7 ms·

Having kids, and following any passions in your young adult life, are mutually exclusive goals. You can't have both, unless maybe you're independently wealthy

by Arizhel 10y ago

Having kids, and following any passions in your young adult life, are mutually exclusive goals. You can't have both, unless maybe you're independently wealthy and even then the marriage and kids will constrain your time a lot. Our biological condition where we need to have kids in our 20s or at the latest 30s is simply incompatible with our other goals in modern society: building a prosperous career for a good nest egg, doing great work (science, research, art, etc.), working your way out of the lower classes into higher classes, etc. There just isn't enough time for it all. So as a result, we're seeing only really well-off people and really poor people having kids. The well-off people can afford nannies, while the poor people live on welfare and food stamps or have crappy jobs and struggle like you experienced. The poor breed more poor people who end up being a drain on society, plus a few who manage to break out of it, but then grow up scarred by the experience and don't have any kids themselves. This isn't a recipe for a healthy, stable society. What we really need to do is figure out how to greatly increase human lifespans so that people can wait until they're 50-100 before they have kids (and feel youthful enough at that age to do so).

jmmcd 10y ago
Is there any data showing a bimodal effect of wealth on number of children?
imesh 10y ago
It seems this is something people without kids tell themselves to justify not having kids, which is fine, we don't need more people, but I had kids young when I was in college and they have been with me as I have progressed my career up. These kind of things are influenced by where you live of course, but if you are developer and aren't living in the Bay area only one of the parents needs to work so that helps. I suppose I don't do "great work" but neither do most of the childless people I know, they just eat out more.
- dpark 10y ago
  > only one of the parents needs to work so that helps. Yeah, it helps a ton if you have a spouse/partner without or willing to give up career goals. That fact is in support of Arizhel's claim. Someone opted out of career success completely in your scenario.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    Yeah, and this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do too, for both partners really. For the woman, she's basically giving up any hope of having a real career, ever, and consigning herself to being nothing more than a "housewife" for her best adult years. She'll never have a serious career after that. Worse, she's making herself entirely financially dependent on the man. What happens when the marriage falls apart, as it does in 50% of marriages? Now she's got no income, no skills, and the best she can hope for is to really fuck over the ex-husband with child support and alimony. Even with that, it's not going to be that easy to live, and she'll have a lower standard of living than before. The same goes for the husband; with a wife that doesn't work, he's likely going to do very badly in divorce court, and lose a large chunk of his income to monthly payments to her. The whole setup is fraught with peril. Finally, what kind of woman has no career goals? Usually one with little or no education. Educated men usually aren't interested in such women, unless they're both highly conservative and religious.
    - gnaritas 10y ago
      > Yeah, and this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do too, for both partners really. For the woman, she's basically giving up any hope of having a real career, ever, and consigning herself to being nothing more than a "housewife" for her best adult years. She'll never have a serious career after that. Worse, she's making herself entirely financially dependent on the man. Absolutely true, but also absolutely the traditional and current norm. > The whole setup is fraught with peril. Yup, but that's why it's a commitment, it's risky for both parties but hugely beneficial if it works. > Finally, what kind of woman has no career goals? Usually one with little or no education. Educated men usually aren't interested in such women, unless they're both highly conservative and religious. Well about half the population is conservative, and about 80% of the population is religious, so that means the majority of men are interested in such women. This is hardly surprising as housewife is actually traditionally the norm, the notion of educated women earning money is rather new historically and isn't something society has really fully accepted yet.
      - dpark 10y ago
waqf 10y ago
By "have" kids do you mean: be the biological parent; finance materially; or spend time looking after? Because solutions start to appear if you separate these things. For example, one thing to try would be (reverting to) a society where grandparents raise the kids. Then people can invest resources in kids when they're 40–70 instead of 20–35.

by Arizhel 10y ago

jmmcd 10y ago

Is there any data showing a bimodal effect of wealth on number of children?

imesh 10y ago

It seems this is something people without kids tell themselves to justify not having kids, which is fine, we don't need more people, but I had kids young when I was in college and they have been with me as I have progressed my career up. These kind of things are influenced by where you live of course, but if you are developer and aren't living in the Bay area only one of the parents needs to work so that helps. I suppose I don't do "great work" but neither do most of the childless people I know, they just eat out more.

dpark 10y ago
> only one of the parents needs to work so that helps. Yeah, it helps a ton if you have a spouse/partner without or willing to give up career goals. That fact is in support of Arizhel's claim. Someone opted out of career success completely in your scenario.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  Yeah, and this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do too, for both partners really. For the woman, she's basically giving up any hope of having a real career, ever, and consigning herself to being nothing more than a "housewife" for her best adult years. She'll never have a serious career after that. Worse, she's making herself entirely financially dependent on the man. What happens when the marriage falls apart, as it does in 50% of marriages? Now she's got no income, no skills, and the best she can hope for is to really fuck over the ex-husband with child support and alimony. Even with that, it's not going to be that easy to live, and she'll have a lower standard of living than before. The same goes for the husband; with a wife that doesn't work, he's likely going to do very badly in divorce court, and lose a large chunk of his income to monthly payments to her. The whole setup is fraught with peril. Finally, what kind of woman has no career goals? Usually one with little or no education. Educated men usually aren't interested in such women, unless they're both highly conservative and religious.
  - gnaritas 10y ago
    > Yeah, and this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do too, for both partners really. For the woman, she's basically giving up any hope of having a real career, ever, and consigning herself to being nothing more than a "housewife" for her best adult years. She'll never have a serious career after that. Worse, she's making herself entirely financially dependent on the man. Absolutely true, but also absolutely the traditional and current norm. > The whole setup is fraught with peril. Yup, but that's why it's a commitment, it's risky for both parties but hugely beneficial if it works. > Finally, what kind of woman has no career goals? Usually one with little or no education. Educated men usually aren't interested in such women, unless they're both highly conservative and religious. Well about half the population is conservative, and about 80% of the population is religious, so that means the majority of men are interested in such women. This is hardly surprising as housewife is actually traditionally the norm, the notion of educated women earning money is rather new historically and isn't something society has really fully accepted yet.
    - dpark 10y ago

waqf 10y ago

By "have" kids do you mean: be the biological parent; finance materially; or spend time looking after? Because solutions start to appear if you separate these things. For example, one thing to try would be (reverting to) a society where grandparents raise the kids. Then people can invest resources in kids when they're 40–70 instead of 20–35.