
Why are diapers so expensive? - Avshalom
http://www.tampabay.com/projects/2018/features/baby-diaper-cost/
======
djrogers
There are a couple of ‘facts’ listed here that don’t line up with my current
reality and very recent knowledge (3 kids, most recent is 18mo).

First off, 12 changes a day is a _huge_ outlier - even for a newborn. 8 would
be a more reasonable number, and it drops down to the 4-6 range in the first
year, and by now we’re at 3 if we don’t go swimming.

Second item that sounds waaay off is $1000/yr for diapers. Again, that has to
be an outlier based on the worst possible set of assumptions. A box of 168
diapers lasts about a month and costs ~$40. That doesn’t add up...

And finally, many of the charities I work with will hand out diapers or cards
for free diapers to anyone who asks. If you’re really in a bind, call a local
church, women’s shelter, or commissary! We really do want to help, but we have
to know you need it.

~~~
rubicon33
Why would people bring a child into the world if they can't even afford
diapers, will always blow my mind.

~~~
mirimir
Because they got pregnant. And an abortion wasn't possible, for medical or
ethical reasons.

Edit: Or for other people's ethical reasons, manifested as laws against
abortion.

~~~
gizmo686
Or political. Abortion is not accessible in all parts of the country.

~~~
endymi0n
With all due respect, I never understood the prevailing attitude in the US to
do everything it takes to make you keep that „sacred life“ if you get pregnant
by accident – and then once it‘s there, drop it like a hot potato and do
exactly zero to make it a tax-paying, happy and productive member of society.
The hypocrisy of it all just blows my mind.

~~~
0xfeba
"Pro-birth"

Yeah, they wail and wail about murdering children and then are all too pleased
to scorn and segregate the mothers (but not so much the fathers) of these
children so they have the worst possible chances.

------
spaceandshit
Just to provide some perspective, I have worked on the structural analysis
(FEA) of diapers for P&G, when I was working at an engineering consulting
firm. As the article states, these companies pour millions into R&D, and for
me that included running simulations to determine if the diaper's material
properties were appropriate. To do this, I was running simulations of a diaper
being wrapped onto a baby, the baby walking, and then pooping. The pressure,
forces, stresses on the diaper were calculated and we drew conclusions based
on these simulations to improve the quality. When I was working there, I also
worked on new razors, loofahs, bottles, etc.

~~~
Game_Ender
As a parent thank you! It is amazing the things a diaper managed to neatly
contain. I always imagined there was a group dedicated to design things the
elastic catch on the edge of the diaper.

------
shiftpgdn
My wife and I cloth diapered both of our children. In addition to being
radically cheaper it also resolved rashes/eczema in both kids as well as
accelerated potty training.

There is an 'ick' factor but liners and a toilet sprayer take care of 99% of
that.

~~~
corvallis
A lot of people don't live in places with an in-home washer/dryer. They have
to go elsewhere in the building for pay laundry or to the laundromat. This
makes it logistically and financially nearly impossible to use cloth diapers.
Not to mention the substantial up front cost for cloth diapers, which makes
them inaccessible for people living paycheck to paycheck. This is an example
of how having money allows you to save money.

~~~
akira2501
When I think about UBI I worry about responsible spending and wonder if just
subsidizing common items food, clothing (diapers) and household goods wouldn't
be a smarter solution overall.

In relation to the case in the article, I wonder if we couldn't subsidize
certain items and allow parents to receive a one month supply at low to no
cost? Why should we give disadvantaged people $180 a month just to let several
middlemen take a cut via the corner drugstore?

~~~
linkregister
This has been done in the past, e.g. government cheese.

It turns out that letting the market deliver necessities based off of demand
is far more efficient than the alternative. That would be a government
anticipates how much a community will use, what styles of diapers they'll
want, etc.

~~~
eesmith
Really? Do tell me more about the benefits of water system privatization in
the US.

