@tylerr:
Sometimes I feel guilty for having had kids for exactly the reasons you describe. The world is sometimes a terrible place, and when I think of the problems their generation will have to face, there are times when I think I must've had them for selfish reasons.
Do you have kids or plan to ?
I think we focus too much on the negative of the world. As Aussie kind of noted; the world is a much safer and more humane place now than it has been throughout recorded history. Yes, there are still unbelievable amounts of abject misery in the world, but that unbelievable amount is significantly smaller than it was even 100 years ago.
Through out much of the last 200 years the U.S. was a beacon of democratic ideals (muddled with republic ideals), and it had, on average, more freedoms than other countries. However, now there are major swaths of every continent with democracies and rather free citizens.
Yes, this could change, but it could also get better (more money usually equals more freedom - China). I don't think "the world is evil" is legit reason not to have kids.
Through out much of the last 200 years the U.S. was a beacon of democratic ideals (muddled with republic ideals), and it had, on average, more freedoms than other countries. However, now there are major swaths of every continent with democracies and rather free citizens.
Yes, this could change, but it could also get better (more money usually equals more freedom - China). I don't think "the world is evil" is legit reason not to have kids.
Aussie, when someone says, "I don't want kids because X", they are being brutally honest. Honest with their feelings and honest with societal pressures.
There is tremendous social pressure to reproduce. There is a tremendous innate drive to reproduce. We all know that social pressure is not always correct. We also know that some innate desires can be wrong.
To even pose the question "why reproduce" one is met with claims of dysfunction and extreme selfishness. You are right to be bothered when someone says they want to reproduce to create a child who will take care of them in old age. But realize, there is no answer to the "why have kids" question that is not equally selfish.
M. Scott Peck's smart-selfishness vs. stupid-selfishness is a delusion. If you need evidence look no further than his life. He himself acknowledged multiple infidelities, left his wife for a younger woman and was estranged from two of his three children. I don't say that to beat on a dead guy. I say it to show the explosive power of the inner conflict created from this self-dishonesty.
There is tremendous social pressure to reproduce. There is a tremendous innate drive to reproduce. We all know that social pressure is not always correct. We also know that some innate desires can be wrong.
To even pose the question "why reproduce" one is met with claims of dysfunction and extreme selfishness. You are right to be bothered when someone says they want to reproduce to create a child who will take care of them in old age. But realize, there is no answer to the "why have kids" question that is not equally selfish.
M. Scott Peck's smart-selfishness vs. stupid-selfishness is a delusion. If you need evidence look no further than his life. He himself acknowledged multiple infidelities, left his wife for a younger woman and was estranged from two of his three children. I don't say that to beat on a dead guy. I say it to show the explosive power of the inner conflict created from this self-dishonesty.
-
aussierogue
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:02 pm
@chad
if you read my post after the last one i agree that declaring not to have children is met unfairly by society.
Re M scott peck....he was a less than perfect person but some of his messages were great.
I am not a christian but i like many of the messages from the bible. The fact that im not a christian how can i then appreciate a dude with a long beard saying he is the son of god? What a whacko hey! That is worse than dipping your dong a few times whilst in wedlock would have thought.
Bob dylan did pespi adds......people arent perfect. The french dont frown on infidenlity like the USA and the Brits...
This isnt about point scoring. I agree with the premise that people aren not necessarily selfish if they decide to have kids or not have kids.
if you read my post after the last one i agree that declaring not to have children is met unfairly by society.
Re M scott peck....he was a less than perfect person but some of his messages were great.
I am not a christian but i like many of the messages from the bible. The fact that im not a christian how can i then appreciate a dude with a long beard saying he is the son of god? What a whacko hey! That is worse than dipping your dong a few times whilst in wedlock would have thought.
Bob dylan did pespi adds......people arent perfect. The french dont frown on infidenlity like the USA and the Brits...
This isnt about point scoring. I agree with the premise that people aren not necessarily selfish if they decide to have kids or not have kids.
@AussieRogue, "I agree with the premise that people aren not necessarily selfish if they decide to have kids or not have kids."
Note: I ask this as someone who tried and failed to have kids.
Can you give an example of an unselfish motive for reproduction?
Regarding my point about M. Scott Peck, his flaw was a result of his flawed belief that it is possible for an act to be both selfish and altruistic.
