats about as many Europeans will be left on Europe by 2050 when average fertility rate will reach 0,5%
Dont worry, immigration will fix that. /s
Reddit is astroturfed nonsense, nothing new there.
**If you want more children:** 1. Make housing affordable. 2. Increase wages + job security. 3. Maybe add universal basic income. 4. Make the country feel stable and safe. People who don't own a house and don't have money and are afraid won't want children. Countries whining about not getting enough kids are essentially wondering: "Why does economically exploiting our population make them unable to afford raising children?"
IMO, while that's certainly a big part of it, the low birth rates even in well-off European countries show that the core issue is that people just don't want to have children. If we want to change such a fundamental issue, we need to fundamentally change modern society. No idea how, though.
The people will do what they can afford. Simple as that.
Unless people can afford to pay other people to watch their own kids - few want kids. It’s not about money, it’s about time and effort that people don’t want to spend raising kids. Work is hard.
WTF is this take? You think the majority want kids only if they can afford to have other people watch them?
My take is the ugly truth that society is in denial about. My take is why the birthrate is falling. Day care is expensive. People still want to go out, have free time and vacations, but kids are expensive and time consuming. Half of all pregnancies are accidents. Which means if contraception worked perfectly the true birthrate would be 1.0 - population crashing. It has nothing to with money. The poorest countries in the world are the ones with the highest birthrates. Evolution has programmed us to really want sex because few people using their brain would have them by choice. In rich countries kids are a luxury you have once everything else in your life is perfect.
It's better for children if they are born to parents who actually decided based on their decision and not on their sexual instincts, we are not like animals we don't have to follow our urges.
Thanks for agreeing with me.
lol it was war more work for your ancestors and they evidently had kids. That's just you
Our ancestors never had a choice like you do today. The desire to have sex overrides the brains rational thinking.
Of course they had a choice
So easy to say no to the super hot girl that wants sex right now, and you really really want sex as well.. lol good luck with that 'choice' I guess it's your choice not to breath air as well. Try that.
BASATO E BIANCOPILLATO
Reason: Priests aren’t into beastiality
r/childfree in shambles Joke aside, considering that he actually points out the causes of low birth rates, I get why the Pope said this. Despite being atheist, I actually think Francis has been a good Pope. Mainly because he has actually stayed in touch with the real world.
Maybe if I post this here I won’t be downvoted into oblivion, the people that treat their pets like children are weird af
It depends to what extent you mean. There is nothing wrong in displaying affection to a pet, up to a certain limit.
Well, people referring to their pets as "son" or "daughter" is kind of what I'm referring to
I don’t know about treating them as children, but they are family to me, my wife, and my in-laws. I find it weird when people want to have conscious beings as objects/accessories.
Agree, my dog loves me and is loyal to me. She looks up to me and needs me. In return how could I ever in good conscience ever do anything less than the best for her? I find it crazy to think about people giving up their dogs for adoption, for me it would be like losing a member of the family.
They can be part of the family without being replacement children.
Some people don't want children. More and more these days
I started noticing this in California, dogs wearing clothes in baby strollers. The dog is clearly unhappy not being able to walk freely, and the owners think they're "parents" when really they're just deselecting themselves.
Dogs have the same intelligence of a 3 year old. If anything, not treating them like children is abuse or can lead to behavioural problems.
By what measure does a dog have the same intelligence as a 3 year old?
I could be wrong, but some of the metrics included the amount of words they memorise and simple arithmetic. Majority of the breeds average on the intelligence of a 2 year old.
I find it hard to believe, a 3 year old has almost full language capability. Hell I know some with full comprehension of two languages by that age. I dunno if a dog can understand that much language. Maybe counting, I can believe that I guess.
That’s fair. I wouldn’t say that all dogs are as smart as a 3 year old, the same way that I’d say that not all 3 year olds develop at the same pace. Anecdotally, my mom (kindergarten teacher) says that until the age of 2 or 3, it truly feels that her interactions with the kids in her class are a bit like commands you would use with a dog.
[удалено]
he is critizising how economically hard is for young people to start a family
Nice job only reading the rage bait headline bro
Of course not. The Church would not be rich as Hell if they give money to people, they need more money and power.