Story upon story like [https://heavy.com/news/2018/02/risks-costs-private-
water-lea...](https://heavy.com/news/2018/02/risks-costs-private-water-lead-
poison/) doesn't make me conclude that letting the market deliver water is
"far more efficient than" a public water system.

~~~
linkregister
Calm down. Assuming bad faith is for Reddit, not here.

Your argument is making a straw man. You are the first commenter to bring up
public utilities. Everybody needs water. Systems that are accountable to local
government are the most effective way to get it. Usually that is with a
publicly-owned water corporation.

A basket of goods is far different. Back to the subject actually at hand: some
people will need cloth diapers. Others disposable. A government employee would
need to administer the program in that town or district.

The inflexibility of the program would mean that some parents would not use
all their diapers and would dispose of them. Other unfortunate parents would
need way more. Also, what size diapers? Benchmark this against weight? A
physical bottom measurement? Not all children use diapers at the same rate.

Hopefully this example gives you an idea of the complexities involved in
centralized management. Empirically, baskets of goods are less efficient and
more costly when centrally administered.

~~~
eesmith
And tone policing is its own uncharitable rhetorical style.

You said "letting the market deliver necessities". Water is a necessity.

I'm also for single-payer government run state-wide/national health systems.
Somehow those work and are more cost-effective for overall public health,
despite a variability of need which is far higher than that of diapers.

Now, I agree that akira2501's proposal isn't tenable, and in a parallel thread
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16763183](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16763183)
) you see I list some of my objections.

What I disagree with is your broad and non-nuanced statement regarding the
supposed efficiency of letting the market deliver necessities.

~~~
linkregister
I disagree you have parsed my response correctly. I do not know why you or the
previous poster choose to mischaracterize a narrow statement as a broad and
universal one.

If you re-read my comment, you will see that I provide a counterexample to the
"all markets for everything" narrative.

Your response indicates that you think I'm a member of the opposing
intellectual "team" and you need to defend yours. Not only do I acknowledge
that single-payer is effective in several countries, I believe that it is one
of many possible solutions to the U.S. healthcare problem.

My comment was narrowly disputing the effectiveness of a centralized planning
system for market commodities. Even the NHS has considerable decentralized
aspects.

------
ringe
"Diapers are sold at much lower prices in Norway than in the rest of Europe.
The large price difference has led to smuggling of diapers, mainly to Eastern-
European countries. The diaper smuggler gain both from the price difference
and by evading taxes on the trade"

[https://www.duo.uio.no/handle/10852/57685](https://www.duo.uio.no/handle/10852/57685)

~~~
maaaats
I was also thinking about that. Normally we do everything we can to buy stuff
from abroad, but for diapers even low cost countries buy here. Kinda absurd.

------
esaym
I always take it personally when people complain about diaper costs. The fact
is 30 years ago, most kids were out of diapers by the age of 2 [0] and nothing
is stopping you from using reusable products just like people had to do 30
years ago. The shear unpleasantness of non-disposable diapers is what pushed
people to start training their kids at age one. But now the "convenience" of
throw away diapers leads modern parents to leave their kids in them until they
are over the ago of 4 (disgusting), and complaining about the price the whole
way. And here in Texas, anyone that doesn't make over $40k a year
automatically qualifies them for the "WIC" program which means they get their
diapers free for how ever long they want.

And yes I am a parent, and was somewhat lazy as my kids were not out of
diapers until right at the age of 3 but all of our friends still didn't even
try until their kids were 4. Heck I can remember being 4 years old and running
around my grandparents farm and popping a squat right out in the open field
and burying it just like the barn cats around there. I almost find it child
abuse to allow your kid to be so unconscious about their bodies that they have
no problem crapping on themselves when in other cultures 4 year olds are
cutting up fruit with machetes (personally seen in a small village, Africa).