FWIW, we are on the cusp of a reproduction revolution where the process of having a child will be very different than it is today...
http://tinyurl.com/98rsero
Note: I ask this as someone who tried and failed to have kids.
Can you give an example of an unselfish motive for reproduction?
Regarding my point about M. Scott Peck, his flaw was a result of his flawed belief that it is possible for an act to be both selfish and altruistic.
FWIW, we are on the cusp of a reproduction revolution where the process of having a child will be very different than it is today...
http://tinyurl.com/98rsero
DW and I have independently decided to not have children. She because she enjoys her life to much, and me because I believe the world has plenty of people willing to breed and needs no more, and on my even darker days believe that no one should bring new life to this planet.
The larger, more intellectual reason that we would offer for our choice if asked, is that there are plenty of biological reproducers for genetic diversity purpose. The important producer of identity is culture, and culture is broadly enough disseminated via the internet and other methods that culture will transmit all important heritable traits. Imagine a factory-like setup, and 'culture' stamping out little citizens on a factory line.
The larger, more intellectual reason that we would offer for our choice if asked, is that there are plenty of biological reproducers for genetic diversity purpose. The important producer of identity is culture, and culture is broadly enough disseminated via the internet and other methods that culture will transmit all important heritable traits. Imagine a factory-like setup, and 'culture' stamping out little citizens on a factory line.
-
aussierogue
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:02 pm
@ego
"Can you give an example of an unselfish motive for reproduction"?
you could shag someone and not think about the consequences and then a child pops out. You could try for children and not be able to have children. Neither ideas are either selfish or unselfish.
and fwiw i dont agree with richard dawkins on many things.
"Can you give an example of an unselfish motive for reproduction"?
you could shag someone and not think about the consequences and then a child pops out. You could try for children and not be able to have children. Neither ideas are either selfish or unselfish.
and fwiw i dont agree with richard dawkins on many things.
Shag... Pleasure is the most fundamental motivation. It is pure selfishness.
My point is, there is no unselfish motivation for having a child.
I'm in a bit of a strange position as someone who tried and failed to reproduce. I understand the motivation of those who have kids and understand the benefits and thinking of those who choose not to reproduce. You hit a raw nerve when you said, "I respect those on here who choose not to have children because they acknowledge their selfishness... I also realise people do many things for thier own selfish reasons. A sure way to stay on a cycle of unhappiness."
According to that statement, Child-free by Choice = Selfish = Inevitable Unhappiness.
As I said above, there is no unselfish motivation for having a kid.
My point is, there is no unselfish motivation for having a child.
I'm in a bit of a strange position as someone who tried and failed to reproduce. I understand the motivation of those who have kids and understand the benefits and thinking of those who choose not to reproduce. You hit a raw nerve when you said, "I respect those on here who choose not to have children because they acknowledge their selfishness... I also realise people do many things for thier own selfish reasons. A sure way to stay on a cycle of unhappiness."
According to that statement, Child-free by Choice = Selfish = Inevitable Unhappiness.
As I said above, there is no unselfish motivation for having a kid.
-
aussierogue
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:02 pm
@ego
the shagging motivation can be for the act of shagging in itself not for the intention of having a kid. Surely there is a difference.
I do respect your views and yes in that paragraph i realised i was off the mark. I tried to rectify that position in subsequent posts. I guess i was a bit miffed at people negativity toward having kids. Anmd then the ones that did many said it was to look after them in their old age. I just find that overtly selfish.
I do till belive that there can be a smart and dumb selfish act. That idea is absolutely reasonable. Its the same as making good and bad decisions. If all decisions are selfish and some decisions are bad and some are good then there is a distinction to be made.
A selfish act may be to be ERE so that i dont have to deal with people in the workplace - but the benefits are also great - less consumerism, less polution etc etc..
Maybe we can agree to disagree - but i do value your opinion as always and sorry of i offended.
cheers
aussie
the shagging motivation can be for the act of shagging in itself not for the intention of having a kid. Surely there is a difference.
I do respect your views and yes in that paragraph i realised i was off the mark. I tried to rectify that position in subsequent posts. I guess i was a bit miffed at people negativity toward having kids. Anmd then the ones that did many said it was to look after them in their old age. I just find that overtly selfish.
I do till belive that there can be a smart and dumb selfish act. That idea is absolutely reasonable. Its the same as making good and bad decisions. If all decisions are selfish and some decisions are bad and some are good then there is a distinction to be made.
