this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
425 points (98.4% liked)

Not The Onion

21184 readers
1551 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/45445434

Fox News Senior Medical Analyst Marc Siegel made some eyebrow-raising comments lamenting that birth rates are down among teenagers aged 15 to 19.

On Thursday, the National Center for Health Statistics reported that the U.S. fertility rate fell to another record low. The agency reported that the number of births per 1,000 women of childbearing age declined from 53.8 in 2024 to 53.1 last year. The latest figure represents a continuation of a decades-long decline in fertility rates.

Siegel joined Friday’s edition of America’s Newsroom, where Dana Perino said that while the continuing trend is not surprising, “the numbers might feel a little shocking.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 16 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Getting the child born is the cheap part, getting them to grow up is the real money sink.

And Canada is not exactly the cheapest place to live either

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 4 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

lots of child care support in Nordic countries and still low birthrates.

If women have a choice i.e they can self support (work) if needs be and not be gas lit, they'll mostly choose 0,1 or 2. That's not enough to grow a population. That and contraception that separates sex from birth.

Look to Hungary, no incone taxes and all sorts of benefits and still a low birthrate. I can see them changing the law to punish women (financially) who don't but they're in the EU so they can say fuck u and move :)

I'm a guy but it makes sense to me, why would a woman do years of study want to be mostly birthing kids every other year for a decade or more ? career, travel, saving and investing etc are much harder if you have a quiver full, let alone the impact on your body, so we're back to 0, 1 or 2 and a declining demographic.

For every woman who decides on 0, you need another woman to decide to have 5 to basically stand still in terms of demographics, and the only ones doing that are religious nutters.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 5 points 19 hours ago

even if the financial cost is covered, time cost is still a thing.

Pretty much if you want educated people to make more children you have to abolish work or have a more dystopian system of separation of child and family where all children are taken care of in a professional facility full time.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I found it amazing that most people had to choose to have 3 kids to maintain the population, and we are not extinct.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Until some point you kinda needed a bunch of them as a retirement plan.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, utility. So it was essentially an MLM scam, got it.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 hours ago