5 ms·

> Those sames engineers are putting off children to later or not having them at all. A group that also switches jobs frequently. Do we really want to structure

> Those sames engineers are putting off children to later or not having them at all. A group that also switches jobs frequently. