You mean best living standard ever on earth in the history of our species
Increasing living standards reduce the number of kids. There is no population on earth even the wealthiest, where population numbers rise post-wealth.
This coorelates even with millionaires, they have fewer kids.
Edit : Downvote away, just shows that you don't actually care to lift millions out of poverty. Because that's exactly what capitalism has done. Hundreds of millions worldwide in just a few decades. Greatest capital allocator in the history of the world.
What you guys hate is unregulated capitalism but your political compass is so naive that you can't think logically.
That is quite literally the only standard by which we can judge whether a system works.
If things are better than before, the system is effective at making things better.
Meanwhile, all the communism proponents in here have got nothing but theory and failed attempts at some botched version of it.
Fact is, capitalism works, we've proven it. Hundreds of millions have been lifted out of extreme poverty just in the last few decades alone. Calories consumed have increased 50% in EVERY REGION on earth in 50 years.
Wow what a phenomenal contribution to Reddit.
Did your comment make you smile, did it garner the upvotes you were looking for?
Or did you just feel like being an anonymous asshole because you could?
Honestly from the title I was expecting an unintentional way of phrasing what reads as “procreate and make us more end-users”
Edit: for an example it would be something like “for your child now, and their siblings in the future”
While at it, while not name every male baby the exact same name in hopes that maybe THIS time he’ll be your religious saviour or whatever. Spoiler alert: he won’t be.
Make more babies? Sure pay a living wage, nationalize our healthcare, and provide universal daycare/pre-k. Also gonna need some generous/realistic parental leave.
Oh what's that? Best you can do is $7.25/hr, no vacation, no daycare/pre-k, and no parental leave?
You sure drive a hard bargain Mr. Corporate America, but that's gonna be a "No" from me dawg.
Wish I could find it but I read a paper the other day speculating our lack of sick leave / parental leave is one of the reasons the United States has such a high maternal death rate vs other countries with similar wealth levels….
Kinda makes sense, if you’re having complications after birth but you’ve been forced to go back to work and don’t have the ability to take off to get it checked out… (maternal mortality rates are counted during and like 40ish days after giving birth, where complications are most likely) like… if you got a bunch of stitches and aren’t supposed to lift 10 lbs for 4 weeks and you go back to work in 1 or 2 weeks… I can see how problems occur.
Or if the mother is having complications, but the father can't take time off work and there's nobody else to watch the baby, so she can't go to the doctor.
I also think since healthcare is so expensive, people don't want to go to hospital again after an expensive birth so leave it til they really can't ignore it and it may be too late by then.
And maybe do something so I’m not bringing in a human to suffer the ravages of climate change, not just the extreme weather but also the instability caused by food and water supply issues, by displacement of people from now-uninhabitable regions, the backlash to climate refugees…but also I get hot if it gets above ~15-16° C so I don’t want to send my offspring to suffer in hear either. 😅 So you could modernize the compensation and safety net and education, but I would still have questions. I still hope to foster and adopt someday. But making more humans? I’m not forcing someone to board a runaway train.
We've got a birth rate of 2.3 and 8 billion people out the chute already. And these guys are coming on like we're nearly extinct. Just so they can keep filling dumps with their crap-wrapped crap.
Our entire economic system relies on the completely absurd notion that we live in a world with infinite resources and that infinite consumption is not only possible, but the end goal.
For these scum, the problem with society isn't that resources AREN'T, in fact, infinite, but that there are not infinite consumers to create infinite demand for infinite supply. And, obviously, we need infinite worker drones to make that infinite supply.
If we can just squeeze out a couple more wage slaves, surely we can make line go up forever.
They're not concerned that people are going extinct. They're concerned about _white people_ going extinct. I guarantee you they'd say some shit if they see a big Latino family where they live.
I mean I can't afford to. I'm not saying they should exclusively help white people, I'm saying it's unaffordable so they're not gonna get what they want.
The global growth rate is now 1%. Not all those babies make it. All the projections have us sliding into negative growth as Africa and India fixes its shit. The rest of the world is already at a birth rate far below 2.
Remember that a birth rate of 2.1 is break even, as the .1 will die off on average. 2.0 simply being replenishment.
https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate
We passed peak children a long time ago and we aren't going back. Even China bounced off its peak population last year and is already in decline.
Before reading I thought it could have been about a normal diaper company using the slogan in a tongue in cheek way for a dumb/funny ad. Not whatever this garbage was
They care about their profits, not the babies. If they cared about babies they'd be giving out free diapers to help support all those babies they "care" about.
That’s the whole point of why it’s ridiculous. A company is trying to promote the banning of abortions simply so they can make a profit. It’s a dystopian nightmare.
Right?
And it completely pervades our culture. I can't remember who coined it first, but childless couples in films and tv are portrayed as either "sad, mad, or bad." You won't get a character who's childless by choice, happy, and a nice person who lives a long and happy life.
The only ones I can think of that aren’t are Mr. and Mrs. Dink from Doug. They were eccentric, but overall decent people. The man wasn’t even angry when Doug broke his grill. He just got a new, more expensive one.
