Lotus Reader - The Hackernews Client

herbsta day ago

Is it to much to ask for to plan and imagine if something works for you before you get it? Or is it so hard to imagine that people actually know what they want or don't?

This sounds just like some people approach pets

ben_wherbsta day ago

IMO:

People trying to plan accurately, end up with a list of things to think about containing more than seven items, and human psychology is such that this makes it *feel* infinite despite us being able to see that it isn't.

People who don't worry to much and vibe it, get pregnant/cause pregnancy by accident, often but not always as teens. Despite not planning carefully, and even in pre-industrial societies where a lot more problems were rapidly fatal and the best you could hope for in such cases regarding childcare allowance was a shotgun marriage, vibing it generally works.

With more certainty:

I'm not sure what the distribution is of women hearing about painful births and saying "nope!", but I do know it's more than none.

I know a few deliberately childfree couples who like the higher income and lack of responsibility, and have zero interest in proposals such as this.

toomuchtodoa day ago

This is a topic near and dear to my heart, I have a startup I’m bootstrapping to pay people who don’t want kids to not have them. “We buy unwanted fertility.” This covers their out of pocket costs for the healthcare needed to affirm their reproductive choice.

The data is robust that some don’t want children out of economic reasons, and others don’t want them out of lifestyle choices (prioritizing self over a thankless job). Across several national pro natalist policy programs, the evidence shows that even when enormous amounts of benefits are provided, it barely moves the realized fertility outcome.

(40% of pregnancies in the US and internationally, annually, are unintentional, and we have enough humans we don’t take care of already [1], we should be radically empowering as many as people who don’t want to have kids to not have them)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44407283

OgsyedIEtoomuchtodoa day ago

There's a lot to be gained from using the lens of push and pull factors. Device addiction notwithstanding there is a much higher expectation of parental time investment into modern childrearing than before and better advertising of childfree life trajectories, both of which are poor for natalism.

One thing I've never had the datasets to work with to do is to just make a scatterplot of US counties by fertility vs median home square footage, and I think analyzing such a relationship is a missed opportunity.

scarface_74toomuchtodo19 hours ago

There are plenty of not for profits - including Planned Parenthood available. It’s not just about providing abortions. Unfortunately, even in states where abortion is not allowed or performed by Planned Parenthood, the Supreme Court just made it legal for states to forbid people on Medicaid from going to planned parenthood which is often the only place available for them to get contraceptives free and cheaply and counseling.

toomuchtodoscarface_745 hours ago

We pay when someone who doesn’t want kids receives permanent birth control (a bilateral salpingectomy is a surgical procedure to remove both fallopian tubes), preventing any need for an abortion in the future. They lock in their reproductive choice, avoiding at least $330k per child (in 2023 dollars) in expenses 0-18, as well as avoiding the creation of an unwanted child if they cannot get an abortion as the US reproductive healthcare situation rapidly degrades. If they change their mind in the future, IVF is an option (although the data shows regret rates to be very low).

At the moment, this permanent birth control is covered by the ACA at 100% as preventative care. We have prepared for any changes to this by establishing travel logistics across the border into Canada, Mexico, and other LATAM destinations at favorable rates (medical tourism).

Planned Parenthood can continue to receive Medicaid funding by carving off abortion services into an independent entity that receives non government funding for abortions (only 4% of the services Planned Parenthood provides are abortion services).

By empowering women to not have children they never want to have, you empower, enable freedom, and avoid suffering at scale.

scarface_74toomuchtodo5 hours ago

No they can’t according to the latest Supreme Court ruling. It’s up to the states now and states where abortion is not allowed or performed by Planned Parenthood are forbidding Medicaid reimbursement for non abortion services.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/5-things-to-know-after-the-supreme-court-said-states-can-block-planned-parenthoods-medicaid-funding

> But the state-federal health insurance program for lower-income people does pay for other services from Planned Parenthood, including birth control, cancer screenings and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

In its 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court overruled lower courts and said that patients don't necessarily have the right to sue for Medicaid to cover their health care from specific providers.

toomuchtodoscarface_744 hours ago

I must be mistaken, thanks for the link.

armchairhackera day ago

I think finances are more a concern/incentive.