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_training#History_in_the...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_training#History_in_the_United_States)
[1] [http://dshs.texas.gov/wichd/](http://dshs.texas.gov/wichd/)

~~~
cf1463456
I personally find the line of thought of your post rather astonishing and even
after a few years I am still not sure, how much of this is somewhat
representative of a deeply disturbing mentality which is stereotypical
"american" and what is just a individual abnormal lack of empathy and more so,
being annoyed, that others arent even worse off.

>I always take it personally when people complain about diaper costs.

Like another poster said, you are aware, that the post is written by mother of
a newborn struggling to make ends meet. Do you really take it personally, that
a poor mother in the developed world is complaining about diaper prices
instead of using reusable diapers? In a country where paternity leave is not
the norm? And your argument boils down to the assumed availability of aid
agencies?

As I am still not sure if there is a cultural misunderstanding here, Are you
aware, that in some regions, arguments like this are considered deeply
antisocial and seen as a lack of basic human decency?

Normally I wouldnt think to much about a post like this, seeing as you are
posting it here, you have to assume, that you are making a worthwhile argument
which might convince someone after he engages with the facts you put forward.

I am just lost on this.

------
mythas
I have an 8 month old and just the other day was thinking how are they able to
make these things so cheaply? Seriously for 80 cents a day I can avoid the
nightmare of cloth diapers (sorry planet). All the estimates in the post are
soooo far off the mark. They are done with the cost of premium diapers for 4
year olds at the rate of use of a sub 2 month old. I’d say 350 bucks Canadian
a year if I extrapolate out our costs to complete our kids first year.

~~~
triangleman
The planet will be fine. Maybe better off, in fact--do you have any idea how
much water it takes to wash these things?

~~~
0xcafecafe
What about the amount of water it takes to manufacture disposable diapers?

------
zik
I feel like this article was an extended ad for Huggies. Particularly with the
happy ending being "Tonight, she was bringing home Huggies".

~~~
LitFan
You're absolutely right. There was only one mention of cloth diapers anywhere
in here, and it was quickly dismissed by "they are difficult to clean without
a machine".

Nothing about how cost effective they can be, and then we go right back to
learning about how huggies are better than generics.

~~~
fokinsean
Yup the South Park episode "Truth and Advertising" is become more and more
true.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Advertising](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Advertising)

------
ajlai
I don't understand the argument that generic diapers "don't last as long."
Every diaper lasts until it's soiled; it's not like the generic brands absorb
one poop but you keep the "better quality" diapers around for three poops, as
though they were paper towels. The only reason I can think of that they
wouldn't "last as long" is if you have defective diapers that you have to toss
before using (only happened to me once or twice in 2+ years of using
Target/Walmart brand diapers, hardly significant). There are other reasons to
buy more expensive brands (fewer blowouts, less diaper rash, odor containment,
sensitivity to materials, who knows depending on the baby) but I don't see why
usage volume is one of them.

~~~
giarc
>Every diaper lasts until it's soiled;

But some diapers can handle multiple pee's before they need changing. It's not
just about the poops.

------
ttul
This is more a story about, “Why is social assistance so horrid in the US that
poor parents can’t even afford diapers”

------
projektir
Whenever something like this comes up, my first question is always: "OK, how
did we do this before diapers were invented, and what happened to that?"

~~~
war1025
In addition to cloth diapers, babies got potty trained significantly younger
than they do now. We had our daughter ~90% potty trained by her first
birthday. From what we've found looking into it, that was extremely common
until the past 50 years or so.

Its not uncommon now for 3 year-olds to still be in diapers. That's two full
years longer in diapers, simply because parents either can't be bothered to
potty train their children, or have been told its not possible to do it
earlier.

~~~
alistairSH
hvidgaard got it. The problem is the reliance on day-care providers, who have
little incentive to stick to a potty-training regimen. Kids can be trained
much earlier than today's average, but with today's time-crunched parents,
it's hard.

~~~
giarc
Why would a daycare provider have little incentive to stick to the regimen? In
my experience, daycare providers are usually the ones to push parents on potty
training. Changing diapers means 1 staff is caring for 1 child. Once a child
can go to the bathroom on their own, they have more time to spend with the
other children. Additionally they have less waste, less need for storage of
diapers and wipes.

~~~
alistairSH
I really don't know. My comment is just based on the experiences of friends
and family. Parents too busy at home, and little or no support at day care. As
mentioned in some sibling comments, today's "super diapers" might not help, as
they might be too absorbent.

------
scandox
Ireland

5 nappies a day x 365 days = 1825 nappies / 30 per pack = 61 packs x euro 2.99
[1] = euro 182.39 per annum

Which sounds about right to me. Where are they getting a $1000 from?

