At the China International Consumer Goods Expo, Chen Wenling, chief economist of the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, said: "Children are durable consumer goods, and it is wrong for young people not to have children. ”
The expert's logic is that if young people do not have children, there will be no long-term durable consumer goods, and the value of other consumer goods is not comparable to the value of having children, so young people should have children.
This remark is not surprising to make young people fry again, and the recent frequent discussions on fertility issues on the Internet will trigger strong emotions among netizens.
From a practical point of view, this is very different from the situation of young people who have good births, late births and late childbearing, and even unmarried and infertile.
From a rational point of view, even if children are really "durable goods", people increasingly disagree with the value of having children.
01
Children are "durable goods" and "investment goods"
Seeing children as a "long-term consumer durable" is indeed a classic theory in behavioral economics.
The famous economist and Nobel laureate Gary Becker believes that children are considered durable goods because this consumption can provide parents with psychological income, so as to play the value of consumer goods.
But at the same time, Becker also pointed out that the decline in fertility in modern society is because the cost of "durable goods" has risen, so people are not willing to invest too much, and will pay more attention to the quality of raising children than to the quantity.
The acquisition of any consumer good comes at a price, and in modern society, the financial, psychological, and emotional investment in raising children may have outweighed the rewards of children.
Therefore, more and more young people are reluctant to have children.
A single friend once said self-deprecatingly: "Now after work, I think about where to play, who to have dinner with, what movies to watch at night; Once you have a child, before you leave work, you have to think about what to cook for your child at night and how to help with homework. ”
"Who has their own life after having a baby? I want to be comfortable for a few more years! The friend sighed.
On the one hand, raising children can lead to a decline in the quality of life of both spouses, which many young people do not want. On the other hand, the economic cost of childcare can also be ridiculously high.
There is a hot question on the Internet, which poked the hearts of many people: "Second-tier cities, monthly income of more than 10,000, what should I do if I dare not have children?" ”
Some people may be very confused: can you not afford to raise children with a monthly income of more than 10,000? But if you calculate the account of childcare in detail, you will find that the monthly income exceeds 10,000, which may not really be enough for the children to make.
Custody classes are tens of thousands a month, interest classes are four or five thousand, and there are clothes and food toys... Before the child enters kindergarten, the parents are already unable to make ends meet every month.
From this point of view, young people feel that "consumer goods" are not durable and long-term investment is not cost-effective, which is by no means a disease-free moan in the eyes of experts.
02
The new hidden worries of "full-time children", raising children is not to prevent old age and worry
As the pressure of employment increases year by year, a new profession has entered people's vision: full-time children.
To put it nicely, full-time children are young people who accompany their parents around the clock at home and do not need to go out to work; To put it ugly, there is no substantial difference between full-time children and what people often call "gnawing the old".
Having full-time children at home is usually because the child cannot find the ideal job after graduation, and does not want to go to a random class, so it is carried out at home for a period of excess.
Some people are physically and mentally exhausted because they are too busy working in big cities, so they rest at home for a while.
Parents who agree that their children gnaw at home must have a high degree of tolerance. Not only do they have to provide food, shelter and living expenses for their children, but they may also be gossiped and pointed at by neighbors and co-workers.
"I heard that your child graduated from a prestigious school! Why haven't you gone out to work yet? ”
"You two are also hard enough, raising the child to your twenties, and you have to raise it again."
Although full-time children stay with their parents, it seems that their parents enjoy the happiness of life, but watching their children stay at home every day, but other people's children can work to earn money to subsidize the family, I believe that few parents will be really happy.
Of course, it is not excluded that some parents are not poor in money and want their children to stay with them in peace.
But for the vast majority of parents, they seem to face a dilemma: children cannot take care of their elderly parents if they do not care about their home and work in other places; If children stay by their side and take care of their families, it will be difficult to achieve career development and realize the value of life.
Raising children not only does not prevent aging, but also worries that there is no one to raise children when they are old: there is one more reason not to have a baby.
03
The emotional value of the "child" outweighs the financial benefit
There is a famous concept in economics called the "rational man hypothesis", which means that people will use the minimum economic cost to obtain the maximum economic benefit.
However, parents are not "rational people" in economics, and cannot simply use the concept of costs and benefits in economics to explain the behavior of having children in real life.
Even in the current prevalence of "unmarried and infertile", there are still many young people who are willing to have children, not because they can't calculate the account of childcare, but because they prefer to be confused in the face of family affection.
In the TV series "In the Name of the Family", the old father Li Haichao has lived in poverty, and it is already very difficult to raise his daughter, but he is still willing to adopt the boy Ziqiu abandoned by his biological mother, and also helps his busy friend take care of his son Lingxiao.
In one scene, Li Haichao got drunk, took the hands of the two children and said: "There is no blood relationship, not a surname, we are also a family." ”
The family affection shown in the play is both pure and precious, which moved countless audiences to tears.
It's the same in real life, family affection is our most difficult emotion to give up, and the relationship between parents, siblings, and children is not a "not cost-effective" can be clearly explained.
Therefore, even if many young people know that raising children takes a lot of time and energy, the final result may not meet their expectations. However, they are still willing to have and raise children, and bond with those closest to them.
It is precisely because children are "long-term durable consumer goods" that young people calculate the return on investment, so they are reluctant to have children.
It is precisely because children are "long-term durable consumer goods" that there will be young people who are willing to give emotions to children in exchange for heart-to-heart connection and emotional comfort.
Therefore, there is no absolute right or wrong in the matter of fertility, there are just different pursuits for each person.
Young people's decisions do not need to be worried by experts, and they believe that everyone will make rational and best choices for themselves.