Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tribune7

I was born in 1956. Every reference I have read placed me at the tail end of the baby boom. I always thought it was more of a post war phenomenon.


10 posted on 06/25/2004 5:58:41 AM PDT by stayathomemom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: stayathomemom

I was born in 1956. Every reference I have read placed me at the tail end of the baby boom. I always thought it was more of a post war phenomenon.




As I understand it, the Baby Boom is not so much a result of the war, as of the prosperity that followed the war.

Yes, there was a boost in the number of babies born when soldiers returned and ... ummm .. well, you know :-)

But it's worth noting that there were 3.1 million kids born in the US in 1943, and 3.4 million in 1946 - so there a lot of canoodling going on in war time in any case :-)

I once read that the continued growth in LIVE birthrates followed:

(a) the increased prosperity that was the result of large-scale mechanisation (developed during the war),

(b) the widespread improvement in medicine - which was also, in large part, a result of the war, and

(c) the upbeat optimism of those who were kids during the war and, having witnessed their dads' victories, were emboldened to believe that Americans (and their allies) could achieve anything.

Sadim


22 posted on 06/25/2004 6:19:56 AM PDT by sadimgnik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson