Having a Baby Never Cost So Much (US)

[Deleted]

Which makes me wonder even more why some people get kids while they are young or are already having a hard time earning a living.

[melodramocracy]

I'm sure it can be rewarding. I knew I'd be a terrible parent for all sorts of reasons, so decided against it. Folks around here have had enough kids to make up for my non-participation. *shrug*

[schwank05]

Its not the raising part that is expensive, our last child was $48,000.00 by the time we even got out of the Hospital after his birth, now this was Pre Obama-care so we could actually afford insurance then, so we paid $2,500.00 out of pocket, and that was covered by my Aflac. Then after that for at least the next 5 years you will get raped at the hospital for another $100,000.00 easily. The clothes, Diapers, and Formula is nothing compared to our retarded health care costs.

[Raelbo]

mate you are one extreme guy.

I laugh at the irony of this statement

I just see things differently <snip> I am just a realist.

If you see things according to your own different reality, that makes you not very much of a realist. A realist sees things as they are, which generally means being able to see things from multiple perspectives and then having the ability to accurately assess what is most likely to reflect the reality. You sir seem to be a cynic and a pessimist.

An honest guy and I hate to sugarcoat stuff for stupid people in order to make 'em feel better.

There is a theme I am picking up from multiple threads you post in that you like calling other people stupid. I suggest you learn to refrain. It's rude, condescending and negatively predisposes everyone else to your viewpoint. It is perfectly possible to be honest and respectful of other viewpoints at the same time.

Also there are a lot of ... stupid ... assumptions you make. E.g. linking suicide rate to how many people wanna live. You can't be real mate.

Seriously? As human beings we are capable of deciding to end our lives. By definition, choosing not to commit suicide is a choice to live.

Here is the logic as it applies to your assertion is that it is cruel to bring a new life into this world. In so doing, you are making a judgement call that any new human life that is created would be better off having never existed than to be forced to live in the world. Surely it is only rational that if not existing at all was preferable to existing, then we would opt to commit suicide?

Ergo, given the overwhelming majority of people choose to live rather than take their own lives, it is surely indicative that, on balance of probability, it is better to be alive than the alternative: oblivion. Hence I would argue that it is more cruel to deny life than to make it.

One more thing. I think the world right now isn't bad. We are living in a golden age. You can get by by doing nothing at all. Free money, free food. Life is easy.
I am talking about the future that is drastically changing the fate of humanity.

It doesn't change my argument. It is still better to be alive today than to have never existed. Hence it is not cruel to bring a life into this world. If and when a significant number of people start committing suicide then I would accept your argument.

damn how could you misinterpret so much of my post? how that even possible

Maybe you are just terrible at expressing yourself....

[Deleted]

I laugh at the irony of this statement



If you see things according to your own different reality, that makes you not very much of a realist. A realist sees things as they are, which generally means being able to see things from multiple perspectives and then having the ability to accurately assess what is most likely to reflect the reality. You sir seem to be a cynic and a pessimist.



There is a theme I am picking up from multiple threads you post in that you like calling other people stupid. I suggest you learn to refrain. It's rude, condescending and negatively predisposes everyone else to your viewpoint. It is perfectly possible to be honest and respectful of other viewpoints at the same time.



Seriously? As human beings we are capable of deciding to end our lives. By definition, choosing not to commit suicide is a choice to live.

Here is the logic as it applies to your assertion is that it is cruel to bring a new life into this world. In so doing, you are making a judgement call that any new human life that is created would be better off having never existed than to be forced to live in the world. Surely it is only rational that if not existing at all was preferable to existing, then we would opt to commit suicide?

Ergo, given the overwhelming majority of people choose to live rather than take their own lives, it is surely indicative that, on balance of probability, it is better to be alive than the alternative: oblivion. Hence I would argue that it is more cruel to deny life than to make it.



It doesn't change my argument. It is still better to be alive today than to have never existed. Hence it is not cruel to bring a life into this world. If and when a significant number of people start committing suicide then I would accept your argument.



Maybe you are just terrible at expressing yourself....

Please stop online-harassing me.

[Pratt]

By all means, be the first to drink the bleach.

But I'm right. So there's that.

[Kapadons]

The sole reason for any organism on this planet is to reproduce. If you aren't reproducing, you are a failure. Most of you will qualify as being complete wastes of space and resources.

Should probably do the universe a favor and go ahead and remove yourself from the equation.

[Xargoth6634]

I've dodged that bullet so far. I'll just hold onto that quarter mill per kid and let my siblings continue the family line.

- - - Updated - - -

The sole reason for any organism on this planet is to reproduce. If you aren't reproducing, you are a failure. Most of you will qualify as being complete wastes of space and resources.

Should probably do the universe a favor and go ahead and remove yourself from the equation.

Well that's just plain ridiculous.

[Sir Andy]

But I'm right. So there's that.

Yes, you are. So, being a good servant of the Earth, you should do the Earth a favor and off yourself before you contribute more to the coming global warmapocalypse.

[HAcoreRD]

Which makes me wonder even more why some people get kids while they are young or are already having a hard time earning a living.

Because one night of fun and pleasure can turn into 18 years of regret and hell

[CMartel]

I remember the average number being less than a third of that for people my age.

That's why we're sticking to cats for now; maybe a dog in a few years.

ITS FREE SWIPE YOUR EBT. Of course eventually there will not be enough productive people to be taxed to maintain benefits if trends continue. Zika small headed babies will cost taxpayers more than their birthweight in gold every year they are alive. There is a woman in NJ with 21 kids, no man and a history of cocaine.

[Varitok]

The sole reason for any organism on this planet is to reproduce. If you aren't reproducing, you are a failure. Most of you will qualify as being complete wastes of space and resources.

Should probably do the universe a favor and go ahead and remove yourself from the equation.

"STOP ENJOYING YOUR LIFE!" Thats all I got out of that. We got one life to live and people will live it however they please.

[Theodarzna]

ITS FREE SWIPE YOUR EBT. Of course eventually there will not be enough productive people to be taxed to maintain benefits if trends continue. Zika small headed babies will cost taxpayers more than their birthweight in gold every year they are alive. There is a woman in NJ with 21 kids, no man and a history of cocaine.

...... Well, that is currently the breeding stock in this country.

As a curious note, why are the other, wealthier classes so infertile in comparison?