A selfish act may be to be ERE so that i dont have to deal with people in the workplace - but the benefits are also great - less consumerism, less polution etc etc..
Maybe we can agree to disagree - but i do value your opinion as always and sorry of i offended.
cheers
aussie
-
Canadian Dream
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:04 pm
- Contact:
We have two boys, age 4 and 7 and I still plan to ER by 40 to 45. I would have to agree with the early comment that kids are no where near as expensive as people are told they are. The first one is somewhat expensive, but depending if the second is the same sex and the same seasonal rotation on clothes it is entirely possible to have a second for a fraction of the cost of the first.
Current cost average for us is about $140 a month (my wife runs a daycare in the house so childcare is zero). That includes sports, clothes, back to school supplies and misc like allowance. Food is extra, but they really don't eat that much right now (~$100/month)...teenagers are a different story.
What people often forget with kids is also the amount of tax savings they can produce. Child tax deducation, child tax benifits (in Canada)allow us to get damn close to breaking even on the kids. Also then your entertainment costs tend to drop post kids as they become your evenings a lot of the time (swimming lessons, soccer games).
In the end, make the choice because you want them...not the money. You can make the money work out, so pick kids because your really want that experience in life. I enjoy mine most of the time (any parent that says all the time lies).
By the way, I don't depend on my kids to look after me in old age, what a crazy idea.
Tim
Current cost average for us is about $140 a month (my wife runs a daycare in the house so childcare is zero). That includes sports, clothes, back to school supplies and misc like allowance. Food is extra, but they really don't eat that much right now (~$100/month)...teenagers are a different story.
What people often forget with kids is also the amount of tax savings they can produce. Child tax deducation, child tax benifits (in Canada)allow us to get damn close to breaking even on the kids. Also then your entertainment costs tend to drop post kids as they become your evenings a lot of the time (swimming lessons, soccer games).
In the end, make the choice because you want them...not the money. You can make the money work out, so pick kids because your really want that experience in life. I enjoy mine most of the time (any parent that says all the time lies).
By the way, I don't depend on my kids to look after me in old age, what a crazy idea.
Tim
Enjoyed reading this discussion.
Very similar to Canadian Dream. Add one more check for me by the "kids are only as expensive as you want them to be" column. Have a girl and a boy, ages 3 and 1 (and having reached self-replacement, we are officially done). Based on the financial independence tracker worksheet, they cost an average of $75 a month excluding food, which isn't much at this point.
DH and I still plan on retiring in our late 30s or early 40s. I do have to say that we are very lucky because DH's parents are young (in their 40s), fully retired, and live less than 2 miles away, so we get free childcare.
Do I DEPEND on my kids to look after me in old age? No. Do I EXPECT my kids to look after me in old age? Yes. We will probably be all set financially, and I will set up some sort of fund for long-term care should that be necessary, because I don't want to burden my children, but I do expect them to visit me and provide emotional support. DH and I both come from very closely knit families, and we will be there for our own parents (not because they asked us to be, but because we want to be), so I hope that my children will end up with those same values.
Plus, don't you DINKs worry about the future of our country? If we just leave the fiscally irresponsible segment of the population to procreate rapidly, where will all our savers genes go? DH and I procreate unselfishly for the good of mankind because of our superior genetic makeup.
LOL, totally TOTALLY kidding on that last bit. Having kids or not having kids is a completely personal decision, and there are pros and cons to each. However, if you feel like you are doing what you are doing for purely altruistic reasons complete with personal sacrifice, then you are probably unhappy with your decision, and I encourage you to reconsider your options for your own sake (unless you regret having kids and you already have them, in which case, suck it up and handle it, bro).
Very similar to Canadian Dream. Add one more check for me by the "kids are only as expensive as you want them to be" column. Have a girl and a boy, ages 3 and 1 (and having reached self-replacement, we are officially done). Based on the financial independence tracker worksheet, they cost an average of $75 a month excluding food, which isn't much at this point.
DH and I still plan on retiring in our late 30s or early 40s. I do have to say that we are very lucky because DH's parents are young (in their 40s), fully retired, and live less than 2 miles away, so we get free childcare.
