Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
CrashedOutAndBurned

Late Babies - How Far Is Hpi To Blame?

Recommended Posts

This bbc article described how mothers are having kids later and later. Usually these articles are framed within a sense of 'superwomen', 'wanting it all', somehow selfishly putting their babies and risk by having them late.

Over the past few years, women in thier 20s and early thirties are not having kids for one reason alone - extreme living costs, HPI especially.

Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

Also, very late mothers suffer other problems. Nowadays, we may have our lives extendeded, but paradoxially, more people have more 'ongoing conditions' than before which can restrict middle-age - cancer scares, diabities, athritis, hip problems, etc.

Also, family support networks may be reduced if granny and grandad also older and therefore unable to be a as hands on with the baby.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4248244.stm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Britain does has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in Europe...

Seriously, HPI and general cost of living is very much to blame for the declining birth rate. It's just a consequence of living in such a materialistic society. There's something very telling in that Brits have more credit cards than the rest of Europe put together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wrongmove
Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

I believe it is a factor, but only a sumptom of a more general phenomena, that people prefer money to reproducing.

Capitalism is cool, but it is an evolutionary deadend in this respect. A species survives by breeding, not shopping. But rich countries have to survive by using the poor and immigrants to breed (not just uk) !

The longterm consequences of this are profound. The fact remains that poorer nations are more "productive" as lust for money does not stop them replacing themselves!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, so many people need two incomes maxed out just to live.

Most do not see how they can cut back enough to have kids. What's more, many couples do not want to have a kid and give it two a child minder five minutes later as they need to carry on working. They see that as perverse, which is understandable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This bbc article described how mothers are having kids later and later. Usually these articles are framed within a sense of 'superwomen', 'wanting it all', somehow selfishly putting their babies and risk by having them late.

Over the past few years, women in thier 20s and early thirties are not having kids for one reason alone - extreme living costs, HPI especially.

Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

Also, very late mothers suffer other problems. Nowadays, we may have our lives extendeded, but paradoxially, more people have more 'ongoing conditions' than before which can restrict middle-age - cancer scares, diabities, athritis, hip problems, etc.

Also, family support networks may be reduced if granny and grandad also older and therefore unable to be a as hands on with the baby.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4248244.stm

Whilst I believe the housing market will crash. I laugh now when I come on here. There is almost a paranoia on here that everything must be related to the satan of HPI. Nowhere in the article does it say HPI is to blame.

"Over the last 20 years the average age for a woman to have their first baby has risen from 26 to 29. " Over the past 20 years everyone. Presumably this increase in the age of first time mothers also occured during the early 1990's recession.

Anyone can make statistics fuel their own argument. After all "There are lies, damn lies and statistics".

I could turn the argument round and say the age will increase because of house price deflation. People will have to tighten their belts more and can't afford to have kids.

Don't get yourselves wrapped up in your own community. HPI is a symptom of the world today and the government we have, not the other way round. And Shock/Horror as it may be to a lot of you, you are not what the world revolves around, so get over yourselves!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm talking about lots of people who would loive to have kids right now but don't see how they could afford it.

Granted, the days of being married at 19 and having a kid at 21 have gone due to people wanting to explore other othings.

I'm talking about couples in reasonable jobs married or in settled relationships that simply do not see where the 'slack' is that will enable them to start a family. Many will be saving for a home, worrying about pensions, student loans, etc.

To put the question another way, 'How many people (friends, family, workmates) have you heard about that are putting off kids due to extreme living costs?'

What I'm sayign the 'selfish superwoman' idea smothers out the fact that plenty of people still want kids these days, and not aged 39.

Edited by CrashedOutAndBurned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm talking about lots of people who would loive to have kids right now but don't see how they could afford it.

Granted, the days of being married at 19 and having a kid at 21 have gone due to people wanting to explore other othings.

I'm talking about couples in reasonable jobs married or in settled relationships that simply do not see where the 'slack' is that will enable them to start a family. Many will be saving for a home, worrying about pensions, student loans, etc.

To put the question another way, 'How many people (friends, family, workmates) have you heard about that are putting off kids due to extreme living costs?'

