This article is worth reading, but my biggest beef with it is that it places too much emphasis on women who are childless because they find kids unappealing:
From the first couple of comments, the readers, thankfully, aren’t buying that as the biggest reason for the declining birthrate:
I agree that the declining birth rate is a challenge to the future of our country as a vibrant and progressive society, but I disagree with the analysis of its cause. The decrease in the fertility rate is caused not by sociological reasons but economic ones. Seen in this context, the decision to not have children is not a “selfish” choice but a rational one.
Look at the state of America today from the perspective of a young adult, married or single. The economy sucks, and the future seems unpromising. Good jobs, with decent salaries & benefits, are harder than ever to find. The middle class, the foundation of a stable, secure and prosperous society, is rapidly disappearing. Public education is underfunded and under attack. Medical and child care costs are increasing, even faster than the rate of inflation. And the promise of long-term economic security, once guaranteed by employee pensions and Social Security, seems to be vanishing before your eyes.
And, you want to “start a family”?
I did find this interesting:
The strong correlation between childlessness and high-density city living has created essentially two Americas: child-oriented and affordable areas, and urban centers that have become increasingly expensive and child-free over the last 30 years—not coincidentally the same span over which middle-class incomes have stagnated. In Manhattan now, nearly half of all households are singletons. Over the past decade, the San Francisco, Boston, New York, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia metropolitan areas all lost children, even as lower-density and more affordable metropolitan areas such as Raleigh, North Carolina; Austin, Texas; Houston; Atlanta; Dallas–Fort Worth; and Salt Lake City registered significant gains. Seattle, once known as a strong family town, is now home to significantly more dogs than children.
Essentially, I am going to be moving from a place with lots of single people (supposedly– I don’t meet a lot in my age bracket) that’s incredibly expensive for a solo person to a more affordable, less stressful place that will then have lots of families with kids (where ironically I was living before but unable, myself, to pull off a family). It’s a frustrating situation.
I agree for the most part, except the public education aspect. The only issue with public education for those in urban areas is the stress and anxiety of finding a school one would feel comfortable and safe to send their children to.