this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
97 points (92.9% liked)

World News

53730 readers
1985 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If France is anything like my native Portugal, people aren't having kids mainly because housing is so stupidly expensive - how exactly do you expect people to have the 2.something average number of kids needed to maintain population levels when they can't leave their parents home until their mid 30s and even just going from a 1-bedroom to a 2-bedroom to have a room for one child costs many years' worth of a couple's after-tax income?

Meawhile salaries in real terms have stagnated for a decade.

Even with the best of intentions, even in the middle class people are entering their 40s by the time they can afford to have a second child so most stick to 1 or even don't have any children.

What's required is not flashy bullshit letters like this one which very pointedly ignore the housing bubble and the politicians' blame in pumping it up, but instead measures to make housing affordable, such as building lots of public housing to increase the Supply side of the Market and limits on multiple house ownership and non-resident ownership to stop (local and foreign) investor speculation in Housing and thus weaken the Demand-side price pressure.

Of course, what the Neolibs in power have done instead is increase immigration claiming that "we have a lack manpower" (after decades of making it unaffordable for people to have children and give them a good life, what else was to be expected?!) and then the Neolibs' Fascist mates can use that to claim that it's really all the fault of immigrants (rather than fatcats and the corrupt politicians in their pockets) that life is getting worse.

[–] Darkness343@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago

Can't you all make illegal settlements called invasions like in south america?

So much skill issue

[–] rogsson@piefed.social 73 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Yeah just remove all the insane ppl in power around the world and we’ll hump like dogs

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 54 points 2 days ago

Give us a reason to want to bring kids into this world

[–] pageflight@piefed.social 34 points 2 days ago

Yeah, as soon as there's dramatic climate action, representative just government, and universal healthcare + pre-K!

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 17 points 2 days ago

Governments spent decades pushing for delaying children and get higher education, promote persuing careers, moving to child unfriendly cities for high paying jobs so everybody can maximize their consumion of goods so the economy grow, and are now shocked when that all means less children.

No shit. The rise of Christo-fascism has been a direct contributor to not wanting more kids.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I doubt it. Much of the same would happen with sane people in power.

The demographic transition:

  • means longer life spans (which means that older people use resources which would be used by new generations in a pre-transition society)

  • means lower infant mortality (which means that people don't need to reproduce a lot, as their children have good chances of surviving childhood)

Whatever additional processes are in play, likely aren't amenable to change either.

  • people have an increased tendency to have children after achieving economic certainty

Result: some never achieve it, some achieve it when less fertile or infertile, some when their own parents already need care.

  • people have an increased tendency for solitary lifestyle

Result: people live separately from their parents more often, and expect it as a criterion of normal life, as a result of which grandparents are less available to help with child care.

  • people have better education about their fertility

Result: children aren't had accidentally.

Changing some politicians seems unlikely to change that, unless a new social agreement forms. What that agreement might be, I don't know. I speculate it could be "considwe havinf children before building a career, to enable this, very strong welfare guarantees are offered to parents raising kids".

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The world is on fire, genocide is being committed out in the open, living expenses are out of control, technology is becoming enshittified and increasingly invasive, wealth inequality is increasing.

No thanks, I'm good.

/I'm not French, but I think this sentiment is widely applicable

[–] ZiggyTheZygote@lemmy.ca 36 points 2 days ago (2 children)

A lot of people are becoming more pessimistic and don't see any logic or reason to having babies. And it's not just in France, it's all around the world. I'm a millennial and I've been pessimistic since the 80s (😎) when the world wasn't as cooked as it is now. I can imagine how the newer generations are feeling these days. Future? Hopes? Dreams? They're going fast down the drain.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Matthew McConaughey's voice:

I was doomscrolling before there was scrolling.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

10 years ago I was pretty fringe for being childfree. Today more and more people are accepting it for themselves or are not sure its even worth the time and effort, even if they wanted a kid

[–] ZiggyTheZygote@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago

It's kind of sad for people who truly want kids but it's not feasible for them to have any. What a world.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

First fucking words of that trash article :
" ... France plans to send letter ... "

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 days ago (2 children)

We spent 100 years engineering the world to decrease birth rates and punish people for having children "they cannot afford", then immiserate the majority of people, eliminate any kind of opportunity to enjoy life, community, family, or recreation without spending ungodly amounts of money to enjoy simple human pleasures that have been part of being human for hundreds of thousands of years, work them relentlessly 24/7/365 (or as close as we permit them) for the sake of business efficiency, destroy the environment so survival itself becomes dependent on the business cycle, and we wonder why no one wants to raise a child in this environment?