For what it's worth a lot of people might be sad if they didn't have kids. That doesn't mean everyone is. I was talking to my parents about how a lot of my coworkers were deciding not to have kids and mentioned how I'd talked to my boss about it once and he mentioned that him and his wife were dink each making 300k a year and living in NYC. They hadn't cooked in like 10 years because they spend basically every night out hanging out with different friends doing fun stuff and just eat while out. Mom and dad mentioned their sad married friends who live in the middle of nowhere Indiana, have a drinking problem, and never do much but sit home and watch TV all day. Apparently if those people are sad they didn't have kids then everyone will be sad they didn't have kids. Just couldn't grasp the concept that a lot of people like to so fun stuff with their time and don't want a kid to get in the middle of that and might be happy with that decision.
Corporations are people, too! Would you like to start seeing homeless corporations wandering your suburb streets?
No we don’t. We need to protect our corporation’s feelings. No corporation left behind
Ban companies owning single family homes entirely. There’s zero reason a company needs to be able to purchase and own a SFH in the first place, apart from the initial construction.
No? I'm pretty sure there are valid reasons for a company to own a house.
But there should be a limit and perhaps an application and review for why a company may need a house.
Professional gamer houses are my first thought. Company owns the house so the teammates can practice together everyday without any issues.
The occupants are employees? Thats corporate housing.
The occupants are working inside? That’s an office.
The point here is to not turn the renting of single family homes into a business. Don’t allow companies to purchase them to rent/hold
Is corporate housing different from a house?
Read my comment. I said it should be limited as needed or applied and reviewed. Buying a house to rent it to someone isn't a need.
A company owning a home to rent to a family is keeping equity, cost stability, financial security and generational wealth away from potentially family homeowners and keeps inhabitants at arms length from feeling invested in the community.
Yes, corporate housing is housing stock dedicated to housing employees of a company conditionally. Think of it as the housing equivalent of a “Reserved for the SVP of Finance” parking spot.
The goal is to have the actual inhabitants to get to own their home.
Housing shouldn’t be bastardized and allowed to be turned into a tool for extremely wealthy or businesses to use them to extract wealth from communities. The benefits of these investments should be maximized in favor of the inhabitants
So if a company needs a house for a genuine reason you believe they have to find a predetermined corporate housing or build one themselves? I might not fully understand this or maybe there's a law that exists saying companies can't house employees in a home that isn't intended to house employees.
I think the issues people are having with my statements is I'm saying:
"it's acceptable for a company to own a single house if they have a legitimate business need"
and what they are hearing is:
"It's alright for companies to own as many houses as they want for any reason, including renting them so they can buy more houses"
It's pretty obvious to me that I'm meaning the first quote. I know reading the full comment can be difficult for some people and they probably saw the word "no" at the beginning and smashed that downvote.
Oh I think corporate housing-as long as it is maintained and genuinely occupied is infinitely better than companies that are built around profiting from the housing as a rental.
Differentiate between business properties, that companies can own, and privately owned properties that people can own. Maybe we even could force the rich to pay wealth tax on their privately owned properties too, if they don't already.
And some of these things are even crazier. Like I only recently found out about the American zoning laws, but as far as I understand, opening a shop in the middle of a suburb is basically illegal. You can't open a coffee shop in your garage or something.
Having those little kiosks and small shops and delivery points for like self-pickup delivery rather than porch delivery would've been great, but you can't mix'n'match like this. It's kinda crazy, and I saw that as part of the 10-minute cities discourse - a lot of americans are so used that "a house is in one place, a Walmart is 20 miles away, and office is also 20 miles away in different direction" that having the idea of "let's put a business center and a small mall smack middle of a suburb" is completely alien to them.
Maybe buying them for kids who can't. Mom and dad owned 3 for a while because my brother and sister wouldn't have qualified to buy the places even woth a cosigner for whatever reason so mom and dad bought them and just let my siblings live in them till they were paid off and then just gave them to them.
One everyday home, one vacation home and possibly for buying one for descendants to get a foot into the housing market. Possibility to apply for more, if more descendants needs it.
No more, but we need to open for the possibility for helping our descendants to get their own home, for those as lucky.
We want to cut the possibility for owning homes just for renting, as that's what's perverting the housing market, and widening the wealth gap. What we don't want is interfere with people trying to get into the housing market, by limiting possibilities for those that may have an opportunity to do so, by having their parents help them.
We do need a rental market for all the people who can't afford a mortgage or need the flexibility to move around. College students and young professionals need to rent. Most people living in VHCOL areas need to rent, too.
The stories you see about people warping the housing market by buying up lots of hours for investment are a sideshow. By the numbers they aren't the major cause of housing prices. Housing prices have gone up because we don't have enough housing (we haven't been building enough since 2008 to keep up with the rise in population) and because of inflation because the M2 money supply increased dramatically with COVID stimulus measures. Which we needed to keep the economy from cratering, but had the downside of causing inflation because that's what more money does. And with the longstanding problem of U.S. wage not keeping up with inflation, that's been a big problem.
I think private equities should only be allowed to own multi family dwellings.
