[lotsofpulp]

Yes, let’s sacrifice the best child bearing years of our lives so that we can outcompete someone else who didn’t sacrifice the best child bearing years of their lives, and then increase the probability of spending a good portion of those savings on fertility treatments.

There can exist a balance between investing in one’s future versus enjoying the present. Nature doesn’t make each day equivalent to the next, and it’s crazy to see so many in the rat race in 20s and 30s so that they can “relax” in their 50s and 60s, because they’re competing against others willing to sacrifice their 20s and 30s.

[dmd149]

Okay.

What I gather from your comment is that you believe Sweden is superior to the US in the sense that culturally, they are not as enamored of the rat race and reinforce their preferences for a more balanced life with social policies funded by relatively high tax rates (when compared to the US).

Whereas in the US, we are more into “getting ahead” in our prime years and this is reinforced by our social and tax policy allowing Americans to keep more of their money and make decisions on their own that support the individual’s values.

My original comment was simply asking if anyone has as data that can show what the net income of an American vs a Swede after paying for the costs associated with raising a child. I made no value judgements there, simply wanted to source the data.

[lotsofpulp]

Pretty sure that data is uncollectible, due to the amount of work it would take to normalize taxes across many decades and the difficulty in simply sourcing it in the first place.

But at the end of the day, what matters is how secure a new mother and father feel and how much time they get to spend with their child. Obviously, one can sacrifice this in the pursuit of income, but who would want their children to have to choose between future financial security and bonding with a newborn?