Honestly, we have spent a century ruthlessly punishing people for even thinking of making a marginally irrational decision and then wonder why they won't indulge in an objectively irrational activity for the emotional fulfillment.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

The birth rate will recover when children can play games and run free among the ancient grass-covered ruins of abandoned suburbia.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

I'd have upvoted anyway, great comment, but you had me at

immiserate

What a perfect word.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The decline in birth rates is perfectly solveable by reducing wealth inequality, overwork, and long term pessimism about the direction the world is headed. They just don't want to do that. The hoarding class is defined only by two things: demanding that their own wealth doesn't just grow, but grows faster than it used to, and making sure responsibility and consequences are someone else's problem.

So the French government can do it but when I go out and tell people to get fucked, it's a problem.

[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Lol.

The ones who want to do it will do it regardless (look at the fertility rates of poor immigrants), those who don't want to won't be convinced by a letter from the government, IMO.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

fertility rates of poor immigrants

For the 1st generation. The 2nd is only slightly higher, and the fertilty for the 3th generation is practically the same as the native population as they have adapt to the cultural and social norms in the new country.

[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Certainly. Because, like I've said before, ideology is what's behind fertility rates in the West. 🤷

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You dumbass, this is happening in every country on Earth.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

At last! The country demographic is saved!

All these people were desperately waiting for the government to ask, now they can finally get to it!

[–] howl2@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do you not want to be notified about free healthcare options available to you? Because if you ignore the ragebait headline and filter the article for its rage potential, the following quote explains it pretty nicely:

"The letter is being sent to 29-year-olds because women are able to have their eggs frozen at that age without a medical certificate. Women will also be reminded that social security in France covers the cost of freezing eggs for women between 29 and 37. "

So woman are being told how to keep the option for kids open for longer. That is quite the opposite of pressuring them into anything if you ask me.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

People can't have kids earlier because living costs are so high relative to salaries, so to afford merelly the 2-bedroom appartment for a 1-child (much less the 2-3 need to maintain population levels) family even a couple of two university-educated full-time workers has to work years.

Even if people stay in schooling for longer now and start working older, even somebody with a degree finishes studying at the age of 20 or 21.

Further and for women specifically, the lack of availability of quality and cheap kindergartens often means that childbirth will totally torpedoe a woman's career because often and due to local cultural expectations the woman is the one who ends up staying home for a couple of years to raise a child and that has been show to majorly delay career progression in a way that is seldom possible to later recover from.

Both of these things can be address with appropriate government policies to make housing and kindergartens cheap, but successive neoliberal governments actually do the opposite (insane house prices are great for realestate investors and you can't have cheap public kindergarten provision competing with private businesses) and instead push forward solutions like this so that couples can have children later, something which should not have been necessary in the first place.

[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I fully agree. I also think it is a terrible way of improving the number of children. And they should focus on improving conditions for the poorest half of the population a lot more.

But that doesn't mean I think the idea is so abhorent that I would be insulted by receiving the letter. (Ok, I personally would, but that is because I'm not a woman.) I'm fine with them sending the letter. Heck, pointing out free healthcare options is great! By all means: let women know what their options are.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

For me such a letter is like somebody who has wipped you across your back your whole life offering you some bandages.

Not only is it profound hypocrisy that the people fucking up young people's lives are passing themselves as good guys, it's also an attempt at offsetting the side effects for those very people of their own nasty behavior towards others with a self-serving "solution" for the behavior changes all that nastiness causes on others, to avoid the real solution which is to stop that nasty behavior.

"You'll keep on fleecing you but here's a way reduce the side effects for us by letting you keep on having kids for us to fleece".

If one looks at it from a grander strategical point of view, this shit is profoundly insulting.

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago

She emphasised that the role of politicians is “not to dictate whether or not to have children”, but to educate women further on fertility and remind them of the option to freeze eggs.

Is it even that, though?

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Are they offering the $400 monthly payments per child until they turn 28 that Israel offers their citizens?

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 2 days ago

yup. that is about the right time to get em. so glad I went to to much school and changed careers because if I had a steady enough job at like 26 I might have made a big mistake.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Reasons not to have kids.

Ai taking jobs

Income not keeping up with cost of living

Healthcare costs(in some countries)

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] slevinkelevra@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Don't feed the troll. Just look at the username andrewta(te)

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I love how everyone always assumes what the ta stands for. And almost everyone gets it wrong.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Mind clearing the air on what it actually stands for?

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Depending on my mood.

Ta: teachers assistant (check my history and you’ll see sometimes I’m helpful)

Or

Ta: Total asshole (check my history and you’ll see examples of that)

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 9 points 2 days ago

Reasons not to have kids:

Not wanting kids.