[1] [https://www.aldi.ie/extra-large-nappies-
size-6/p/05962400586...](https://www.aldi.ie/extra-large-nappies-
size-6/p/059624005863400)

~~~
sampleinajar
They do their math in the article. "In the United States, the average diaper
sells for about 25 cents. The quarters add up quickly. Newborns need as many
as 12 changes a day. That’s $21 per week, or $84 per month. Bigger kids need
fewer, but their diapers are more expensive." It's a worst case calculation
biased towards newborns, which they don't remain all year, obviously. For me,
it averaged more like $800 - $400 a year. Also, 2.99 a pack is insane for me
as an American. That would go for about $8-$10 USD, depending on size.

------
planetjones
It would appear that a large part of the problem is the person's finances are
in such bad order, they cannot afford to buy the diapers in bulk. Could the
local church or community organisation not buy the nappies in the bulk and
then sell them at the lowest item price possible ?

When in such poverty (and potentially from a less educated background) I know
finding solutions is difficult. But this is where community should help.
Having a baby is super expensive and super stressful, but there are some
things which can help e.g. consider cloth diapers, encourage breastfeeding to
avoid formula costs.

I don't know how much support someone like this gets. But I guess not enough.

------
ConceptJunkie
I have 4 kids, the youngest being 18, and like many people said, 12 a day is
way too high, except for a newborn.

Disposable diapers are indeed expensive, but I've heard that the environmental
effects of cloth diapers are comparable. Fortunately, it's a problem that is
long, long behind me.

One thing I do remember is that nothing makes a baby more willing to take a
big dump or even a pee than putting on a fresh, clean diaper.

------
ada1981
I was expecting to see people brainstorming technical solutions...

Anyone interested in brainstorming some solutions to this?

What do the component parts cost of the best diaper?

Are there ways to bring those costs down by an order of magnitude?

How about an X Prize for Diaper Design?

What questions should be asked around this problem?

I'd be up for hosting a video virtual brainstorm of this topic if anyone is
interested, let me know.

------
scandox
To everyone talking about cloth nappies: you're insane. You do it for 3 years.
Then do it for another 3 years. Then talk. They are a fecking nightmare to
manage.

~~~
senorjazz
3 kids, all been in cloth / reusable nappies. We were not militant strict.
Used dispoable for night due to extra absorption. But day time use, pretty
much only reusable.

Anecdotal of course, but they all were toilet trained before other kids.
Whether that is because it is more noticeable the nappy is wet and
uncomfortable or other factors (wife was home all the time, kids in a nursery
from a young age all day seemed to lag further behind). But I think the cloth
nappies definitely played a part.

~~~
ggg9990
“Wife was home all the time” is the key here and a luxury not available to
all.

~~~
giarc
Cloth diapers are expensive. My wife and I bought them and tried them for
about a week before giving up and selling our stock. So for one there is a
large upfront cost, and if parents can get over that hurdle, there is also the
need to find a daycare that will 1. accept a child in cloth diapers and 2. be
reliable enough to send back your cloth diaper investment.

------
soVeryTired
Looks like a whole comment thread got deleted because it got too political. I
understand that political discussion isn't right for HN, but I don't approve
of comments disappearing silently. It would be nice to see a note from the
moderators explaining that that's what happened.

~~~
DanBC
In your profile there's an option called "showDead" which you can toggle to
show comments that have been killed.

Comments can be killed by mods, but I think the vast majority are killed by
user flags not moderator action.

The karma threshold to flag a comment is small, about 50. TO flag a comment
you click the timestamp of the comment, which will take you to a page where
the flag option appears.

The karma threshold to downvote a comment is higher. I think it's about 500 or
750 or so.

~~~
soVeryTired
Thanks for the info

------
mixmastamyk
Hmm, not one commenter here in 120+ addressed the point of the article, namely
why don't companies make cheaper diapers, instead of only ratcheting up the
high tech? Obviously it's more profitable, but are there other factors?

~~~
NoGravitas
There doesn't need to be any factor other than "it's more profitable", though.
The higher tech is there to produce higher margins.

------
pnathan
They are expensive because they haven't hit the price points which induce
demand pressure downward.

That said, the thread holding this narrative together is the _terrible_
welfare system in the United States.

I see absolutely zero reason why the 0-3 y/o in poverty shouldn't qualify for
free diapers from the local welfare offices, no questions asked.

n.b., cloth diapers are a fair bit of work, and a substantial investment early
on.

