Neal Freiman

What I like, it's not an endless scroll.

It's curated.

Every day I get a select batch of smart, interesting people who are actually serious about dating.

It feels intentional, efficient, like someone filtered out the noise.

So if you're looking for someone on your level, someone serious about getting serious, check out the league.

Download the app and apply today.

Welcome to Neal's Numbers, the segment where I pick three stats from the week's news that will make you a Lisa Simpson in a world of homers.

For my first number, in New York City, the only people having enough children to keep a population stable over time, 2.1 per household, are those making more than $10 million.

Every other income group from...

low-income folks to mere millionaires are having fewer children than the richest of the rich and not enough to sustain a population.

The finding comes from Liena Zagare of the right-leaning think tank Manhattan Institute, who looked at personal income tax brackets in 2023 and plotted them against birth rates.

You can draw a few conclusions from this.

One, only the ultra wealthy are having multiple kids in New York because they're the only ones who can afford to.

A separate analysis by the city's comptroller found that a New York family would need to make $334,000 to afford the cost of care for one two-year-old.

That is four times the median family income.

Second, perhaps more interestingly, is that major societal shifts could be underway in which kind of people are having the most kids.

For most of human history, it was the high-status, wealthy males that were going all cheaper by the dozen.

Think Genghis Khan.

But that reversed.

Starting around the Industrial Revolution and lasting until today, it was lower-income people and not the richest who were having the most children.