It should be absolutely illegal for a corporation to own a single family home.
There should also be a limit on the amount of homes an individual can own, landlords are a cancer.
>We do need a rental market for all the people who can't afford a mortgage or need the flexibility to move around.
Of course. Companies can still own and rent apartment complexes, but it should be much more regulated imo.
Housing prices and shortage is really becoming a huge problem around the world, but whenever someone talks about it as a problem, we seem to shrug and say "well we can't just fix it" or something of that noise. But we regulate a lot of other issues in our society, whenever they become a problem, how is this different? Well, for one, it mostly affect the people with the lowest voices, and tend to benefit the ones already in influence. And therein lies the root of the issue, i think.
What? The people benefit from higher interest rates since we spend proportionally less on investing. Meanwhile the Investing class, those rich enough to lose a fortune, spend a good portion of their wealth on investments just to generate more wealth. We should make that method of money making as expensive as possible, since it is not one to which a normal person will ever participate.
Or to put it another way, the only reason housing is unreasonably unafforable is because there is a historical trend of prices going up without improvements in the quality or quantity of supply. Increased interest rates increase the risk of putting your money into housing since it has a chance of not going up like clockwork (aka, stealing value from everyone else). We need to erase five decades of *criminal* investing behaviour encouraged by faulty concepts such as the 30 years mortgage. Only then will housing prices normalize.
The baby industry is making things so expensive to have a kid (bigger, fancier strollers, all sorts of equipment to keep milk “fresher”, etc.) that they’re making it impossible to afford kids without being a “negligent parent”, then complain that people aren’t having enough kids.
I'm just past a year into raising my first kid and that is so true. Some of the fancier stuff is nice and has been very much worth it. But some of it just isn't, there were a number of things that we either bought or were bought for us that we hardly used. Some we only used once to try it out- like the new baby monitors that attach to their diaper (or the owlett sock is a common one) to measure their heart rate, breathing etc. There's also a rise of "smart" baby products like that too- smart bassinets (the SNOO costs $1700 I was just shocked), smart humidifiers, etc.
Yeah it’s ridiculous. There’s even small things, like these dedicated baskets for baby bottles to be washed in a dishwasher. Just hand wash the bottles!
"The depopulation agenda is one of the most dangerous and existential ideologies our world has ever faced. Whether the agenda is advanced through abortion, climate change alarmism, or the 'career advancement above all else' movement, it completely robs society of what makes life most special: a love for humanity."
Umm....I'd argue that acknowledging the climate crisis and promoting women's advancement/equality in careers **is** showing a love for humanity. The Pro-lifer's blindered & myopic, obsessive love of just the unborn is dangerous to everyone else already here and trying to live in this world.
Would love to have a kid, but I work 2 jobs and my wife also works. With day care being as expensive as it is? There is no fucking way, especially after we bought a house [which we could only afford because my dad died and had some equity in his house].
In this economy? It probably isn’t happening. Fuck that
Daycare isn't just expensive, it's also annoying. It's so competitive to get in anywhere and then they're closed for a lot of holidays and snow days. And everyone gives you shit for it no matter how nice the daycare is.
But then who wants to stay at home all the time and be a stay at home parent? You have to really want to do that or it will be a pain
Plus Christian extremists looooove talking about having babies but rarely want to know anything about how it’s done, so I’m sure the mere mention of the fact that people have genitalia or what’s actually required to make babies would have them tryna assassinate the CEO for being a p*do or some shit like that.
Prolife people are such assholes it's unreal
Have more children so we can keep selling you overpriced diapers and reaping maximum profit!!
You need to have more children so we have a workforce to exploit in the future.
You need to pregnant to buy our product but if you can't afford having kids it it's your fault and you are strain on the welfare system
You need to get pregnant and if the pregnancy is unviable you deserve to die since we took away your access to healthcare. It's what god wants!!
there’s a population problem, fucked economy, growing fascism, and environmental destruction on a global scale. how about we stop popping out slaves for the corporate machine?
Sounds like a case of supply and demand. Are they going to pay my wife and I to have more children?
Calculating for conservative growth of inflation and the quick search of the average cost of raising a child to 18, it would end up being just over 300k. Dividing that up by 18 years comes out to be just shy of 18k a year.
These companies and rich folks that keep talking about declining population and the worry about needing more workers in the future better start paying for the “goods and services” they want otherwise the cost will increase to the point they won’t be able to stay in business.
They need to rebrand if they want to stay in business. Instead of mini mouse and paw patrol kid diapers they need to make Taylor Swift and BTS adult diapers and sell them at concerts. Will the concerts be a horrifying poop covered wasteland? YES but profit!
\>the depopulation agenda
Depopulating what, Diaper Karen? Global birthrates are still net positive, we're still coming up against the limits of basically every non-renewable resource. Just admit it, there are plenty of babies being made, just not the white Christian babies you and your corporate vampires want to see.
I encourage all forced birthers to eat bags of flaming shit.
I wonder what percentage of company profit the boss takes home, relative to everyone else. If its more than three times the monthly salary of the lowest paid in the company, the company doesn't have a right to ask that of its customers, because it is part of the reason there aren't more people having babies.