~~~
balls187
> I see absolutely zero reason why the 0-3 y/o in poverty shouldn't qualify
> for free diapers from the local welfare offices

I'll give you one reason: a large chunk of the voting population/tax base
doesn't want to pay for it.

> no questions asked.

I understand your sentiment, but as soon as that sort of policy is
implemented, unscrupulous individuals will abuse the system.

~~~
pnathan
> unscrupulous individuals will abuse the system.

Welfare fraud isn't that prevalent, and adequate checks on gratuitous abuse
are not exactly difficult to implement.

For the people who would rather see newborns have health issues than pay
taxes, I frankly find their morals odious and their foresight lacking.

~~~
balls187
The point being there are checks. "No questions asked" implied no checks.

> For the people who would rather see newborns have health issues than pay
> taxes, I frankly find their morals odious and their foresight lacking.

The article referenced a black, un-wed, young mother stuggling to pay for
diapers. That portrayal of poor minorities is what the anti-welfare state sees
when fighting for less taxes. The money isn't going to people who are
struggling like they might be; the money is going to minorities who aren't
willing to work hard.

Said more plainly, the health and wellbeing of black and brown babies are
worth less to (some|many) Americans than white ones.

~~~
pnathan
> The point being there are checks. "No questions asked" implied no checks.

it really doesn't.

no questions need to be asked if you aren't tripping the fraud wires of, e.g.,
grabbing 30 diapers a day for 1 kid.

> Said more plainly, the health and wellbeing of black and brown babies are
> worth less to (some|many) Americans than white ones.

I agree that that describes the reality that exists. I find that morally
problematic, however: whatever else we can pick at, I feel that babies are all
equal and they matter.

~~~
balls187
My belief, if you showed most (all?) Americans a baby, regardless of color,
and asked if that baby deserved healthy life, they'd say yes. If you asked if
they'd donate $2, they'd probably be inclined to do so.

The problems comes down to the concept in abstract. Special interest groups
capitalizing on the frustration of paying tax, by preying on human's most base
nature of mistrusting people that are perceived to be different.

"You're paying high taxes, and lazy people (minorities) are getting a free
ride." sounds much better than "You're paying high taxes, and government
contractors are taking a lot of that money."

Especially since poor/minorities are far less of a powerful lobby than those
who represent government contractors.

------
duncan_bayne
I'd probably use cloth nappies if I were a stay-at-home dad. As it stands, I'd
much rather put some of the money I'm earning towards the convenience of
disposables.

------
Buetol
The Wikipedia article is very informative also:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaper](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaper)

From Pampers making big sizes for the child to be dependant until the age of
5, to skin irritation because of diapers. My guess. You just can't expect the
same quality of care when people get poorer and poorer in general.

------
kwhitefoot
I'm pretty sure I never spent that much on any of my three sons. Here in
Norway (you know, everyone's favourite "Oh my god it's so expensive" country)
you can get one nappy/diaper/bleie for less than NOK 1, say about ten cents
US. Even at 12 a day that's only USD 438. And 12 a day is ridiculous.

------
radicalbyte
I saw 0 difference between pampers and supermarket branded nappies. Only the
piss strip from pampers is handy for the first two months. However marketing
is powerful and most people are emotionally driven not analytically driven. So
we get this situation. Medical has the same problem.

------
columb
In UK nappies are ultra cheap. My Wife uses Lidl's nappies but Aldi's are
equally good (if not the same!). They cost around 5-7 pence each. Can't really
exactly remember because they are so cheap. Pampers are more expensive but by
much.

~~~
lebski88
Yes I noticed this too:

> In the United States, the average diaper sells for about 25 cents

That's so much more expensive than here. Looking at the pictures you can get
the same brands and nappies for half the price here.

In the decent sized packs from amazon pampers are only a touch more expensive
but yeah the Lidl ones are just as good as far as I can see. We mostly used
pampers because they are cheap with a subscription but have used Lidl ones
fairly often. Shame we're not very close to a Lidl store (well we are, but
traffic).

