Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I want children, but I don't have any.-Male

64 (41%)

I want children, but I don't have any.-Female

2 (1.3%)

I don't want children and I don't have any.-Male

72 (46.2%)

I don't want children and I don't have any.-Female

6 (3.8%)

I have children and am happy I had them.-Male

9 (5.8%)

I have children and am happy I had them.-Female

3 (1.9%)

I have children and I regret it.-Male

0 (0%)

I have children and I regret it.-Female

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 154

[alway]

It's not that hard to understand. The overall cost of raising a child to 18 in the US is usually over a hundred thousand dollars, if not over two hundred thousand. That is a lot of money I could be spending on things I care about instead of children.

Or, for a link to actual statistics to back that up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_raising_a_child
And keep in mind, those figures only include raising children up to age 17; there's also another 50-200k for college; and that's making the incorrect assumption that college costs won't increase by the time they get to that age. That's just cost of raising them in monetary terms, not opportunity costs or costs of time. So, in monetary terms, in order to raise a single child, you are giving up at bare minimum, about 150k. Assuming higher income levels and college costs, closer to 300-350k. 2 children, 600-700k. 3 and you're looking at around $1 million. There's a good reason birth rates decline in developed nations; they're really expensive.

[Lysabild]

It's not that hard to understand. The overall cost of raising a child to 18 in the US is usually over a hundred thousand dollars, if not over two hundred thousand. That is a lot of money I could be spending on things I care about instead of children.

I understand this as much as I understand the Liberals in my country who think taxes are evil because they help everyone and not just themselves. That is, I don't understand it. Not at all. You may argue that it is totally different, probably is, but at it's core it feels the same to me.

Children invoke a feeling sort of like this to me:

I was given life, I'd be selfish not to pass along that gift.

Or maybe more like this:

Someone gave me a cake that I could have, eat and share without losing any of it.

My dream is being a public school teacher too for much the same reasons, despite being a rather mediocre and hated job to most people. "Eugh, kids?!" Yeah, no. But I actually want to give kids whichever tools I have acquired in my life to help the next generations to fight bullshit, learning them to logically question everything they see, hear and read.

What is this legacy you speak of?

My family name and hopefully the family's eyes ^^

Spoiler: Disclaimer? (click to show/hide)

Also, all, I'm purposefully not stroking y'all, normally I'd just lurk or stroke with everyone, but this is a subject making me want to actually express what I feel, thoughts that actually make my chest feel funny in it's importance to me.

[DJ]

I want as many children as my hypothetical wife would be willing to birth, because Idiocracy is a very scary movie.

[Reudh]

I think two to four is perfect for me. I'm a very family oriented person.

[Tellemurius]

I want as many children as my hypothetical wife would be willing to birth, because Idiocracy is a very scary movie.

Wait so you want that many intelligent children around to combat stupidity or is the Carl's Jr brigade be marching out of your house every day?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I want as many children as my hypothetical wife would be willing to birth, because Idiocracy is a very scary movie.

Idiocracy isn't representative of reality. At all.

[alway]

Idiocracy isn't representative of reality. At all.

This. Very much this. There's pretty much nothing it actually did manage to get right.

[Bauglir]

Well. I'd be willing to wager that substituting a sports drink for water in crop growing would prove an inefficient strategy, at best, and more likely a complete failure. Although, on the other hand, you might eventually select for strains that can tolerate it, thus averting the famine...

[Muz]

People who don't want children should note that there's 0 people who answered that they regret having children.

Internet polls don't really represent reality I know a few who regretted having children, but not many. Generally, it's the poor non-urban people who enjoy having lots, since their kids start bringing in money by the time they're 15+

[DJ]

The movie basically says that in absence of environmental pressure and plenty of room for population growth, the optimum evolutionary strategy is to have as many offspring as you can. I don't see what's so wrong about that.

[Vector]

The movie basically says that in absence of environmental pressure and plenty of room for population growth, the optimum evolutionary strategy is to have as many offspring as you can. I don't see what's so wrong about that.

Yes, that's a standard tenet of biology.  Problem is, we do have environmental pressure and not that much more room for population growth.

[alway]

Evolution is also extremely slow by human standards. You won't see evolutionary changes across a population in anything less than several thousand years barring a die-off or other very disruptive event. Evolution doesn't mean diddly to a species in which civilization has taken hold as strongly as it has for us. It moves way too slowly to be relevant when environmental conditions change dramatically in a mere fraction of a century due to societal changes. To expand upon what Vector stated, not only do we have environmental pressure, but we have very powerful and rapidly changing environmental pressure. And if you hadn't noticed, the rate of population increase is declining over time, not rising. If you want children to do your part to stop an idiocracy; no, that's just stupid. More so as we reach a point at which many natural resources available to us continue to dwindle.

[DJ]

Oh, so you're disputing the part where stupid people procreate more than intelligent people? I thought that one was obvious :S

As for pressure thing, IIRC current farming technology could support 20+ billion people. It's not that there isn't enough food, it's that it's not distributed properly.

Also, pretty much every developed country has negative natality, so more children there isn't a bad thing. We shouldn't be looking to USA and Europe to stop overpopulation, we should be helping Africa and parts of Asia modernize. Industrialization is a prerequisite for educated and emancipated women, which leads to more sustainable birth rates.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Evolution is also extremely slow by human standards.

That said, forced evolution through technological breakthroughs in genetics will likely come far sooner.

[DJ]

I subscribe to the punctuated equilibrium theory.