What I'm sayign the 'selfish superwoman' idea smothers out the fact that plenty of people still want kids these days, and not aged 39.

So remove reckless statements like "Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

" from your posts............................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why remove the statement?

I'd say that if there had been no HPI boom, many more people would have the slack. It's obvious that a 1999 mortgage of £500 Vs. £1200 in 2005 for the same house, is a major slack remover among other things.

Edited by CrashedOutAndBurned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why remove the statement?

I'd say that if there had been no HPI boom, many more people would have the slack. It's obvious that a 1999 mortgage of £500 Vs. £1200 in 2005 for the same house, is a major slack remover among other things.

So show me the figures if you are so informed that directly prove since 1999 the age of first time mothers has jumped significantly. The article refers to a 20 year period, which includes a recession. Show me that people had babies earlier in the period 1994-1999 and I'll support your argument. Fact is you can't so without all of the facts and data, your statement is reckless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could say that 60 odd years ago women put off having children until their 30s because the country was at war, my mother was 35 when I was born and 39 when she had my brother for that very reason. It was bloody difficult to start a family when your husband was the other side of the world for years on end fighting for his country.

The main reason women are putting off having children now is simple - because they want it all. Established careers, high earning power and then children once they've achieved everything else.

It's pure nonsense to attribute this to high house prices, 20 or 30 years ago women had far fewer expectations of career achievement. You had children, worked part time when they were small and did without luxuries during that period of your life - there was also a far smaller proportion of the population that owned its own homes. Now I wonder why that was?

Perhaps if we stopped aiming for a ridiculous 50% of the population having degrees, women would have children earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So remove reckless statements like "Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

" from your posts............................

Statement I see no statement?

I see a hypothesis that will be tested through debate on this thread but no statement.

Now if it was "HPI is now destroying human reproduction" that would be another matter.

Edited by mustrum_ridcully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevino,

The stats are here, not right up to date.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/popu...gfert_pt109.pdf

Post 1970 ish since the banks have run amock with lending the birth rate has been falling and the average age at which childen have been born has been rising.

If you can't see that the requiment for 2 jobs is only going to act to decrease the birth rate and increase the age at which they are born without statistical evidence you have a tenuous grip on reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A large increase in women in the workforce means that there are far more 2 income households than before. One side effect of this is that this can drive up house prices as 2 incomes are bidding for the same property, fuelling the house price boom. The benefits of having a more economically active workforce no doubt outweigh the disadvantages, but it is certainly more difficult these days for a "traditional" family, with a stay-at-home mum to get on the property ladder.

While all would like to have their dream house before reproducing, it is nonsense to say that people cannot "afford" to have babies. How that this be a serious comment when we see babies starving to death in Africa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it all depends on when you meet your partner!. I was 31 when I met my husband and he was 35. We were lucky enough to have a daughter when I was 34yrs. I know many single women in their late twenties and early thirties who are single, they have no choice but to wait.!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's right to point the finger at HPI singularly but rather at the overall increased costs of living.

I've no data to back this up but being in the "data set", I feel I can speak with some insight. I'm mid twenties and haven't bought a home because, up until the last couple of years, we simply weren't ready.

We (Ms Lib and I) and almost all of the couples we know have delayed(after much heartache and soul-searching, I might add) having kids because it is simpy too expensive.

You might say thats a cold, calculated decision and that "there's no price on a families happiness" but it is a stark reality of life in UK for many young couples.

Like I say, I don't have any hard data to back this up but I do have my own experiences and those of a large circle of "20 & 30 something" friends, family and colleagues - many with their lives "on hold" due to an economy built on debt (IMO).

As far as a solution goes, we've got to move away from the consumer society. Couples don't all need full-time dual incomes. It just feels like that because everyone is fixated on having so much "stuff".

I distanced myself from the whole consumer frenzy some time ago and we now only buy essential items. We shop at markets and downgraded the cars to runarounds. It is so much easier to see through the mass marketing and advertising and we simply smile in wonder as we see people loading up their debts buying crap they don't need.

Is it really unrealistic to live on one full-time income, one part-time and more time with the kids....and less "stuff" !?!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The dude
So remove reckless statements like "Is HPI now destroying human reproduction?

" from your posts............................

