this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
64 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10792 readers
267 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This is definitely a contributor, but declining fertility rates isn't a new thing.

I think the largest problem is average hours worked per parent has been increasing for 60 plus years.

We need more full time jobs at 30 hours a week or so.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about this issue 2 decades ago: The Two Income Trap.

It used to be that you could afford a mortgage on 1 income. Now you can’t even afford it on 2. The explosion of 2 income households has made it much harder to compete in the bidding wars for housing.

At the same time, homeowners (NIMBYs) go to city hall and fight tooth and nail to protect their investments by blocking new housing development. It’s this horrible cycle of ladder pulling.

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I haven't read, but read a brief summary. Thanks for sharing.

It felt unintuitive to me at first. Why would two incomes be more risky than a single income? But yeah if one of those two become incapicated/unable to find work.. you are screwed since you need both. Single income you essentially have a backup (assuming they can find work)

So, reduced work week would free up needed time and reduce convenience costs, but families are still exposed.

But I don't want to go back to a single income household at a societal level (doesn't sound like EW did either). Tricky.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about this issue 2 decades ago: The Two Income Trap.

and she did nothing about it.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What did you expect her to do about it?

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

To consume her enemies and grow mighty from their combined strength until she becomes too powerful, and a global army has to be assembled to defeat the 900 foot tall super monster who has made her way to Tokyo and is devouring all in her path.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

That works for me!

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

God I wouldn't have the energy to raise kids. I work, my wife works, and working to pay someone else to raise my kids that I only see when I finish work sounds like shit.

[–] tangonov@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

Depends on where you are. My wife and I work 100 hours a week easy