By not having children and saving up the money instead will make you rich?

[Doctor Amadeus]

This thread literally feels like a breeding ground of those righteous people who think children are like the bane of the earth, ignoring themselves being children, possibly being little arseholes to their own parents and potentially surrounded by children who are parented by those with lower incomes.
Sorry, did you like lose out because children come from all walks of life? Are you going to lose out because children are born every generation? Narrow-mindedness will dictate you say yes, otherwise knowing the economy you'd understand they are a benefit in the long run.

What you lose in money for a child, you gain experiences and memories you'll never have without children.

There's no right or wrong answer but sorry, being up your own arse about these choices is beyond a joke. It's not your life or choice on what other's do. Get over it.

Nobody is asking whether it is the right or wrong answer just weighting the pros and cons as they pertain to economics, and really depending on who you are and that is most or the average yeah having kids is burden, because most people can barely make enough to sustain themselves without a shit load of trouble if they don't have insurance or miss a few paychecks.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

True indeed! There are many elements to what keeps our population growing. People not having children is not going to suddenly start a decrease in population. Basically, it is perfectly fine that people do not have children. If anything it is one of the many things that helps keep us in check.

When speaking of the human race in it's entirety, you're correct. What's being discussed however is wether or not the cultural identity of the west ought to suicide itself and be replaced by that of Africans, Middle Eastern and central Asians, who are far more productive. This of course, not meant to be apocalyptic as demographic shifts have happened for all of human history. We're just going to have to decide as a society if our particular flavor of humanity, along with its accompanying institutions and beliefs, is going to be a failed experiment or a successful one. I opt for the latter, and am not a racist for doing so.

[Nyoken]

Yuck.....who wants to get kids?! Save ur money instead and live ur life

[Evangeliste]

Nobody is asking whether it is the right or wrong answer just weighting the pros and cons as they pertain to economics, and really depending on who you are and that is most or the average yeah having kids is burden, because most people can barely make enough to sustain themselves without a shit load of trouble if they don't have insurance or miss a few paychecks.

From what I've seen there's a lot of passive aggressive stances on "having kids" is a bad thing. Page 1 shows a lot of it.

I don't live in America, nor does the OP according to their Location on their user profile nor do I live in either. What you're are saying doesn't really apply to me in that way since my systems are different, but honestly those people in those difficult situations aren't going to be "burdened" if they wanted the child/ren. Having money or not, shouldn't dictate nor have an opinion imposed on them to have children or not. Whether economic or not.

This whole debate is basically saying "should only wealthy people have kids, because they can afford it?".

[ArguesWithStrangers]

That isn't how this works, I am calling out your nonsense, and you choosing to not respond is irrelevant, your fucking race is not especially unique or special there isn't anything pure about being inbreed which is just about the only thing that white nationalistic bullshit is about. Genes are actually made better by diversity, this is a fucking fact, and right now there are more than enough people to keep the human population and civilization going forever, whether that is the kind of world you wouldn't be in because you're a dinosaur not withstanding.

See, you're so hell bent on arguing with a set of talking points you've failed, again, to acknowledge, or even address, the argument I actually made. That aside, are you equally outraged when a man from Bangladesh wants to preserve his cultural identity, moors, and beliefs? Is he an evil racist?

[Doctor Amadeus]

When speaking of the human race in it's entirety, you're correct. What's being discussed however is wether or not the cultural identity of the west ought to suicide itself and be replaced by that of Africans, Middle Eastern and central Asians, who are far more productive. This of course, not meant to be apocalyptic as demographic shifts have happened for all of human history. We're just going to have to decide as a society if our particular flavor of humanity, along with its accompanying institutions and beliefs, is going to be a failed experiment or a successful one. I opt for the latter, and am not a racist for doing so.

Well you are racist for doing so, or you are simply ignorant and delusional take your pick, because there is no science that backs your bullshit claim up, what do you think if there aren't enough white people we are going to suddenly unlearn the formula for fucking cement or some shit?

I mean really are you really one of those conspiracy theorist that believes on horse shit like white genocide or whatever, or by god the stupid idea race is anything more than a social construct.

There isn't enough bunk bullshit theories concerning I.Q, Biology that supports any of that. Not even religious context supports it. Unless of course you believe LOTRs was based on a true telling of actual events.

[Doctor Amadeus]

From what I've seen there's a lot of passive aggressive stances on "having kids" is a bad thing. Page 1 shows a lot of it.

I don't live in America, nor does the OP according to their Location on their user profile nor do I live in either. What you're are saying doesn't really apply to me in that way since my systems are different, but honestly those people in those difficult situations aren't going to be "burdened" if they wanted the child/ren. Having money or not, shouldn't dictate nor have an opinion imposed on them to have children or not. Whether economic or not.

This whole debate is basically saying "should only wealthy people have kids, because they can afford it?".

I think kids can be wonderful, kids are great, I think without kids obviously the the human race would die, I don't want to see that happen per say, but it isn't an election I don't get a vote, and rest assured if we allow stupidity to guide our aims we will most certainly not realize the longest and more successful future.