Do I DEPEND on my kids to look after me in old age? No. Do I EXPECT my kids to look after me in old age? Yes. We will probably be all set financially, and I will set up some sort of fund for long-term care should that be necessary, because I don't want to burden my children, but I do expect them to visit me and provide emotional support. DH and I both come from very closely knit families, and we will be there for our own parents (not because they asked us to be, but because we want to be), so I hope that my children will end up with those same values.
Plus, don't you DINKs worry about the future of our country? If we just leave the fiscally irresponsible segment of the population to procreate rapidly, where will all our savers genes go? DH and I procreate unselfishly for the good of mankind because of our superior genetic makeup.
LOL, totally TOTALLY kidding on that last bit. Having kids or not having kids is a completely personal decision, and there are pros and cons to each. However, if you feel like you are doing what you are doing for purely altruistic reasons complete with personal sacrifice, then you are probably unhappy with your decision, and I encourage you to reconsider your options for your own sake (unless you regret having kids and you already have them, in which case, suck it up and handle it, bro).
-
aptruncata
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:14 pm
I would have to disagree with the generalization that "kids are only as expensive as you want them to be", it's an over simplified statement that does not account for current standards of public educations available and child care costs. I agree more with jennypenny's statement of "You can raise them without spending a ton of money, but you have to have the backbone for it."
I found this article on child care which it claims costs more than college education.
http://consumerist.com/2012/08/child-da ... tates.html
There are many different situations where childcare before 4-5 years are covered by own childcare business, family members and what not. However, for the majority of the households where both mother and the father works, childcare is not an option: it's a requirement which costs $1,000 or more a month.
I found this article on child care which it claims costs more than college education.
http://consumerist.com/2012/08/child-da ... tates.html
There are many different situations where childcare before 4-5 years are covered by own childcare business, family members and what not. However, for the majority of the households where both mother and the father works, childcare is not an option: it's a requirement which costs $1,000 or more a month.
-
Canadian Dream
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:04 pm
- Contact:
@aptruncata,
"it's an over simplified statement that does not account for current standards of public educations available and child care costs"
I understand what you are getting at, but at the same time both education and child care do involve a lot of choice. You can choose to move to a location that has a better school system and cheaper child care and still pay reasonable housing costs if you wanted to. Some areas are just more child friendly than others. By the way, I'm totally not defending school boards here...I'm a trustee on mine so I know more than most the issues.
I would also challenage the assumption that both parents have to work. I know several families that if they did the math would be shocked to realize how little their spouse is 'earning' on an after tax basis. I've worked it out for my wife and her daycare business is equal to about a $30K/year job. After all if you have ERE expenses you likely don't 'need' both incomes in all cases.
My three cents *grin*
Tim
"it's an over simplified statement that does not account for current standards of public educations available and child care costs"
I understand what you are getting at, but at the same time both education and child care do involve a lot of choice. You can choose to move to a location that has a better school system and cheaper child care and still pay reasonable housing costs if you wanted to. Some areas are just more child friendly than others. By the way, I'm totally not defending school boards here...I'm a trustee on mine so I know more than most the issues.
I would also challenage the assumption that both parents have to work. I know several families that if they did the math would be shocked to realize how little their spouse is 'earning' on an after tax basis. I've worked it out for my wife and her daycare business is equal to about a $30K/year job. After all if you have ERE expenses you likely don't 'need' both incomes in all cases.
My three cents *grin*
Tim
-
aptruncata
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:14 pm
@Canadian
"You can choose to move to a location that has a better school system and cheaper child care and still pay reasonable housing costs if you wanted to."
Hmmmm things must be a whole lot different on your side of the border. I'm a banker living near downtown los angeles and i have yet to meet one person that knows such a place you're talking about. (better school system + cheaper childcare + resonable housing all of which have to come with a decent job market) I'm not talking about relocating to Arkansas from CA for cheaper childcare and that wouldn't be so ERE either especially when i only have 10 years to go on mortgage and debt free (other than mortgage).
The tax deduction is not even considered an "deduction" here in the states compared to what it really costs. It would be like purchasing a 747 for free peanuts.
"You can choose to move to a location that has a better school system and cheaper child care and still pay reasonable housing costs if you wanted to."