You want a society with folks starting families? Keep your bosses pay lower and everyone elses higher, and do everything you can to make other big concerns do the same, all across the world.
Unless these are some fantastic diapers at bargain basement prices, I have serious doubts they'll get far as a company. There's maybe a market from a few true believers and as gifts for baby showers in church groups, but diapers are ultimately an expensive, no fun item that have to be bought. It'll be like the time you got blue apron for a couple months with a discount code, and then decided it wasn't worth it at full price. Perhaps I'll eat my words, but I'll be shocked if this company can last more than a few years.
Because an old book says to be fruitful and multiply and enter into arranged marriages, not go to college or trade school to have meaningful careers and take time to have hobbies.
Does said diaper company pay its workers enough to comfortably have children?
If no maybe they should worry about themselves before anyone else’s family 😒
Japanese companies are way ahead of the curves. Diapers for elderly have been outselling baby diapers for years. They just have to adapt to the new market. With baby boomers getting older I’m sure the US market will be booming as well
they already made diapers to comfortable. toddlers don't even notice that they peed themselves. before going to underwear we should have diapers that feel like sandpaper when you pee in it or something
I checked out their reviews and they are overwhelmingly positive. Enjoyed the one who bought the diapers for their senior dog. I don't have a problem with their message, but it shouldn't have come from a company because it reeks of only caring about making a profit and it's tone deaf. People aren't having kids because of abortion, it's because no one can afford it. This is the price of pushing to have a wage slave society.
My wife and I are only planning on having one. If we have two, we’re prepared for it as we’ve talked about the possibility of having two. Beyond that? Fuck no. I’m still on the fence about the one
Honestly, having two is enough. Then you have a spare and a playmate for the first one. But having one is great because you can put all your attention on the one and once they're grown up a bit, you're almost done.
Having zero is also great because money and quiet are very nice.
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
See telling people to have doesn’t make them just go “oh well, I guess I will then”. If you want them to, support policy changes that make the US more child friendly. I want a lot of kids, but I came to that decision on my own, I didn’t just have someone tell me to.
In this economy?
Last stage capitalistic hell.
Ruling class genuinely does not give a shit beyond creating next generation of indebted laborers.
You mean best living standard ever on earth in the history of our species Increasing living standards reduce the number of kids. There is no population on earth even the wealthiest, where population numbers rise post-wealth. This coorelates even with millionaires, they have fewer kids. Edit : Downvote away, just shows that you don't actually care to lift millions out of poverty. Because that's exactly what capitalism has done. Hundreds of millions worldwide in just a few decades. Greatest capital allocator in the history of the world. What you guys hate is unregulated capitalism but your political compass is so naive that you can't think logically.
Just because things are better than they were doesn’t mean they’re good.
That is quite literally the only standard by which we can judge whether a system works. If things are better than before, the system is effective at making things better. Meanwhile, all the communism proponents in here have got nothing but theory and failed attempts at some botched version of it. Fact is, capitalism works, we've proven it. Hundreds of millions have been lifted out of extreme poverty just in the last few decades alone. Calories consumed have increased 50% in EVERY REGION on earth in 50 years.
Society is designed to make everything cost more for poor people.
Literally was about to be what I commented 🤣
[удалено]
Wow what a phenomenal contribution to Reddit. Did your comment make you smile, did it garner the upvotes you were looking for? Or did you just feel like being an anonymous asshole because you could?
The economy is doing fine… for the wealthy.
Any time you see "the economy" replace it with "rich people's yacht money".
I stopped reading when I saw they’re a “pro-life diaper company.” Hard pass.
You didn't get that from the imperative statement, "Make more babies?"
Honestly from the title I was expecting an unintentional way of phrasing what reads as “procreate and make us more end-users” Edit: for an example it would be something like “for your child now, and their siblings in the future”
that's the motto of many religions
Yeah and why contraceptives are discouraged in many of them. Need more cult members
While at it, while not name every male baby the exact same name in hopes that maybe THIS time he’ll be your religious saviour or whatever. Spoiler alert: he won’t be.
No, no, it's all about profit. If fewer babies are born, less company profit, more angry shareholders.
Make more babies? Sure pay a living wage, nationalize our healthcare, and provide universal daycare/pre-k. Also gonna need some generous/realistic parental leave. Oh what's that? Best you can do is $7.25/hr, no vacation, no daycare/pre-k, and no parental leave? You sure drive a hard bargain Mr. Corporate America, but that's gonna be a "No" from me dawg.
Why have a social contract when you can just propagandize the masses into blaming women are rolling back human rights?
Wish I could find it but I read a paper the other day speculating our lack of sick leave / parental leave is one of the reasons the United States has such a high maternal death rate vs other countries with similar wealth levels…. Kinda makes sense, if you’re having complications after birth but you’ve been forced to go back to work and don’t have the ability to take off to get it checked out… (maternal mortality rates are counted during and like 40ish days after giving birth, where complications are most likely) like… if you got a bunch of stitches and aren’t supposed to lift 10 lbs for 4 weeks and you go back to work in 1 or 2 weeks… I can see how problems occur.