~~~
mcv
I just checked Dutch prices: googled and took the first link for diapers for
newborns: 52 diapers for €7, or €5 if you buy in bulk. So that's 10-13 cents
for random big chain diapers of a good brand.

Seems to be a typical price. At another chain, I get the same prices for
another brand. Looking for the biggest A brand, I find 72 diapers for €15,
which is a bit more expensive, but still less than 25 cents (though eurocents
are worth a bit more than dollar cents, of course).

------
quantumhobbit
Disposable Diapers are surprisingly high tech, or at least well engineered.
See:
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xYNX8y6lQMc](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xYNX8y6lQMc)

------
mcv
When we had our first kid, we scoured the shops looking for good deals on
diapers. Turns out there's a mailinglist you can subscribe to which alerts
young parents when a shop in the vicinity has a sale on diapers. Buying them
in bulk at the right time can save a lot of money.

By the time we had our second child, we didn't care. We buy diapers without
thinking about it now. The stress of worrying about this is a bigger cost for
us now than the money we pay.

Friends used cloth diapers for environmental reasons. Hell of a lot of work,
and I have no idea what they cost. Old-fashioned cloth diapers are cheap, but
messy.

~~~
yellowstuff
It's not obviously true that cloth diapers are better for the environment. EG:

[https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?artic...](https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=56347)

------
merpnderp
We used a combination of disposable and cloth diapers. Disposables for daycare
or when not at home, and cloth for when at home. And this saved us massive
massive amounts of money. You buy a couple dozen cloth diapers for $40, and
then it is $.50/day for an extra load of laundry. My son still has his cloth
diapers as rags he plays with and he's been potty trained for years.

But on weekends and evenings, cloth diapers were basically free. And word of
warning, they are disgusting to shake into the toilet before throwing into the
washing machine with a cap of bleach, but you get over that.

------
ToFab123
Because you need them and do not really have any other choice. The same reason
that a razor are so expensive, and toothbrushes, and female products, and
shampoo and ... you get the drift?

------
howard941
This article was a really good read. The woman featured in it celebrates
finding a job in Pinellas Park but sadly she lives in Tampa and is about to
experience another ill afflicting our piece of paradise: It's about an hour
and a half by >= two buses from Tampa to Pinellas Park. That problem will
still be around when the diapers are rotting the landfill and the kid's in
school. Being poor in Florida is hell. Without a car it's hell^2.

------
Hermel
Even 50 cent diapers are less expensive than the time it costs you to change
them. So I don't think they qualify as "so expensive".

~~~
steve918
Maybe you should have read the article. Maybe not expensive for a software
developer making 6 figures a year, but that's not most people. For people
living near poverty levels $1k a year is a lot of money.

------
Simulacra
My husband and I are gearing up for our first pregnancy. We're at the point in
our careers for we know we can actually afford this. That said, we are really
liking the idea of washable diapers. I'm surprised this hasn't caught on.
Instead of more diapers, what if the state paid for a service to collect and
wash those?

~~~
Keyframe
You do realise that people, before disposable diapers, did just that?

~~~
scient
Coming from a former Soviet state, we did not have disposable diapers when me
and my siblings were growing up. Washable diapers were the only option, and it
was horrible. Both for the kids as well as the parents having to wash them all
the time.

Im actually amazed that there are people today who think this is a good idea
and want to go back to it. Seriously what?

~~~
Keyframe
I remember old giant cooking pots where people would 'cook' those and then dry
them later on.

------
virusduck
There are organizations that help out with diapers in the US. Some notable:
[https://greaterdcdiaperbank.org](https://greaterdcdiaperbank.org)
[http://nationaldiaperbanknetwork.org/](http://nationaldiaperbanknetwork.org/)

------
Reedx
The Engineering Guy has a great video on disposable diaper technology -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYNX8y6lQMc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYNX8y6lQMc)

It's impressive. Not sure how much R&D plays into the costs, but probably more
than it may seem.

------
jetcata
Does anyone still use cloth diapers these days? They’re reusable and produce
so much less waste.