I mean if people want to have kids that is fine, but people should know what they are up against and of course everybody should do what we can, but it is also alright to be honest, and honestly I don't want people to have kids who hate them or shouldn't have them do you?

[ArguesWithStrangers]

If you're really worried about "white genocide", it's not like it would happen in your lifetime or your childrens lifetime or their childrens lifetime, and by the time it would, chances are no one would really think about it that way anymore, either.

I mean, sooner or later everyone on the planet is going to have extremely racially mixed backgrounds anyway.

If you're going to use quotes with regards to something I believe, at least quote something ive said. As to your scenario, I don't think that is very likely, and even if it were to come to pass, I think that would be very sad. One of the great joys in my travels has been enjoying the variety in art, architecture, ritual and food of he diverse tapestry of peoples on this blue marble. For that to be possible though people must assert and protect their cultural identity in their own lands. When that disappears we're left with a homogeneous and rather bland existence.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Sure, if you don't want to help humanity.

I always thought that people who didn't want to have children because of money when they can afford it was inherently selfish.

[deepr]

Maturity is knowing what you want and don't want and make your decisions based on that, independent of social pressure, or any other outside influence. Unlike other organisms we can consciously make the decision to have kids, or not, so why not use that freedom to make up your own mind. Only a weak minded fool would have children without giving it some serious thought.
If you dont want kids for whatever reason, don't have them. You are under no obligation towards anything or anyone to have them.
If you do want to have kids, be a 100% sure about it and go for it all the way and accept the responsiblities that come with that decision.

Also, just having kids so you won't be alone when you're old, if that's your main motivation then that sounds a lot more selfish to me than not having children because you don't want them.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

Well you are racist for doing so, or you are simply ignorant and delusional take your pick, because there is no science that backs your bullshit claim up, what do you think if there aren't enough white people we are going to suddenly unlearn the formula for fucking cement or some shit?

I mean really are you really one of those conspiracy theorist that believes on horse shit like white genocide or whatever, or by god the stupid idea race is anything more than a social construct.

There isn't enough bunk bullshit theories concerning I.Q, Biology that supports any of that. Not even religious context supports it. Unless of course you believe LOTRs was based on a true telling of actual events.

Dude, go breathe into a paper bag for a while and come back when you feel better. You've yet to provide a single offering to this conversation that isn't laced with strawmans.

[McTroll]

Sure, if you don't want to help humanity.

Is procreation "helping" 100% of the time? Especially in an era in which we're getting closer to overpopulation for our planet's resources?

I always thought that people who didn't want to have children because of money when they can afford it was inherently selfish.

What's more selfish? Someone who knows his/her limits and acts in accordance to those, or someone who judges that person to validate his/her own life choices?

[Kathandira]

When speaking of the human race in it's entirety, you're correct. What's being discussed however is wether or not the cultural identity of the west ought to suicide itself and be replaced by that of Africans, Middle Eastern and central Asians, who are far more productive. This of course, not meant to be apocalyptic as demographic shifts have happened for all of human history. We're just going to have to decide as a society if our particular flavor of humanity, along with its accompanying institutions and beliefs, is going to be a failed experiment or a successful one. I opt for the latter, and am not a racist for doing so.

I admit, i'm one of the one's who welcomes the cultural diversity, and cultural change. So long as it doesn't call for cultural cleansing. If I, as a white man, became the minority in my country, i'd be ok with that. It's kind apart of the consequence of being a multi-cultural country (The U.S.). However, I would not be cool with discrimination because of it. It wasn't ok for any other races while the White people were the majority, and it wouldn't be fair for it to happen if White people became a minority. I'd like to think that since we are moving towards a more even mix (eventually) that discrimination based on race will eventually become a thing of the past.

Yeah, I live in wonderland, with tons of wishful thinking.

[Doctor Amadeus]

See, you're so hell bent on arguing with a set of talking points you've failed, again, to acknowledge, or even address, the argument I actually made. That aside, are you equally outraged when a man from Bangladesh wants to preserve his cultural identity, moors, and beliefs? Is he an evil racist?

Yes, it's misguided and stupid, and just because it was done in the past doesn't make it nature, or science or anything else, NO as it pertains to culture I really don't give a shit about that either, I don't give a fuck if the next generation came out blue really, WHY?

Because they aren't me and I am not them, and if there is anything to build on it is what is real, and maybe what could be imagined but there needs to be perspective all around period.

That isn't culture, that is knowledge, which is what science is.


Now I am sure you dropped that nugget about other races much in the same breath you would or could drop some bullshit about why nobody ever asks if their isn't enough white people, it's stupid fucking straw man, it is an idiotic hypothetical and the whole thing is backed by a racist bullshit white supremacist agenda, that is plagued with the notion if I am not on top and MOST already fucking aren't then do we want to be the minority.

I hate to break it to you, YOU aren't going to control that, and the best that can be achieved is to guarantee that the worst of whatever culture you claim is harmed and destroyed, rather than the other way around.

Other races embrace science, gay people do embrace commitment and marriage, there really are conservatives in as many groups as their are liberals, if that isn't as fucking evident as it has existed in ALL races whether it be social or civic conflict, it is already happening.