Hmmmm things must be a whole lot different on your side of the border. I'm a banker living near downtown los angeles and i have yet to meet one person that knows such a place you're talking about. (better school system + cheaper childcare + resonable housing all of which have to come with a decent job market) I'm not talking about relocating to Arkansas from CA for cheaper childcare and that wouldn't be so ERE either especially when i only have 10 years to go on mortgage and debt free (other than mortgage).
The tax deduction is not even considered an "deduction" here in the states compared to what it really costs. It would be like purchasing a 747 for free peanuts.
@altoid
I do plan on carrying family insurance. Right now I have 100% employer coverage for the family, but I do have the additional cost worked into my ERE plans. It is very difficult to estimate the cost of future health insurance. For now, I have worked in an extra $24k into predicted annual expenditures in retirement for health insurance and as a general (and, hopefully, generous) cushion for any other line item underestimations. I will have a much better idea of what actual health insurance for the family will cost a few years before retirement when I can get quotes.
@aptruncata
The whole lower COLA/lower pay vs. higher COLA/higher pay is a frequent topic, and adding kids to the equation doesn't change the baseline debate much. You could probably sell your LA suburbs house and buy a bigger house in cash and still have money left over in Arkansas, seriously. However, obviously that is a decision easier said than made since you have other aspects of your life that you are probably attached to and revolve around your current location. It's a topic that I sometimes play the "what if" game with myself, except from the opposite spectrum (live in a LCOLA - Gulf Coast - and have received job offers for 3x what I am making now in east and west coast cities, but the family would be miserable, so I keep telling myself that the additional costs and lower air quality would nullify any anticipated financial gains).
I do plan on carrying family insurance. Right now I have 100% employer coverage for the family, but I do have the additional cost worked into my ERE plans. It is very difficult to estimate the cost of future health insurance. For now, I have worked in an extra $24k into predicted annual expenditures in retirement for health insurance and as a general (and, hopefully, generous) cushion for any other line item underestimations. I will have a much better idea of what actual health insurance for the family will cost a few years before retirement when I can get quotes.
@aptruncata
The whole lower COLA/lower pay vs. higher COLA/higher pay is a frequent topic, and adding kids to the equation doesn't change the baseline debate much. You could probably sell your LA suburbs house and buy a bigger house in cash and still have money left over in Arkansas, seriously. However, obviously that is a decision easier said than made since you have other aspects of your life that you are probably attached to and revolve around your current location. It's a topic that I sometimes play the "what if" game with myself, except from the opposite spectrum (live in a LCOLA - Gulf Coast - and have received job offers for 3x what I am making now in east and west coast cities, but the family would be miserable, so I keep telling myself that the additional costs and lower air quality would nullify any anticipated financial gains).
-
RealPerson
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:33 pm
We have 2 adopted kids. They are teenagers now. Looking back, I think we just wanted to have kids because "people just have kids". We did not really think about them taking care of us in our old age. You never know if they are even interested. Raising 2 kids has definitively been a real challenge, with very gratifying moments interspersed.
I have found raising kids very expensive. The largest expense is the opportunity cost. You cannot really have 2 career professionals and raise 2 kids at the same time. The other expenses are constant checks for sports stuff, activities, etc. It is amazing how that adds up. Since keeping track of my expenses, "kids" is the largest expense category. You could save on the kids expenses, but not without really curtailing some of the opportunities they can develop for themselves. College, which is coming up soon, is not nearly as expensive as we thought. There are several really good deals around, where a college degree does not require any student loans. After reading some of the posts here, I guess we have to wonder if college is even necessary.
In the end, it is really cool to have the chance to be so involved with the lives of 2 young people. One thing that would sort of depress if we would not have had any kids, is the end of our legacy once we are no longer living. Part of you lives on in your kids!
I have found raising kids very expensive. The largest expense is the opportunity cost. You cannot really have 2 career professionals and raise 2 kids at the same time. The other expenses are constant checks for sports stuff, activities, etc. It is amazing how that adds up. Since keeping track of my expenses, "kids" is the largest expense category. You could save on the kids expenses, but not without really curtailing some of the opportunities they can develop for themselves. College, which is coming up soon, is not nearly as expensive as we thought. There are several really good deals around, where a college degree does not require any student loans. After reading some of the posts here, I guess we have to wonder if college is even necessary.
In the end, it is really cool to have the chance to be so involved with the lives of 2 young people. One thing that would sort of depress if we would not have had any kids, is the end of our legacy once we are no longer living. Part of you lives on in your kids!