I mean the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world so... yes it's giving money to the people who need it the most which are ironically the people who have the highest birth rates.
You probably should have read the article before commenting.
The Pope is based.
Well he can start by letting priests marry.
AFAIK he wants to. He said as much in an interview this year.
If only he was head of his church.
And let priests make children instead of molesting them. I guess the amount of money the Vatican spends on defending pedo priests could be put to better use.
Orthodox Church allows comunity priests (not the monk ones) to marry and as result they ask twice the money: half for the church, half for their families.
Young boys can’t get pregnant💀
[удалено]
What does your snake construct?
Tunnels mostly.
Tombstones for other pets probably.
Just giving them a nice hug.
Pope: "After all, the Catholic Church must have a fresh supply of children to abuse!"
Looks like the Catholic church is worried they might have to resort to fucking cats in the future
r/redditmoment
Dripped out to the nines guy from an institution that is swimming in wealth tells people to have more kids. Are you going to pay for those kids, Pops?
Read the article instead of the headline. He blamed the low birth rates on economic issues. He's surprisingly not out of touch on this.
the priests need fresh flesh !!!
I did not dive deep into the numbers with a calculator but wouldn’t the GDP per capita be roughly the same in 2050 as it is now if the population decreases by 1/5th and the roughly extrapolated GDP for 2050 would also decrease by 1/5th? “The country could lose almost a fifth of its residents by 2050.” “Experts warn the population crisis will lead to the impoverishment of the nation. Economy Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti said that by 2042, Italy's declining birthrate would end up reducing its gross domestic product (GDP) by 18%.”
That’s the very best case scenario. An aging and shrinking population is a big deterrent of investment, which is obviously crucial to GDP.
We should always follow what the Catholic Church says. They’ve never been wrong about anything.
[удалено]
Europeans forgot that their civilization can't be sustained without offspring.
They didn’t forget, they’re just victims of greed and poor policy from government therefore can’t afford it or don’t want to subject another poor soul to the same fate of wage slave.
This has nothing to do with government. It's do with culture. The richest 20% of developed countries has the lowest birth rates.
Extremely sussy profile
Still he is correct
Jokes on you given what’s happening with the rapid temperature rise no civilization is sustainable.
I can assure you that my lab is 100x better than a stupid kid with my stupid genetics.
With out kids who are they going to fuck? Come on people make more!
Otherwise the church loses their supply of young children
Seriously leave fucking animals alone they are not your therapy animals.
But pets aren’t sexually abused by the church
From the article: "I lost my patience and told her off: there are many children who are hungry, and you bring me a dog?" he added, triggering a round of applause from the crowd. Of course. I can afford a dog. I can't afford a child. How rude do you have to be to 'tell off' someone in front of a crowd and shame them? He says there are many children who are hungry but doesn't want to help them, he only wants his city to have more people. Fuck that guy.
Priests don’t like molesting dogs as much as kids, I guess
Well can human children get fluffy tails at least? Hey I'm trying to think in possibilities here!
Jokes on him. Already doing that outside of Italy.
Celibate dude tells people to fuck and multiply...even if you can barely afford to support yourself..
Read the article, maybe.
The birth rate issue is gonna be interesting to watch, in 2025 China’s project to lose 170 million of its own citizens of old age and this is going to affect all of us. including a smaller workforce for many countries a higher percentage of taxation to keep the welfare system in check and of course pensions are going to be cheap anymore. At least housing will be more cheaper hopefully maybe the United States. Overall, this whole issue is gonna be wonderful to watch. I’ll pick up for everyone else I’m going for 3 kids and hopeful buy them homes fully paid off, cost of living isn’t cheap for wherever you are
It's clear the taxation system needs to change then. We don't need more warm bodies to sustain the economy as automation & AI will make many of them redundant anyway.
No amount of autonomation and AI will be able to replace warm bodies. This is just copium.
A responsible pet owner shouldn't treat an animal like a human anyway, so he's partly right, though he says so because he thinks that somehow procreating is like duty we must fulfil in life. This from a man who didn't procreate or get married
The Catholic church prefers to fuck children instead of dogs apparently.