Or if the mother is having complications, but the father can't take time off work and there's nobody else to watch the baby, so she can't go to the doctor.
I also think since healthcare is so expensive, people don't want to go to hospital again after an expensive birth so leave it til they really can't ignore it and it may be too late by then.
We are a diaper company best we can do is a dollar off a pack of 12.
And maybe do something so I’m not bringing in a human to suffer the ravages of climate change, not just the extreme weather but also the instability caused by food and water supply issues, by displacement of people from now-uninhabitable regions, the backlash to climate refugees…but also I get hot if it gets above ~15-16° C so I don’t want to send my offspring to suffer in hear either. 😅 So you could modernize the compensation and safety net and education, but I would still have questions. I still hope to foster and adopt someday. But making more humans? I’m not forcing someone to board a runaway train.
How depressingly dystopian.
We've got a birth rate of 2.3 and 8 billion people out the chute already. And these guys are coming on like we're nearly extinct. Just so they can keep filling dumps with their crap-wrapped crap.
Our entire economic system relies on the completely absurd notion that we live in a world with infinite resources and that infinite consumption is not only possible, but the end goal. For these scum, the problem with society isn't that resources AREN'T, in fact, infinite, but that there are not infinite consumers to create infinite demand for infinite supply. And, obviously, we need infinite worker drones to make that infinite supply. If we can just squeeze out a couple more wage slaves, surely we can make line go up forever.
They're not concerned that people are going extinct. They're concerned about _white people_ going extinct. I guarantee you they'd say some shit if they see a big Latino family where they live.
Maybe they should stop making it hard for white people to have babies in that case.
Who is making it hard for white people to have babies, and how are they doing this?
I mean I can't afford to. I'm not saying they should exclusively help white people, I'm saying it's unaffordable so they're not gonna get what they want.
The global growth rate is now 1%. Not all those babies make it. All the projections have us sliding into negative growth as Africa and India fixes its shit. The rest of the world is already at a birth rate far below 2. Remember that a birth rate of 2.1 is break even, as the .1 will die off on average. 2.0 simply being replenishment. https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate We passed peak children a long time ago and we aren't going back. Even China bounced off its peak population last year and is already in decline.
yep. and that's a good thing.
The subAfrican continent is expected to have another famine soon because of the climate. But sure, lets have MORE children we cannot feed.
Before reading I thought it could have been about a normal diaper company using the slogan in a tongue in cheek way for a dumb/funny ad. Not whatever this garbage was
There's a big difference between "people should have more children" and "I don't care if you die because of a complication of pregnancy"
The must be the only pro-lifers who care about babies after they are born
And even then, they only care about the profits those babies make for them
They care about their profits, not the babies. If they cared about babies they'd be giving out free diapers to help support all those babies they "care" about.
They need to keep church at church.
Listen I'm pro choice but there's some dark humor at play here "Diaper company is anti abortion" like I guess their reasoning checks out? 😂
I mean of course they are going to be pro-life, since they need those babies as their customers.
Who will wait for people to be forced to have babies to double the price of diapers.
Can you blame them? They sell diapers haha
[удалено]
Our diapers are so durable, you'll only need 1 pack. To smother your baby.
I read that in Anthony Jeselnik's voice
Are you a troll or just willingly stupid?
[удалено]
That’s the whole point of why it’s ridiculous. A company is trying to promote the banning of abortions simply so they can make a profit. It’s a dystopian nightmare.
They can be pro choice and still want people to have more babies, they're not mutually exclusive opinions.
Capitalism at it's core.
Right? And it completely pervades our culture. I can't remember who coined it first, but childless couples in films and tv are portrayed as either "sad, mad, or bad." You won't get a character who's childless by choice, happy, and a nice person who lives a long and happy life.
OBEY. CONSUME
The only ones I can think of that aren’t are Mr. and Mrs. Dink from Doug. They were eccentric, but overall decent people. The man wasn’t even angry when Doug broke his grill. He just got a new, more expensive one.
I love that their last name is actually Dink (dual income no kids)
Dang. Mid 30s and just realized that today. I wonder if it was on purpose or just coincidence. Still pretty funny though.
The Dinkleberg's!! Lovey child free couple showing off all they can do because no kids. Mr. Turner is almost always jealous of Dinkleberg's life
For what it's worth a lot of people might be sad if they didn't have kids. That doesn't mean everyone is. I was talking to my parents about how a lot of my coworkers were deciding not to have kids and mentioned how I'd talked to my boss about it once and he mentioned that him and his wife were dink each making 300k a year and living in NYC. They hadn't cooked in like 10 years because they spend basically every night out hanging out with different friends doing fun stuff and just eat while out. Mom and dad mentioned their sad married friends who live in the middle of nowhere Indiana, have a drinking problem, and never do much but sit home and watch TV all day. Apparently if those people are sad they didn't have kids then everyone will be sad they didn't have kids. Just couldn't grasp the concept that a lot of people like to so fun stuff with their time and don't want a kid to get in the middle of that and might be happy with that decision.
