The wealthier and the educated classes in America have few to no children and the poorer and less educated classes in America lots of children (usually the parents don't even bother to marry).
Doesn't make any sense to me but, I think the wealthy and the educated just are afraid of breeding.
Children fill you with overweening, swelling narcissistic pride in yourself, as if you have accomplished something, even if you only did what every other mindless rutting animal on earth does. They make you walk around in a sentimental, self centered daze, as everything is justified now because you are a parent, you can become hysterical, exact revenge, attack other people because they don't worship the spawn of your loins etc. etc. They make you highly irrational in a very pleasing, narcotic way, nature's little incentive to keep the rug rats alive.
They can't escape until they are older, automatic captive audience when everybody else has told you to go to hell. If the kids are smart, they will act like they love you.
They give you something to obsess over endlessly so you never get bored, and something to control.
However, it doesn't matter how many kids you have or support, after about five generations out, if your kiddies have kiddies etc. there will be only about 3 percent of you left in any particular individual. You have been essentially erased as an individual by the great waring blender called genetics, sorry, no more you.
What's left of you in genetic bits and pieces may wind up in some weird ethnically mixed backwater of gene pooling.
Guess what, nature fooled you again to do something for it making you think you are doing something for you!
Not everything has to be an 'investment' to make it worthwhile.
In the long term we are all dead and it matters not whether you have offspring or not, and if so, whether they are good or evil, rich or poor. Do whatever you have to do. Life ain't a fsckin investment.
government needs your kids' contribution to Social Security
"As Countries Develop, Fertility Rates Usually Drop
In the United States, for instance, the average fertility rate was 3.67 children per woman between the years of 1875 and 1925, dropping to a little above 2 children per woman in the second half of the 20th century. And that’s a good place to be, because 2.1 is the fertility rate sweet spot: It’s the replacement rate, ensuring that a country’s population doesn’t decline over time. (Because two parents each replace themselves, and then some. Get it?)"
government needs your kids' contribution to Social Security
They just need to dump the premiums into appreciating or interest bearing assets like treasury securities.
In 2005 I got curious and ran my numbers. Assuming the retirement age did not increase, FICA tax rates didn't go up, and the wage cap did not increase faster than inflation I needed to outlast my statistically expected lifespan by five years to get a 0% inflation adjusted return on my contributions.
Investing my contributions in a portfolio returning 3% after inflation would quadruple my benefit for the same 15 years (or support 4X the people), double my benefit until I died at 100, or allow me to draw 30% more forever with the principle remaining for my heirs (or to support future retirees).
The current Ponzi scheme could also be preserved at lower cost by allowing young working adults to immigrate (no earned income credit for parents, no public schooling, no interval between government benefit eligibility and joining the work force).
Kids cost a fortune ... they make you less adaptable.. increase your risk exposure ... are harmful to the environment
If you care about genetics, we are all 99.9% identical anyway... If you want followers, starting a religion is more practical...If you want a small and cute companion, get a pet....If you want to keep your surname alive, write a fucking novel. (Or better yet, start an immortal corporation.)
Welcome to the Bay Area, Cool and Hip. Welcome to the Values of the Hipsters.
Fighting to live another day really ain't worth the costs, so might as well eat a bullet for desert
I fully understand that every decision is an economics decision. The flaw in your analysis, is using someone elses metrics. You shouldn't allow USDs to control every aspect of your life,,,you'll likely end up disappointed
You were someones child at one time, do you regret being born? Seriously, what kind of self depreciating kinky shit are you in to
I agree that it should not be the dominating factor, but it ties in with lifestyle and how you raise your kids. If you are happy without all the consumerism chances are you kids will be to, unless they get baited too much and switch to the dark side ;) Making money just to have more money is kinda pointless to me, but if you can translate that into more free time. early semi-retirement and a happier you through less consumption then it is worth it.
Anyone that would make such a statement, are no doubt the same sort that would put a dollar in a change machine and then say...
"There's just no beating the house with this machine..." after 4 quarters fall out the bottom.
Consent to donate sperm is not the same as consent to finance the upbringing of the kid. The idiots suing him should be made to pay 10 times the asked for "child support" to the man.
Shit like this ultimately harms future users of sperm banks as successful men are much less likely to donate. So instead of getting this guy's sperm,
you get this guy's sperm,
The greedy assholes behind the lawsuit are simply ruining the system they benefited from for all future lesbians. What a bunch of scumbag hypocrites!
Furthermore, men will start insisting on completely and absolute anonymity for their donations which means the child will never know its medical history or be able to connect to his or her biological relatives when he reaches adulthood. Yet another reason to throw out this suit with severe prejudice.