The only thing hysteria brings regardless of race or ideas about purity, is stupidity, chaos, and needless suffering for all involved.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Dude, go breathe into a paper bag for a while and come back when you feel better. You've yet to provide a single offering to this conversation that isn't laced with strawmans.

Well no I don't have any cake, this is true, but you have had enough already. I am pretty clear when it comes to stupidity masquerading as some kind of false wisdom and enlightenment, and I am not special in that because this act has gotten pretty fucking old even faster than previous attempts.

Take a bit of your own advice, calm down, the thread is about babies and the economics of that, not a referendum on who it is the fuck you think would be best born and why.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

Well that's what you seem to be describing. You don't have to say "automobile" for everyone to get the point when you talk about a four-wheeled gas powered vehicle that you operate on roads.



No one said that cultures would disappear just because racial backgrounds expand. I'm not even sure how you'd come to that conclusion.

A genocide and a die off are not the same thing. I'm clearly describing he latter.

As to your second point, you stated we'd all be of more mixed backgrounds in the distant future. If we're all mixed, it logically follows that we're less distinct, which seems rather bland to me.

My problem with most people on your side of the argument is they will clap their hands with approval if someone says the Congolese ought to promote their culture, protect their borders and celibate their faith and history, but the second someone from France or any other predominantly white western country says it they're an evil racist.

[Tinykong]

It doesn't really cost that much to have a kid. Comparatively speaking, I spend less money now than I did before, because I have less free time. Most of the costs of raising kids comes in the later years, when they are younger, it's relatively cheap.

If you have the discipline to save all your disposable income for all your earning years, sure, you'll have a nicer retirement. But, most people will be tempted to spend that disposable income.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I admit, i'm one of the one's who welcomes the cultural diversity, and cultural change. So long as it doesn't call for cultural cleansing. If I, as a white man, became the minority in my country, i'd be ok with that. It's kind apart of the consequence of being a multi-cultural country (The U.S.). However, I would not be cool with discrimination because of it. It wasn't ok for any other races while the White people were the majority, and it wouldn't be fair for it to happen if White people became a minority. I'd like to think that since we are moving towards a more even mix (eventually) that discrimination based on race will eventually become a thing of the past.

Yeah, I live in wonderland, with tons of wishful thinking.

I exempt the US from my line of thinking because we're a propositional nation and have been diverse from the onset. We don't have the same cultural ties to place and history as those in the old world. When I'm talking about preserving western cultural identity, I'm about Europe, as their cultures re tied closely to the places they grew out of.

[Raelbo]

The problem is those 7 billionaires are not innovators, they aren't doing anything new.

Well, this thread is about making money, not about being innovators. That being said, I still think it's a outrageous assertion to claim, without any kind of substantiation, that most of the world's biggest innovators are/were childless. It's patently false in fact.

And even then, if you go and look at individual cases of famous innovators who were childless, you'd still need to provide an argument to support the notion of causality. For example, Sir Isaac Newton, Nikola Tesla and Albert Einstein (arguably the three most famous childless innovators) are suspected to have Aspergers, a condition that makes them non-predisposed to wanting children, as well as more likely to come up with genius ideas. It wasn't a choice to not have kids that made them successful.

And here's another point to consider: If you look at most masters or doctoral theses, they almost always have dedications to their family: Either children, spouses, or siblings. I think it's pretty obvious to any observer of humanity that important people in our lives (of which children are by far the most important) are a great source of inspiration and a significant reason for which we strive towards greatness.

Which brings me back to my main point: If you're choosing not to have kids because you think that they will make it impossible for you to be successful, then you're likely to fail. Great people don't make excuses like "if it weren't for my kids I'd have been a success". They find a way to achieve all their goals, including having kids if that's what they want.

[Evangeliste]

Probably because people who choose not to have children usually spend their lives dealing with nosy, righteous assholes who constantly lecture them on how they're doing life wrong, how kids are the best thing ever, how it's your job to procreate, why are you so selfish, and so on.

I hear the social pressure is even worse for women than it is for us men, too.

Also: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/kids

I don't constantly going round to strangers lecturing people that they should have kids. Do you see others doing that? I don't either.

If anything it's been more common for me to see others actually be rather an arsehole to people with kids. Like "Can you stop that kid screaming?". I've seen a fair, few social media here in the UK claiming that every single mother here is looking for an easy way to life, with benefit handouts and should have kept her legs shut than screw our economy and society with children bringing up children.
This thread pretty much shows that the attitude that you should have a life first than kids only if you can afford them.

Personally, I wasn't subjected to either end. Simply informed from my parents and sex education that you protect yourself, be smart, understand your life, if there is an accident address in how you feel is necessary. My kids were a surprise, I even had twins. I chose to keep them because though my parents told me I'd regret having an abortion, I thought eventually I'll have kids, this is just sped up for me personally.

I feel sorry for you if you feel the world is pressuring you, this thread alone shows you the opposite "fuck why have kids? Enjoy your life and make sure you have money to do kids".