Or possibly you would have learned emotional regulation sooner.
Kids change you, for the better if you let it. There's nothing like a completely helpless infant who is totally dependent on you to wear down your selfish tendencies.
I don't dispute that the teen birth rate is much lower now. I'm trying to estimate out the counterfactual "what would the US birth rate be if teen pregnancy was (say) the same as 2 decades ago" ? Currently it's 1.66.
But the back-of-napkin math is hard for me to figure out from the given "births per 1,000" women per different age group.
Just the other day my wife and I were marveling that people in our neighborhood groups are requiring pet sitters to be insured and bonded.
The future has always been uncertain. The modern world focusses on risk mitigation to an astonishing degree compared to generations even in the relatively recent past. A lot of that has produced good results. But personally I suspect that we're overly focussed on safety to a degree that inhibits human flourishing.
> There is no effect on money supply if this is funded through taxes
Of course there is. Suppose we tax Elon several billion dollars. Now, instead of sitting in his money vault, it flows into the economy where it increases demand pressure.
The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population.
Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse.
There may be a way to accept low or no growth without economic collapse, but if there is no one has figured it out yet. That's nothing to be cavalier about.
Looking at exit pool demographics might help if you're struggling to have any empathy for a Trump voter. They are largely working class and undereducated and astonishingly diverse for a republican candidate in recent memory.
This can be done, carefully, through in-person conversations. I think it may be nearly impossible on social media, whose primary purpose seems to be to enforce group identity.
>it seems entirely possible (maybe even likely) that what we experience as consciousness is some kind of illusory side-effect of biological processes as opposed to something autonomous and “real”.
I've heard this idea before but I have never been able to make head or tail of it. Consciousness can't be an illusion, because to have an illusion you must already be conscious. Can a rock have illusions?
"You" can learn to steer your mind by choosing which of these thoughts to capture and dwell on, by monitoring them.
There is voluminous writing in the area of monastic spiritually about this. On the one hand, they affirm that these thoughts aren't chosen, using the vocabulary of sinful thoughts introduced by demons. But it's also clear that change is possible through prayer/meditation (not exactly identical to modern ideas about mindfulness).