info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
WaPo: "Millennials aren't having kids, Here are the reasons why."
28 views
Skip to first unread message
Kenny McCormack
Nov 7, 2023, 1:23:15 PM11/7/23
to
In article <9830c6a2-1484-4dad...@googlegroups.com>,
Lenona <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/03/millennials-only-children/?...
Note that you don't need all that extra stuff. You can (and should)
truncate it to just:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/03/millennials-only-children/
Anyway, I found the article hard to read because of its silly tone. It
kept going back and forth. Still, the tl;dr as far as I can tell is:
People who want kids have lots of them. People who don't don't.
So "average" is not the best descriptive statistic.
--
When I was growing up we called them "retards", but that's not PC anymore.
Now, we just call them "Trump Voters".
The question is, of course, how much longer it will be until that term is also un-PC.
Lenona <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/03/millennials-only-children/?...
Note that you don't need all that extra stuff. You can (and should)
truncate it to just:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/03/millennials-only-children/
Anyway, I found the article hard to read because of its silly tone. It
kept going back and forth. Still, the tl;dr as far as I can tell is:
People who want kids have lots of them. People who don't don't.
So "average" is not the best descriptive statistic.
--
When I was growing up we called them "retards", but that's not PC anymore.
Now, we just call them "Trump Voters".
The question is, of course, how much longer it will be until that term is also un-PC.
Lenona
Nov 7, 2023, 1:58:21 PM11/7/23
to
I thought it wouldn't get around the paywall if I truncated it.
Anyway, one never knows what the comments will be like. The WaPo is often great, in that respect.
Bot one thing I wonder about is what someone else said:
"In the late 19th century, living was cheap and goods were expensive. Now, it's the other way around."
I mean, what is "living"? Food and clothing were MORE expensive back then, I believe.
MAYBE city housing, college, health care (and servants) were cheaper in the 1890s...but was anything else?
Anyway, one never knows what the comments will be like. The WaPo is often great, in that respect.
Bot one thing I wonder about is what someone else said:
"In the late 19th century, living was cheap and goods were expensive. Now, it's the other way around."
I mean, what is "living"? Food and clothing were MORE expensive back then, I believe.
MAYBE city housing, college, health care (and servants) were cheaper in the 1890s...but was anything else?
0 new messages