Granted I'm all-ways amazed that in the West on one hand the news proclaim and medical professionals to have children when the women are in there 20's. Although the support and service's such as cheap day-care and family centered activities are completely lacking to support that mind-set.
The message most young people receive is `It is healthy to have children when you're younger`. The reality is `Yes you can, but I hope you like living in a studio apartment counting your monies well all your colleges/friends are having fun`.
That and in today modern world having a child in your 20's is more or less considered social suicide.
The only to maintain a life-style and support structure for young women would be to find a partner who can support them and their child well at the same time maintaining their quality of life. Something such partners are very small so there is a lot of competition for this type of partner.
For me I chose to get my education and start a career before even thinking about starting a family. Now I'm in my mid 30's I'm really starting to think I may not have played this very smart. I'd have been better off spending more time looking for a partner in my 20's. I'm a man, I hate to think what this looks like for a women who has a more limited fertility time span than I do.
Don't take this the wrong way when I read you're in your mid 30's I basically cheered! Go out and meet new people and experience life that you have some money/experience under your belt.
Personally if I had time to rewind the clock, I wouldn't of got Married (here in the west). The legal system, law is blantly sexiest against men it's beyond a joke. Seeing from first hand account of this myself.
This would seem to indicate that many jobs are bullshit, wages are suppressed, or there is artificial scarcity in the day care business.
To my understanding talking to the ladies at the child-care center's. The center is required to not exceed x number of children per day/per hour. They can only hire people with the clearance to supervise children after getting their Certificate 3 in child care. Then the staff need to under-go skills/training on their time to improve working with children.
Then you have insurance for the workers, building and also the necessary security and fire drills to be conducted regularly and kept up-to-date.
You have over-time pay, inclusive of when parents are late to pick up the children from day care.
It’s a barrier, but so is a Masters in Education. My mother had one, as well 15+ years of classroom experience, and still found it less economically favorable to teach 25 kids vs. directly care for my brother.
Though I don't have the numbers with me but here in Australia Asian families out-source the raring of infant's and children to the grand-parents. Although talk to any Western family (especially baby boomers) they want nothing to do with raising grand-children.
One big factor is the number of convicted felons, ~10% for the general population and significantly higher for the un/underemployed, that's a huge amount of the potential workforce gone. Another win for the war on drugs.
That rent then usually gets pumped straight into the bottom line of some REIT or a millionaire's property portfolio.
Back when property taxes were higher, building rents were lower (because as you pointed out, supply usually meets demand) and those taxes helped pay for things like, well, childcare.... rather than yachts.
But sure, we have regulations that keep children safe too, and it's true that they impose a cost.
Speaking as a parent, I don't consider every Tom, Dick and Henrietta off the street as equivalent caretakers for my child. The pool of potential child care workers is much, much lower than "all of humanity".
Maybe it's the first and second categories who tend to end up in large cities. And maybe it's the third category who tend to live in the poorest regions. That is rather consistent with the standard understanding that education and economic development tend to reduce population growth.