Consider: the government pays a salary to each married family while they raise children; the salary would be equivalent to a blue-collar job, and it would scale with the number of children up to a point (e.g. 4 kids).

I strongly believe that'd lead to many more marriages and childbirths. Many people not interested in raising kids would prefer it over a "regular" job. Families with adoptive children would also be paid, so it could decrease adoption difficulty and stigma as a side-effect.

However, some people will game this policy, and it would be very expensive to implement.

jbiasonarmchairhackera day ago

Brazil have something like that: Up to 4 children, you get about 1/4 of the minimum pay from the government for each. There are some caveats, though: The children must be in school, they can't fail a year, children which reach adult age (18) do not count/get paid for anymore, and the family monthly salary can't exceed about 75% of the minimum pay[1] to be eligible.

While this somewhat help lower paid families, we still have a huge number of men that just leave their families once kids appears and leave a single mother to raise the kids -- which have their own issues.

[1] I may be a bit off in the values, but you get the idea.

scarface_74armchairhacker19 hours ago

So who exactly is going to pay for this when the US already won’t be able to meet its obligations for social security and Medicare in less than 10 years? Shouldn’t we be prioritizing universal healthcare, affordable pre-K, etc first before we start subsidizing more kids coming into the world?

herbstarmchairhacker13 hours ago

> However, some people will game this policy, and it would be very expensive to implement.

This is common in central Europe. In German we call that Kindergeld. It's not exactly a full salary but for some it is. Gets more with more children etc. Is expensive, gambling it is weird. Who makes a child for like 500$ a month? Some may do, but nobody cares ...

One way the state also pays for children is by having them have basically free healthcare in your name. No extra costs for that in the first 18(?) years.

The weird thing about Kindergeld ist that everyone gets that, no matter if you earn good or not. There are ways to get more of you are poor, but the base is basically basic income for your child.

I am not sure that actually helps growth. We don't have higher birth rates than other modern countries

jbiasona day ago

That's one way to think about numbers and not about the persons.

I believe most of countries have orphanages already -- and what you're suggesting already exists in some countries (I do believe we still have that in Brazil).

While that could increase the number of people, orphanages are not great places to raise a child (with rare exceptions). Imagine you growing up with a large group of other child, and nobody actually take the time to take care of you. What kind of person would you be today?

scarface_7419 hours ago

Currently every state has a safe haven law where new mothers can leave an unharmed infant up to 7-30 days depending on the state anonymously at hospitals, fire stations or police stations and it’s not considered abandonment.

Finding people willing to adopt newborns is also fairly easy now.

herbstscarface_7413 hours ago

I don't know about the US. But in fact it's hard up to impossible to adopt a child here in central Europe as there are WAY more couples ready to raise a child than children in the system that need parents.

scarface_74herbst9 hours ago

So doesn’t that confirm what I’m saying? If a mother wants to put her child up for adoption, she will have no issues finding parents.

horsellama10 hours ago

pregnancy is no joke, you don’t undergo that experience just to see if you like having a baby for one year

akudha4 hours ago

How about offering cheaper healthcare, cheaper child care, sensible maternity/paternity leave/benefits, not tying healthcare to jobs, providing better work life balance, better wages... and on and on?

Babies are not like buying clothing, that you try it on for a few days and return if you don't like. Primary reason most people don't have more kids is the economic stress and affordability. Of course there are people who genuinely do not want children, no matter how much they earn. Those are the minority though.

And yes, not all countries face all problems listed above, it is just a collection of problems that countries face at different levels. But in general, social safety nets are disappearing everywhere. We can't expect responsible people to have more kids in this situation. Of course irresponsible/gullible people will still have kids even if they can't afford, which will only add to the problems

aristofun4 hours ago

The single most effective idea is tax reduction proportional to number of children in the family.

Yet nobody cares in the west to implement even this. Having children became a luxury.

This is a problem not solved by a startup.