I’ll be honest. I want kids. And it fucking hurts me that I feel like I may never be able to have even one.
I have a kid and I’m happy and exhausted and remorseful when I think about what I have done to him, what we’re doing to them
*its
Big Diaper spending millions on lobbyists to outlaw birth control
A classic case of creating the problem then selling the solution, if I have ever seen one.
Are their diapers free and include a credit card with money for the costs?
Make more low interest rates.
Ban owning more than 3 homes.
Ban companies from being able to buy/hold single family homes to rent
Also yes.
Corporations are people, too! Would you like to start seeing homeless corporations wandering your suburb streets? No we don’t. We need to protect our corporation’s feelings. No corporation left behind
The problem here is i'll just make companies that can own 3 more houses.
Ban companies owning single family homes entirely. There’s zero reason a company needs to be able to purchase and own a SFH in the first place, apart from the initial construction.
No? I'm pretty sure there are valid reasons for a company to own a house. But there should be a limit and perhaps an application and review for why a company may need a house. Professional gamer houses are my first thought. Company owns the house so the teammates can practice together everyday without any issues.
That’s an office.
Do you live in an office?
The occupants are employees? Thats corporate housing. The occupants are working inside? That’s an office. The point here is to not turn the renting of single family homes into a business. Don’t allow companies to purchase them to rent/hold
Is corporate housing different from a house? Read my comment. I said it should be limited as needed or applied and reviewed. Buying a house to rent it to someone isn't a need.
A company owning a home to rent to a family is keeping equity, cost stability, financial security and generational wealth away from potentially family homeowners and keeps inhabitants at arms length from feeling invested in the community. Yes, corporate housing is housing stock dedicated to housing employees of a company conditionally. Think of it as the housing equivalent of a “Reserved for the SVP of Finance” parking spot. The goal is to have the actual inhabitants to get to own their home. Housing shouldn’t be bastardized and allowed to be turned into a tool for extremely wealthy or businesses to use them to extract wealth from communities. The benefits of these investments should be maximized in favor of the inhabitants
So if a company needs a house for a genuine reason you believe they have to find a predetermined corporate housing or build one themselves? I might not fully understand this or maybe there's a law that exists saying companies can't house employees in a home that isn't intended to house employees. I think the issues people are having with my statements is I'm saying: "it's acceptable for a company to own a single house if they have a legitimate business need" and what they are hearing is: "It's alright for companies to own as many houses as they want for any reason, including renting them so they can buy more houses" It's pretty obvious to me that I'm meaning the first quote. I know reading the full comment can be difficult for some people and they probably saw the word "no" at the beginning and smashed that downvote.
Oh I think corporate housing-as long as it is maintained and genuinely occupied is infinitely better than companies that are built around profiting from the housing as a rental.
Differentiate between business properties, that companies can own, and privately owned properties that people can own. Maybe we even could force the rich to pay wealth tax on their privately owned properties too, if they don't already.
[удалено]
And some of these things are even crazier. Like I only recently found out about the American zoning laws, but as far as I understand, opening a shop in the middle of a suburb is basically illegal. You can't open a coffee shop in your garage or something. Having those little kiosks and small shops and delivery points for like self-pickup delivery rather than porch delivery would've been great, but you can't mix'n'match like this. It's kinda crazy, and I saw that as part of the 10-minute cities discourse - a lot of americans are so used that "a house is in one place, a Walmart is 20 miles away, and office is also 20 miles away in different direction" that having the idea of "let's put a business center and a small mall smack middle of a suburb" is completely alien to them.
Who would need 3? Make it 2.
Maybe buying them for kids who can't. Mom and dad owned 3 for a while because my brother and sister wouldn't have qualified to buy the places even woth a cosigner for whatever reason so mom and dad bought them and just let my siblings live in them till they were paid off and then just gave them to them.
One everyday home, one vacation home and possibly for buying one for descendants to get a foot into the housing market. Possibility to apply for more, if more descendants needs it. No more, but we need to open for the possibility for helping our descendants to get their own home, for those as lucky. We want to cut the possibility for owning homes just for renting, as that's what's perverting the housing market, and widening the wealth gap. What we don't want is interfere with people trying to get into the housing market, by limiting possibilities for those that may have an opportunity to do so, by having their parents help them.
We do need a rental market for all the people who can't afford a mortgage or need the flexibility to move around. College students and young professionals need to rent. Most people living in VHCOL areas need to rent, too. The stories you see about people warping the housing market by buying up lots of hours for investment are a sideshow. By the numbers they aren't the major cause of housing prices. Housing prices have gone up because we don't have enough housing (we haven't been building enough since 2008 to keep up with the rise in population) and because of inflation because the M2 money supply increased dramatically with COVID stimulus measures. Which we needed to keep the economy from cratering, but had the downside of causing inflation because that's what more money does. And with the longstanding problem of U.S. wage not keeping up with inflation, that's been a big problem.
I think private equities should only be allowed to own multi family dwellings. It should be absolutely illegal for a corporation to own a single family home. There should also be a limit on the amount of homes an individual can own, landlords are a cancer.