Kevin...stop being a silly ass - is it not possible for you to use some kind of lateral thinking and to read between the lines? Or are you just incapable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t often disagree with Blue Lady, but on this one I sympathise with author of this thread.

I wouldn’t want to have children whilst renting the place I have now. I would prefer to have my own place, and not have my family and I answerable to a landlord not this day and age.

AST still favours in the direction of landlords and leaving practically zero rights for tenants. When you have a family you need more say in the place you live. I like to hang a few pictures on the wall for example.

I think kevino is in one of his provocative moods as he has raised a confrontation element to what is benign and genuine inquiry to the relevance of high prices correlated to homemaking for a family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The impact on society of overly high house prices is well documented.

It is a medical fact that the later a woman has a baby the more problems there are likely to be during pregnancy. These rise exponentially after the age of 35. Scary decision today for a lady 30 - 34 keen to have children but who also wants a settled home environment first. I think this aspect of childbirth is a fairly recent phenomena. I also believe the desire to have children would outweigh any hardnosed economic analysis in any couples decision to have children.

What is not proven yet is how society will cope in future years as youngsters develop away from the traditional family structure of 1 parent working and 1 parent concentrating on raising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, so many people need two incomes maxed out just to live.

Most do not see how they can cut back enough to have kids. What's more, many couples do not want to have a kid and give it two a child minder five minutes later as they need to carry on working. They see that as perverse, which is understandable.

people don't really need two incomes to live, they just need to learn how to spend their current money and stop paying others + tax to do the simple jobs they can do for themselves.

for instance, non-chav loaf costs about £1 - that's dear!

strong plain flour (can use UK grown plain @ 35p, but it goes a bit cakey) 54p (ASDA) will make three loaves.

yeast, next to nothing (don't buy the stupid ripp-off sachets - you have been warned)

bit of gas to bake them (bake in bulk - bread or even dough, freezes very very well)

bit of sugar

bit of salt

half an hour effort on your part kneading... rest is waiting (that's easy!!!)

outcome: scrumtious bread at less than 20p a loaf free of crap. freeze it or eat it within a couple of days. add some egg, marg, lard... to increase shelf life.

three sliced loaves from shop, £3. a saving of £2.80.

i am on a mission to make the most of what i have. bread is a very easy target.

my next target i hope to meet by next summer; i have made available a patch to grow barley and hop vines, you know the rest... :)

Edited by farmerdring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kevino,

The stats are here, not right up to date.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/popu...gfert_pt109.pdf

Post 1970 ish since the banks have run amock with lending the birth rate has been falling and the average age at which childen have been born has been rising.

If you can't see that the requiment for 2 jobs is only going to act to decrease the birth rate and increase the age at which they are born without statistical evidence you have a tenuous grip on reality.

Just because it is post 1970's how can you tie it to the banks' lending??

OK, I decide I will tie it to the rise in Feminism, the Sex Discrimination act, etc., prove me wrong................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
people don't really need two incomes to live, they just need to learn how to spend their current money and stop paying others + tax to do the simple jobs they can do for themselves.

for instance, non-chav loaf costs about £1 - that's dear!

strong plain flour (can use UK grown plain @ 35p, but it goes a bit cakey) 54p (ASDA) will make three loaves.

yeast, next to nothing (don't buy the stupid ripp-off sachets - you have been warned)

bit of gas to bake them (bake in bulk - bread or even dough, freezes very very well)

bit of sugar

bit of salt

half an hour effort on your part kneading... rest is waiting (that's easy!!!)

outcome: scrumtious bread at less than 20p a loaf free of crap. freeze it or eat it within a couple of days. add some egg, marg, lard... to increase shelf life.

three sliced loaves from shop, £3. a saving of £2.80.

i am on a mission to make the most of what i have. bread is a very easy target.

my next target i hope to meet by next summer; i have made available a patch to grow barley and hop vines, you know the rest... :)

But man can't live on Bread Alone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just because it is post 1970's how can you tie it to the banks' lending??

OK, I decide I will tie it to the rise in Feminism, the Sex Discrimination act, etc., prove me wrong................

Impossible to prove you wrong because you're absolutely right. Add in reliability of contraception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.