Blogs and Stories
The New Baby Bust
Is there a stimulus package that can save our sex lives? An exclusive Daily Beast Valentine’s poll reveals that in the chilly climate of recessionary America, sexual activity is down, people are postponing having kids—and the size of your bank account matters in the bedroom.
In recent months, Americans have watched nearly every economic indicator plunge, from GDP to consumer confidence. But in the aftermath of the economic collapse, another alarming slide is taking place.
Click Here to See the Results of Our Poll
Americans’ romantic lives are undergoing a meltdown of their own, according to a new Daily Beast poll conducted by Penn, Schoen & Berland. They’re less likely to go on dates (35 percent), and plan to spend less on dates when they bother (39 percent). About one quarter of Americans (28 percent) are more likely to argue with their partners. The most popular gift for Valentine’s Day? The proverbial dinner for two—but probably cooked at home—followed by an affordable…card. Twelve percent of Americans aren’t planning on buying any gift at all for their partner this year.
Beyond February 14, the collapse is shelving more complex plans. Nearly half of all Americans surveyed (42 percent) are now less likely to have children, and many are postponing other major life events. Americans are now less likely to get married (31 percent), move in with a partner (26 percent), or go through with a divorce (35 percent). Add maternity wards, wedding registries, chapels, and divorce courts to the list of institutions likely to suffer in the coming years.
And although nearly half of Americans believe that sex helps them take their mind off of their problems, the economic crisis has not piqued much interest in one of the world’s least-expensive activities. Only 13 percent of those surveyed say they will have sex more often this year compared to last, one in two are planning to be more cautious about who they sleep with, and 20 percent are consciously upping their safe-sex practices to avoid having children.
Where will it all end? Look for the answer somewhere around $75,000. Americans believe people with more money have more sex in general, more partners, and more affairs. And rich people agree, reporting a more-active sex life, plans for more sex in 2009, and less long-term concern about their relationships and the economy. But for people making less than $75,000, things look bleak: They are more pessimistic about the future, more likely to feel a negative impact on their relationships, and more likely to argue about both money and sex. Not surprisingly, that translates pretty directly to the bedroom: Americans who make less than $75,000 plan to have less sex—and even look at less sexual material—in 2009.
Overall, Americans are still optimistic about the future, still believe in romance and marriage, and by and large refuse to judge a partner by his or her wallet. But there are signs that the credit freeze is becoming the sex freeze, and the lack of liquidity may turn into a lack of babies before the crunch has come to a close.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
The World's 12 Most Fashionable Hotels
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Best (And Worst) Cities to Find Love
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
RussianHatGuy
For those of you not having as much sex, let me assure you that I will pick up the slack for you. Send your women my way.
I always do my part for the USA.
winkingchef
I think this survey is skewed based on DailyBeast's demographic. I'd estimate about 1/2 of your readers are from Manhattan, where the reduction in lavish bonuses and parties for the financial industry have hit harder than the rest of us.
In my circle of friends, over half of them have had children in the last 2 years or are expecting new children. My thesis is that as Americans stay at home more and spend less, they will start to appreciate the memories of home and family.
A concept perhaps a bit Foreign to the NYC audience, but quite familiar to the rest of us.
Antinous
The depression years were a baby bust period so it is not unexpected that hard times might create another.Then there is gay marriage threating the whole concept of family. We are doomed.
tomfarr
Winkingchef has it right. Most DailyBeast readers and posters are hyper-sensitive liberals demoralized by adversity.
Healthy Americans are still having sex and children.
Trilby16
My law firm is experiencing quite a baby boom. And attorney salaries were frozen for 2009. Explain that!
joymars
So consumer spending for Valentine's Day will be an affordable card, but Super Bowl consumption stayed the same glutton-fest?
I see the priorities.
ardeth
So there's a silver lining to this recession! Anything that slows down the world's scary population growth and gets people to realize (albeit too late for Octomom) that they actually need money, and a lot of it, to raise kids, isn't totally bad.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
funkychicken
Even for the two sixteen-year old models in the photo?
tomfarr
Ardeth, have you noticed that refugee camps have lots of children being born? The scary population growth will continue.
scott1607
Antinous, please explain how gay marriage is contributing to less babies? Are you saying that because gay marriage exists (barely if you count the number of states where it is legal... try doing it on one hand you should have no problem) there will be less babies born? Because more people will turn gay and not have children? Or straight people will be so depressed that the concept of family is being destroyed that they will be unable to procreate? Please do tell.
JD92840
GIVE ME A BREAK!
People are still going at it, giving birth left and right! Having twins, triplets, Octuplets!
There's NO decrease in sex and having children. Especially NOT in California where you can't drive a mile and not see a Hispanic woman walking with her EIGHT children, and pregnant again. Or an African/American woman standing in line in the grocery store with 5-6 children paying her bill with food stamps the TAXPAYER pays for.
And who foots the bill for at least 30% of the children born in the USA? TAXPAYERS DO!
Why don't we pay people to NOT have children?
Say $100 a month via a tax deduction for those earning under $100k a year and $50 a month via tax deduction for those earning over $100k a year?
Our country is already OVER POPULATED and we can't even take care of these people. Why on earth would anyone want to have children now?
How many children are in the care of Child Protective Services, Foster Homes, Adoption Centers? What's wrong with these children? ADOPT a US Born Child!!
We see all these Hollywood Actors adopting children from foreign countries to look good, why haven't they adopted children in our own country?
Just doesn't make sense to me to want to have children in a wavering economy and when we have so many children needing homes right here in our own backyard!
Also look at the woman from California who is on permanent disability, already had six children and gave birth to eight more. Who do you think will end up supporting her children?
MissJuliet
Antinous-
How does gay marriage threaten the concept of family?
During WW2 one of the main points promoted throughout the American society was the idea that family life should be happy and supportive...not that it should be heterosexual.
Whether or not a family is straight has no affect on how "doomed" we may be as a country.
joymars
JD92840 writes:
Why don't we pay people to NOT have children?
Great idea.
Some stats, though. All 1st World countries are experiencing either negative or zero population growths. The only exception is the U.S. We have positive population growth. Why? The single reason: immigrants. Legal and illegal. Without them we'd be like Europe and Japan.
Our particular brand of capitalism depends on growth -- growth in consumerism and fueled by that sure-fire engine population growth.
Lou Dobbs can't figure out why we allow anyone in. Someone should tell him it's American capitalism.
upsidedownzebra
I have 3 and 18 month old girls. I love them. The BC gov't picked up the tab for their entrance into this world (Canadian babies are not born indebted). I work a low paying job and live in a small apartment. With all this economical doom and gloom I know the one thing that nobody can take away from me are my children. You do not need a lot of money to raise kids. You need a lot of money to own a car or pay down your bloated credit card.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.