The healthcare market is taxing reproduction out of existence
aaronstannard.com277 points by Aaronontheweb a day ago
277 points by Aaronontheweb a day ago
Related: Car Seats as Contraception https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/731812
> We estimate that these laws [mandating safety seats] prevented fatalities of 57 children in car crashes in 2017 but reduced total births by 8,000 that year and have decreased the total by 145,000 since 1980.
Car seats as contraception is just a specific enumeration of the general. "busybodies as contraception" problem wherein the "has so few real problems they stop minding their business and mind other's business" classes try to force priorities on the rest of society that the rest of society can't yet afford to have. And it's not just contraception or kids. Pretty much everything in our economy gets shot in the foot by this to some extent.
Contraception is a bargain deal for any class, assuming you were not intending to have a kid.
I also question the idea that safety regulations (let's call them that) are the result of a class of people who have "so few real problems they stop minding their business and mind other's business." I get the idea, but couldn't the high cost of obstetrics and child car seat requirements be due to the wishes and decisions of people outside of this supposed class?
> be due to the wishes and decisions of people outside of this supposed class?
Of course, but life is just so easier when you can attribute every problem to an imaginary enemy.
But babies going through car windows is bad. I don't want that. Not even just for the baby, but for me. We don't need projectile babies. Ballistic babies, if you will.
It’s not the car seats that are the contraception, it is the cars themselves.
What does that mean? Plenty of people have been conceived in the backseat, and some in the front. But seriously, what are you talking about?
car-dependent infrastructure and urban design is hostile to human life.
Car depend infrastructure is amazing to families. A mom can take her children to the grocery store in a car in relative safety without worrying about mentally ill homeless people on the subway.
Why would you need to get on the subway to go to the grocery store? When I lived in Paris I was within a five minute walk to at least three general grocery stores plus various speciality shops. Always plenty of parents all around. This is not uncommon in properly designed non-car dependent cities. Not to mention deliveries are just that much easier and all without a car.
In more than a decade living in Stockholm never had a mentally ill homeless person bothering anyone in the subway.
Perhaps the subway itself isn't the problem...
wow. this thread is microcosm of how wild and polarised the internet can be.
It's pure facts. I used to live in a city where me and my wife were terrorized by homeless people on the light rail. Now we live far away from public transportation and no longer have to worry about the safety of ourselves or our children and our neighbors are fantastic people.
Car dependency and castle doctrine is essential in a low trust society with a legal system that puts violent offenders right back on the street.
Moving in a private vehicle is statistically the most dangerous activity an otherwise healthy young person routinely participates in. Your family is almost certainly at higher risk of death and serious injury now because you based this decision on your perception of safety rather than evaluating the reality of it. Speaking of "pure facts."
I have more than 200,000 miles accident free and my kids are doing fine. Living in a city with unhinged maniacs on drugs was way more dangerous.