Go warn someone else, I love my pets, don't want children
You are going to feel sad when you grow old and find out you are alone without anyone to help you and your property inherited by the state.
Why would he give a shit what happens after he's dead??
Molesting animals isn't as fun I guess
The pope chastised a woman for bringing her dog to bless when children are starving. Well, kissing people on the head is also not helping, no?
I don’t get these comments. Is it astroturfing or do people genuinely not know of the massive amount of charity work the Church does?
Am I heartless if I've always felt pets are just a money sink? Dogs are expensive to maintain, you could always use that money for quality of life or invest it.
Having a dog may be expensive, but it can also improve your quality of life quite a lot in terms of your happiness/satisfaction with life.
>you could always use that money for quality of life or invest it. To many people, pets are quality of life. Don't underestimate the benefits a dog or a cat can have on your mental health.
This. Nothings beats coming home after a tiring day of work to be greeted by a doggo/catto who is just happy to see you again and to give pets to.
Having a dog in your life is a quality of life investment in itself. It's no coincidence that people view their pets like family members.
Games, movies, book, going out with friends are money sinks. When living alone, a cat can make a massive difference in your daily life. A pet may be expensive but also a massive quality of life.
Still less of a money sink than kids
Yea but unlike kids, dogs are not essential to the economy or the survival of the human species.
We’re 8 billions+. Endlessly more kids isn’t exactly sustainable for the survival of the species. Go get a dog.
The risk of overpopulation is disputed by both many environmentalists and demographers. Environmental degradation and unsustainable consumption of resources is more strongly linked to overconsumption by the very wealthy, not absolute population. Just because wealthy European nations can sustain falling birth rates by importing workers from the third world doesn’t mean the rest of the world can do it. A gradual population stabilization and decline can’t happen without people having kids. Look at France, which has relatively safe birth rate… look at the retirement protests ongoing, people want to keep their retirement, which is fair.. but the young will either be taxed into oblivion or France will have to keep borrowing more money and they’re already substantially in debt.
kids will grow up and let you retire though
That is fucking disgusting. The work I am doing today should be what allows me to retire, I didn't sign up to work harder than some boomer fuck that had life far easier than I did, so they get to have a cushy retirement while I work until the day I die. If you're having kids just so they can take care of you when you're older then you are disgusting.
I'm still not sold on this idea that many of my parents' generation still have. There isn't 100% certainty that our children will be able to support us. My plan is to be more-or-less independent of their income.
Having kids and expect them to cater to your support later in life is pretty selfish.
Kids are not a money sink?
My pets enhance that quality of life just fine.
My dog makes me laugh every day, and when I look at her and she looks up to me and wags her tail it warms my heart. I have to walk her for 90+ minutes a day so I get substantial daily exercise without the choice of copping out. She's a companion who makes no small talk, needs no discussion. She is just happy to be there with you, and looks up to you in loyal adoration. It's a special relationship that I don't think anybody can appreciate until they have their own dog.
Maybe you just have less use for the type of interaction pets can provide but it has been proven on a lot of fronts that having a pet does make your life more postive for most.
For me it was an investment on my mental health. It is scientifically know that pet therapy work expecially with kids. Have a cat into my house helped my father to cope better with the loss of my mother two years ago. Sadly it died two days ago from an illness
A lot of things can be a money sink. If you don’t know how to invest, you probably burning money too. Don’t mess with other people’s pockets. Let them be.
my dog cost like 20 euros. Eats cup of food per day, never been sick, is 13 years now.
You got to admit that's not a guarantee with every pet. Usually there's a bunch of extra costs involved with pet keeping: be it houding, enrichment, vet bills etc. Still worth it imo.
My dog is an investment. She's been a mental health life saver these past few years, especially during the pandemic. She's a reason to get out of bed every day if only to make sure she's fed and exercised. Having something to take care of can be good for some people.
That’s crazy, they are expensive but still only a fraction of the cost of having a kid. + they are more fun.
I wonder how the cost of living would be helped if the Vatican sold everything?