~~~
emddudley
Yes, my family did a few years ago. I would guess that we used around 80%
fewer disposable diapers... disposables are still useful when traveling and
other miscellaneous situations.

------
kwoff
Heh, what a day on Hacker News. I read comments about bidets, where people go
into intimate detail about how they poop -- and now comments about diapers,
where parents go into intimate detail about how their babies poop and pee. :)

------
wnevets
>In the United States, the average diaper sells for about 25 cents.

Really? I'm currently paying 8 cents a diaper from Aldi.

~~~
kemayo
The word "average" suggests that you buying a much cheaper diaper from a
budget retailer is not at all incompatible with this figure.

~~~
wnevets
Its an article about how expensive diapers are and the plight it causes to
those with low income. Why are we talking about anything BUT a much cheaper
diaper from a budget retailer?

------
NIL8
“Given the technology that’s inside them,” consultant Heidi Beatty said, “they
are super cheap.”

Talk about being full of shit!

------
randyrand
Diapers are not a necessity. Washable cloth is more than fine, just more work
and less convenient.

~~~
sageabilly
Can't wash them in laundromats that don't allow them, and you have to have the
money for the initial purchase plus the time to do the laundry. Plus you
cannot use cloth diapers at daycare.

------
ythn
> Diapering a child now takes about $1,000 a year for an average product.

That doesn't seem right. Are these people buying the smallest quantities
possible? You can buy ~300 diapers for $30 on amazon. That's only $360 /year.

~~~
craftyguy
folks living paycheck to paycheck cannot afford big upfront costs like this.
even if it saves them money in the long term. too bad personal finance isn't a
thing taught in public schools.

~~~
mantas
$30 is big upfront costs? Seriously?

Of course, that may be a bigger sum in 3rd world countries. But they don't
have Amazon there at all and probably don't use diapers either.

~~~
war1025
When you are making minimum wage, which I believe is ~$7.50/hr, and are most
likely not working full time, that is a good chunk of a day's pay. Granted, if
you are in that situation, you are probably getting some government
assistance.

Also, some people are just terrible at managing money.

~~~
mantas
Let's say small packs cost $85/mo (as per $1k/year). Big monthly pack is $30.
So weekly supplies in small packs are barely cheaper than buying in bulk for a
month. Unless you pay day's diapers every day..

Do you think poor people are stupid and can't plan even a week ahead? They're
getting paid weekly or monthly in most cases after all.

In my experience, poor people are much better at managing money than better
off folks. I could see plenty of people who couldn't bother to order bulk of
diapers and then store them somewhere. But poor people usually go the extra
mile even for couple bucks.

~~~
war1025
My comment wasn't about poor people being dumb. My comment was attempting to
point out that, when you are poor, small amounts of money matter a lot more.

I may have worded it poorly or misread the context of the comment I was
replying to, but the point I was trying to get across is that when you don't
have much money, you have to be much more conscious about how you spend it.
And if you aren't, then you go broke and don't eat for a while. It's an easy
thing for well-off people to lose sight of.

~~~
mantas
Exactly, they're much m ore conscious about how they spend it. Thus putting
aside $30 is no brainer vs buying in small packs. Most people, poor or not,
get paid weekly or monthly. It's not that hard to buy $30 worth of goods after
getting paid vs spending $10 every few days...

------
hennsen
„Procter & Gamble and Kimberly-Clark have poured billions of dollars into
research and development“

Can that be true? Really Billions?

Or just a story to justify a pricing strategy to maximize profits with those
who can pay it leaving others aside?

~~~
ggg9990
Not per year, but in total over the last 100 years is believable.

------
syndacks
Why is sunscreen so expensive?

------
randyrand
I wish the author could answer the question without a tangential "human-
interest" piece. tldr?

------
jaaames
Autonomous demand.

