It's important in science (but also in general) to verify things that are thought to be obvious or "common sense", since not everything that the broad public agrees on is true after all.

"It needs no more capitalism interfering with people’s lives and reproductive rights for all."

So far, the writer advocates for more social spending and argues respecting people's family choices is the best way to cause such a baby boom.

So what if he is pro-baby boom? He does a decent job researching social spending and pro-worker/social spending.

It's useful and especially useful when reactionaries pull their "family values" bull on us; we have a bunch of stuff on a site ready to refute them.

The article itself doesn't blame young people for being away from their parents but is sympathetic to their problems of high housing costs and financial insecurity.

It's strange to me that for a lot of people pro-natalism equals pro-capitalism. These are not opposites, in fact hyper-capitalism is likely a contributing factor to declining birth rates

It is possible to hold a left wing position and be concerned about the affects of declining population on our political stability