Recent study found that giving men a pay raise led them to have more children, while giving women a pay raise led them to have fewer children. https://www.everydayinterpreter.com/p/money-and-motherhood
Obvious truth. Men pay the bills. Women use credit.
>>534190776This is the kind of thing you don't need a study for because it's self evident (although you probably should have one so you can push it up the ass of any retard feminist that disputes it).Obviously this applies to career professional and not fastfood worker, but if you have a woman working full time in an office, developing her career, she's probably already not having kids or has already had kids. Giving her a bigger chunk of cash will make her less likely to want to put her career on hold or abandon it altogether to raise kids/raise more kids. Not all men, but at least a chunk of men working in the same office setting are already the main provider for a family with children; if money is the constraint on the number of kid he's raising, then obviously giving him more money is likely to lead to a larger family.Nice to have that study, but it's a bit like having a study that confirms rain makes the grass wet.
>>534190776You have to feed kids or you go to jail
>>534192734Women get government assistance to do it. CHIPS
>>534192851And WIC
>>534192851Its not an even trade for 18 years of raising a kid to not be that stupid
>>534190776>recent study
>>534190776Men for all of human history:>if you want to breed, you need to work hard, accomplish things, rise above the othersWomen for all of human history:>you will have to breed in exchange for things from men, giving them access to sex with you gives you access to their stuff, if you already have lots of stuff, you don't need to give men access to sex unless you want toAdd in contraceptives and feminism has skewed society towards eliminating women's direct relationship dependence on men, and making it more difficult for men to distinguish themselves. Birthrates plummet as a result. Death cult leftists will tell you that breeding below replacement rates is somehow a good thing because they're nihilistic atheists who believe nothing has any purpose and all existence is suffering (though paradoxically they refuse to end their own). Fortunately, there is a way this will reset itself. Women are not as dependent on men directly for relationships, but they do depend on men to maintain every single major apparatus of society. Men keep the resources moving, they keep the factories running, they keep the lights on in your home and the food on your table. Every job that maintains this delicate infrastructure of essential goods and services is dominated overwhelmingly by men because they are often difficult, dangerous, exhausting, and not always highly rewarding. There will be a breaking point when the men who keep society afloat will feel nobody else, women especially is holding up their end of the bargain. At that time, the people most capable of exerting the use of force to subjugate women and reshape government will be men. When the conditions for this will present themselves is anyone's guess, to be honest I would have expected it to happen by now already.
>>534193435>here will be a breaking point when the men who keep society afloat will feel nobody else, women especially is holding up their end of the bargain. At that time, the people most capable of exerting the use of force to subjugate women and reshape government will be men. When the conditions for this will present themselves is anyone's guess, to be honest I would have expected it to happen by now already.Eventually, yes, but it could take a good while. We might just end up with a shitty decayed shambles of a society like in Rover (greatly underrated movie).