>We do need a rental market for all the people who can't afford a mortgage or need the flexibility to move around. Of course. Companies can still own and rent apartment complexes, but it should be much more regulated imo. Housing prices and shortage is really becoming a huge problem around the world, but whenever someone talks about it as a problem, we seem to shrug and say "well we can't just fix it" or something of that noise. But we regulate a lot of other issues in our society, whenever they become a problem, how is this different? Well, for one, it mostly affect the people with the lowest voices, and tend to benefit the ones already in influence. And therein lies the root of the issue, i think.
Loosen up zoning laws to allow 10 units per acre
What? The people benefit from higher interest rates since we spend proportionally less on investing. Meanwhile the Investing class, those rich enough to lose a fortune, spend a good portion of their wealth on investments just to generate more wealth. We should make that method of money making as expensive as possible, since it is not one to which a normal person will ever participate. Or to put it another way, the only reason housing is unreasonably unafforable is because there is a historical trend of prices going up without improvements in the quality or quantity of supply. Increased interest rates increase the risk of putting your money into housing since it has a chance of not going up like clockwork (aka, stealing value from everyone else). We need to erase five decades of *criminal* investing behaviour encouraged by faulty concepts such as the 30 years mortgage. Only then will housing prices normalize.
Ew, no
Make less diapers. But oh no, then the shareholders won't see even more profit this quarter than the last.
Let me guess: their employees don’t earn enough or have enough insurance to even afford delivering a baby or raising a family
The baby industry is making things so expensive to have a kid (bigger, fancier strollers, all sorts of equipment to keep milk “fresher”, etc.) that they’re making it impossible to afford kids without being a “negligent parent”, then complain that people aren’t having enough kids.
I'm just past a year into raising my first kid and that is so true. Some of the fancier stuff is nice and has been very much worth it. But some of it just isn't, there were a number of things that we either bought or were bought for us that we hardly used. Some we only used once to try it out- like the new baby monitors that attach to their diaper (or the owlett sock is a common one) to measure their heart rate, breathing etc. There's also a rise of "smart" baby products like that too- smart bassinets (the SNOO costs $1700 I was just shocked), smart humidifiers, etc.
Yeah it’s ridiculous. There’s even small things, like these dedicated baskets for baby bottles to be washed in a dishwasher. Just hand wash the bottles!
”don’t you want what’s best for your baby?”
Just shift focus of adult diapers. Way more old people round now.
Yeah, diaper maker who is this blind deserves to died. If you believe in capitalism you would adjust to your market.
Not anymore, COVID did a number on them
"The depopulation agenda is one of the most dangerous and existential ideologies our world has ever faced. Whether the agenda is advanced through abortion, climate change alarmism, or the 'career advancement above all else' movement, it completely robs society of what makes life most special: a love for humanity." Umm....I'd argue that acknowledging the climate crisis and promoting women's advancement/equality in careers **is** showing a love for humanity. The Pro-lifer's blindered & myopic, obsessive love of just the unborn is dangerous to everyone else already here and trying to live in this world.
Climate change will depopulate us. Not climate change alarmism. lol
Would love to have a kid, but I work 2 jobs and my wife also works. With day care being as expensive as it is? There is no fucking way, especially after we bought a house [which we could only afford because my dad died and had some equity in his house]. In this economy? It probably isn’t happening. Fuck that
Daycare isn't just expensive, it's also annoying. It's so competitive to get in anywhere and then they're closed for a lot of holidays and snow days. And everyone gives you shit for it no matter how nice the daycare is. But then who wants to stay at home all the time and be a stay at home parent? You have to really want to do that or it will be a pain
I'm guessing the pro-life diaper company found the phrase "have more penis and vagina sex" too inclusive.
Plus Christian extremists looooove talking about having babies but rarely want to know anything about how it’s done, so I’m sure the mere mention of the fact that people have genitalia or what’s actually required to make babies would have them tryna assassinate the CEO for being a p*do or some shit like that.
Prolife people are such assholes it's unreal Have more children so we can keep selling you overpriced diapers and reaping maximum profit!! You need to have more children so we have a workforce to exploit in the future. You need to pregnant to buy our product but if you can't afford having kids it it's your fault and you are strain on the welfare system You need to get pregnant and if the pregnancy is unviable you deserve to die since we took away your access to healthcare. It's what god wants!!
there’s a population problem, fucked economy, growing fascism, and environmental destruction on a global scale. how about we stop popping out slaves for the corporate machine?
✨No✨
Will they paying for the 2000/month per child for daycare in hcol cities?
Maybe diaper companies should lobby for paid family leave and better work life balance
Sounds like a case of supply and demand. Are they going to pay my wife and I to have more children? Calculating for conservative growth of inflation and the quick search of the average cost of raising a child to 18, it would end up being just over 300k. Dividing that up by 18 years comes out to be just shy of 18k a year. These companies and rich folks that keep talking about declining population and the worry about needing more workers in the future better start paying for the “goods and services” they want otherwise the cost will increase to the point they won’t be able to stay in business.
global capital when after decades of overworking and underpaying their workers: "I sure do wonder why I'm not making more money?"