------
chrissnell
This article is so frustrating. The helplessness and dependence are just sad.
Cloth diapers cost less than $1.50 each in a 10-pack. If you are poor enough,
you can wash them in a bucket with bar soap. That's what virtually everyone
did before washers were invented. I'm saddened that this girl didn't figure
this out. I know first-hand, when you're poor and desperate, you figure shit
out. Unless, of course, you have a system that encourages dependence on public
assistance and actually ends up hurting a woman's self-sufficiency and puts
her little boy at a high risk of being helpless and dependent, too.

I want to help them, but the answer isn't more subsidies. I want to see her
get that better job, even if it means losing the assistance. I want to see Dad
stay in the home because that's so critical for developing emotional control
in young adults. I want their son to grow up scrappy and industrious, with a
good sense of how to get by even things are tough because tough times happen
for everyone.

I don't blame this woman. I'm not pissed at her. I'm pissed, however, at the
politicians who have created this dependency web to trap people like this
woman and ensure that there will always be a need for do-gooder politicians.

~~~
s4vi0r
Jesus, your comment and the other replies just straight up reek of
privilege/ignorance.

What you're suggesting is obviously the pragmatic choice - obviously, if she's
poor as shit and can't afford regular diapers, using reusable cloth ones is a
great solution. But that's not the fucking point of the article - its
$CURRENT_YEAR in the richest country in the world, this absolutely shouldn't
be a thing that happens in the first place.

I'm not even a communist or anything, but its absolutely insane to me that
Americans don't realize how "third world" their country is in some ways. Do
you think that back in the 50s and 60s when your parents or grandparents were
buying the first mass produced disposable diapers, they would have expected 60
years later people would be forced to go back to washable cloth diapers
because they couldn't afford regular diapers? What a stupidly low standard to
have for the wealthiest country in the world.

Capitalism is an awesome thing, but it seems conservative pundits and the rich
have convinced a lot of people that you can't have both a strong, capitalist
free market economy along with a government that actually gives a shit about
its citizens and not just the top 10,000 guys with the biggest wallets or
whatever.

~~~
eljimmy
You seem to think first world means everyone is happy, content, and without
struggle. No country such as that has ever existed.

The common concept of first world is so misconstrued by people who live in it
that those from second and third world countries would ridicule you for your
comment.

Perspective, don't forget it.

~~~
Cthulhu_
No, but there's a lot that the US (which, remember, is THE RICHEST AND MOST
POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD (caps for the people in the back)) can do as a
country to improve the basic standards of living. Basic things like affordable
health care for everyone (and free health care for those that can't afford
it), education and equal opportunities for everyone (so that kids whose
parents are poor can still go to university if they have that drive /
intelligence - I'm saying that because I had that opportunity), etc.

The cost of disposable nappies is not the issue here. Neither is happiness or
contentness. It's being the richest country in the world while 13.5% of its
population is living below the poverty line, while people are literally dying
on the streets due to being neglected by both the government, their
neighbours, and a lack of acceptable health care. With the poor staying poor
due to no social mobility, access to education, or normal jobs that don't
involve having to scrounge the bottom of the barrel looking for e.g.
passengers to drive around.

~~~
ComputerGuru
“It's being the richest country in the world while 13.5% of its population is
living below the poverty line,“

I don’t want to get into the political or moral issues, but I just want to
point out that this is almost a non sequitur. The USA’s dominance is relative
to other countries, but the poverty line is intra-USA. The single poorest
person in the USA could be richer than everyone outside it and there could
still very well be a poverty line - and people below it - in the USA.

~~~
rusk
There is such a thing as "absolute poverty" \- rather than relative poverty
[0]

 _" a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs,
including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter,
education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to
services"_

I don't know, if the statistic for the USA is as high as the 13.5% cited by
GP, but based on what I read about, and some small amount of personal
experience, it is unusually high for such a wealthy, proud nation.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty)

------
dmitriid
Recently I'm becoming more and more repulsed by the "everyday life is shit in
the US" news.

1 in 3 families in the US cannot afford diapers? A full one third of families?
The richest country in the world, indeed.

------
JustSomeNobody
> Safety net programs are little help. Only one form of public assistance can
> be spent on diapers, and in Florida the average benefit hasn’t increased in
> more than two decades.

Why do we hate the poor so much?

