>From behan@osiris.Colorado.EDU Sat Aug 20 21:52:02 1994 Return-Path: behan@osiris.Colorado.EDU Received: from re.colorado.edu (re.Colorado.EDU [128.138.151.10]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with ESMTP id VAA05018 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 1994 21:52:02 -0600 Received: (from behan@localhost) by re.colorado.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9/UnixOps) id VAA12686; Sat, 20 Aug 1994 21:51:56 -0600 Date: Sat, 20 Aug 1994 21:51:54 -0600 (MDT) From: Behan Pamela Sender: Behan Pamela Reply-To: Behan Pamela Subject: Addendum To: PPN List Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Having just sent the above message, I of course realized that there is a third logical explanation for a general correlation - a third variable determining the other two. However, a correlation between fertility and income that holds true across cultures and religions cannot be caused by either culture or religion. The only variables I can think of which could create this effect are 1) education, and 2) parents' social class - whether determined by wealth or income. More education results in higher income and lower fertility, in general. Being born into a higher social class would have the same effects, I think, partly because of an increased probability of being well-educated, but also because of a lower probability of ending up poor, and a higher probability of having other opportunities in your life that a large family adds nothing to. Where does this leave us? Pamela Behan