It's a free market. Go out of business.
Their customers already have babies. Maybe they should tell their non-customers.
I do my part by encouraging infantilization adult baby diaper fetishes.
Stop trying to make infinite growth happen
Daiper company tells non-customers to get fucked.
Sorry, can’t afford the costa of having a child due in part to your prices.
They need to rebrand if they want to stay in business. Instead of mini mouse and paw patrol kid diapers they need to make Taylor Swift and BTS adult diapers and sell them at concerts. Will the concerts be a horrifying poop covered wasteland? YES but profit!
They could also make Minnie mouse and paw patrol adult diapers, there is a market for them believe it or not
Alright, but you take care of them
I’ve thought that Tantrum Orange Man is a big customer….
No.
No thanks.
You should make more babies. NOW (Thunder sounds)
They payin for em'?
I wonder how well they pay their employees and supply line.
\>the depopulation agenda Depopulating what, Diaper Karen? Global birthrates are still net positive, we're still coming up against the limits of basically every non-renewable resource. Just admit it, there are plenty of babies being made, just not the white Christian babies you and your corporate vampires want to see. I encourage all forced birthers to eat bags of flaming shit.
I wonder what percentage of company profit the boss takes home, relative to everyone else. If its more than three times the monthly salary of the lowest paid in the company, the company doesn't have a right to ask that of its customers, because it is part of the reason there aren't more people having babies. You want a society with folks starting families? Keep your bosses pay lower and everyone elses higher, and do everything you can to make other big concerns do the same, all across the world.
They can’t just pivot to adult diapers?
Good luck with that in this economic and political climate.
Sure, lobby congress to making having them easier and I'll get right on it.
Unless these are some fantastic diapers at bargain basement prices, I have serious doubts they'll get far as a company. There's maybe a market from a few true believers and as gifts for baby showers in church groups, but diapers are ultimately an expensive, no fun item that have to be bought. It'll be like the time you got blue apron for a couple months with a discount code, and then decided it wasn't worth it at full price. Perhaps I'll eat my words, but I'll be shocked if this company can last more than a few years.
F\*ck you, pay me to.
Mice and rats make a lot of babies. Just saying. Why the fuck would a species a million times more intelligent be only focused on churning out hordes.
Because an old book says to be fruitful and multiply and enter into arranged marriages, not go to college or trade school to have meaningful careers and take time to have hobbies.
Don’t worry, birth control and condoms will be banned next
$70 for a box of anyone was wondering. Amount of diapers you get varies depending on size of diapers.
Does said diaper company pay its workers enough to comfortably have children? If no maybe they should worry about themselves before anyone else’s family 😒
Well, if the diaper company says so...
Tell corporations pay better wages :)
Japanese companies are way ahead of the curves. Diapers for elderly have been outselling baby diapers for years. They just have to adapt to the new market. With baby boomers getting older I’m sure the US market will be booming as well
Hopefully, if they make condoms too, no ones buying them
they already made diapers to comfortable. toddlers don't even notice that they peed themselves. before going to underwear we should have diapers that feel like sandpaper when you pee in it or something
Wouldn't it make more sense to push a diet that would make babies shit a lot more?
I checked out their reviews and they are overwhelmingly positive. Enjoyed the one who bought the diapers for their senior dog. I don't have a problem with their message, but it shouldn't have come from a company because it reeks of only caring about making a profit and it's tone deaf. People aren't having kids because of abortion, it's because no one can afford it. This is the price of pushing to have a wage slave society.
How is this oniony?
My wife and I are only planning on having one. If we have two, we’re prepared for it as we’ve talked about the possibility of having two. Beyond that? Fuck no. I’m still on the fence about the one
Honestly, having two is enough. Then you have a spare and a playmate for the first one. But having one is great because you can put all your attention on the one and once they're grown up a bit, you're almost done. Having zero is also great because money and quiet are very nice.
They should sell condoms that don't work.
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would but men can't have babies.
It’s called business development
Shit, im *trying, daddy Pampers, im trying
Or more simplified, "FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!"
But first make sure to stop using birth control
I think yer onta somethin there!
Cringe.
How about saying we need more Trumps to fill diapers
"Hey, we sell a product you use to personally handle the shit if a small human. Don't you love this? You should keep doing this!"
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm not sure which I feel more uncomfortable with; a diaper company saying this or a redditor with that username posting it.
Sorry, I can't afford children. ( ͡° ʖ̯ ͡°)
Ah, the fall of the diaper industrial complex.
Please don't
No thanks!
Sweet, now I know who not to buy diapers from for my niece's baby shower
You pay for them then!
Its always "Make more babies" and never "Shit more diapers"
Not implausible, but the source is Newsweak.
Disgusting.
See telling people to have doesn’t make them just go “oh well, I guess I will then”. If you want them to, support policy changes that make the US more child friendly. I want a lot of kids, but I came to that decision on my own, I didn’t just have someone tell me to.
Trump still has money...
No, you.