Most developed nations are not breeding at any kind of level to avoid serious demographic issues in the next few decades because people have children well below the replacement rate. Especially quite a few European countries, China, and Japan to name a few. Some places in Japan and China are already suffering serious issues.
Hope you enjoy the people's brats who wipe your ungrateful ass when you're playing with yourself in your depends at the nursing home. I don't care if people chose not to have children. Still considering it myself given how children impact one's ability to travel the world. Lot of sanctimonious assholes here though who hypocritically whine out the other side of their mouth about people who question their choice to not while they piss and whine about how terrible children are to have/be around that don't realize or care that we do need so have enough children to replace the aging people.
Last edited by shimerra; 2017-08-10 at 03:30 PM.
“Logic: The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding.”
"Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."
Ambrose Bierce
The Bird of Hermes Is My Name, Eating My Wings To Make Me Tame.
Just because you feel justified in your insult doesn't mean it's not an insult. Thinking your individual choices don't affect larger trends s not arrogant. One soldier of thousands doesn't win the war no, but thousands of individual soldiers making individual choices to move towards that end does. Nothing wrong with doing your part, and feeling glad you did so.
That is hard for me to get a grip around since I am so incredibly used to not having a culture rooted in hundreds upon hundreds of years of ancestors. But if I try to put myself in their shoes, I can absolutely understand a resistance to mixing cultures in Europe.
RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18
Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.
can't say I'd be rich but I wouldn't be financially poorer for it to say the least.
I agree they shouldn't if they don't want to. With or without the interference of an income but, this isn't about wanting them, this thread was mostly started to be about children and money to sustain them.
I had a very limited opinion on children before my own. I wouldn't really be an arsehole to someone who had them or the child because unless you know them personally, either could be having a really bad day when you see them, I like to be at least positive on those things. I wouldn't go out of my way to help those either because I was ignorant on how to mostly.
Now I have kids, I am happier and they guide my life in a way that's actually positive. Sure it's not everyone, but I didn't like money dictate my choice and others shouldn't have to. Sadly, I did have them at a time period in my life, I was working to get myself back into Uni so I paused it all. But now 5 years later, I am going back to Uni. But my Uni course landed me 30k in debt from the get go. My children have incurred close to that now, after nearly 5 years of them living.
Christ, there's wealthy couples out there that would go poor if they could have their own child. Just shows that wealth shouldn't be a factor nonetheless.
And stupidity is in every place, procreating isn't going to be the only bastion to attract or churn out stupidity.
You're twisting my point. Let me clarify my stance.
In the west, we have a problem where we barely hit the even number of children per family versus the parents. That means that if you take illnesses in consideration, we're declining. We shouldn't have families of twelves, that's absurd. But just look at Japan to see this phenomenon pushed to an extreme.
There are also a hundred of reasons to not have children. Ilnesses, inability, context. I made sure to point to the fact that I considered people who could have children but decided against it purely for monetary purposes - even though they can well afford it. You don't want children because you're bad with kids? Fine. You don't want children because you want your 100$ wine bottle every week? Not fine.
Google Diversity Memo
Learn to use critical thinking: https://youtu.be/J5A5o9I7rnA
Political left, right similarly motivated to avoid rival views
[...] we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)..
The same sanctimonious attitude can be found in those self-righteous parents who use the debate to validate their own life choices and calm their own insecurities on the matter.
I don't find children to be terrible at all. I just know and own that I'd be a terrible fit as a father.
- - - Updated - - -
No, I'm asking questions, and therefore am leaving you the opportunity to clarify your stance.
And that's one clarification I can agree on.
Well I have to agree with everything you said for the reasons you broke down, so yeah. I mean people are going to make whatever choices they are going to make, I like that to be with the best information and education they can have.
But no money isn't the only obstacle as you just pointed out, because I don't hate kids or animals in general, and the way some people treat their pets or living toys, I would be afraid the temperament of some of these types to even have children, but some do.
Deciding you want to be responsible for a life should require much thought.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
That is the old way of doing things that will have you labeled as unambitious now.
Now, you get your engineering degree. Then you move somewhere there are entry level jobs for some super big name in the business and stay there for 3 -
4 years. Then you move somewhere smaller and less well known but for a significant jump in position, you do that for another 3 - 4 years. Depending on how high you jumped when you took the last one, you either repeat that move and move up again with an even smaller, less significant company or you get back into a big one in your now higher level position.
small, less influential, companies are for experience
big companies who get a hundred thousand apps a month are for security and big pay/benifits
You have to move often to be seen as an motivated and ambitious
Plus before the kid thing, all the expenses you have to take into account for all these dates people go on out to dinner, going to the movies, play dates, and all the stuff you have to buy for your spouse when in a relationship, or even being married. All that total expensed before you have even had at least one kid...
As well as all the stuff WoW'ers buy such as the nice desktop and laptop computer you people spend a fortune on, and $15 a month, knowing people who play like it's a bible. So 15 a month x 12 months x how many years you play.
You have to budget, and have priorities. Work a lot, eat right, and don't buy stupid things like smoking cigarrettes, etc. It's different life when when you're a strict college student, living on your on and on a budget.
Last edited by Wuuzikli; 2017-08-10 at 03:56 PM.
All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
Well I hire people and I keep a lot of folks with this mentality in there momma's cribs and pick people up that show me they got balls, skill, and it being built on proof / hard work. Not how they carry their sorry asses, cry about what they want, or how cool they are with the social media.
But if they enjoy the bread line I won't hate. Those people can be those people.
It is odd. They even teach this in school. As required courses they literally brought in some local senior VP from some company to explain to us how to put together a series of 4-5 year plans for the rest of our career.
If you stay in a job for very long you kind of 'fall off' the elevator to the top. You can kinda work with role changes within the same company...but in the end they want to see you moving once in a while.
The years and years of company's showing less and less responsibility for their employees has finally come full circle and the employees no longer feel any loyalty to the company. It is literally just a job, like any other job, and if this one doesn't work out they will just go find another one....exactly the same way employers have been treating their employees where 'if this one doesn't work out I can just go get another one'.
- - - Updated - - -
'Those people' are the ones who get promoted ....
"Those people' are the ones who get to be senior managers in fortune 100 companies at the age of 34....just how the game is played now.
Where in my post did you see anything about being lazy? There is hard work in all of this...do you know what the learning curve is like moving up that fast?? You don't just get promoted by doing nothing...lolwut?
Also, by not having children, you'll be doing your part to save the planet.
Why is either decision better/worse than the other?
Saying "I don't need to have kids, my life is awesome!" is just as ignorant and short sighted as people with kids telling those without kids how awful their life is.
Some people are happy coming home to a fancy car in their expensive home. Some people are happy coming home to a kid in a rented apartment. Neither person is right or wrong.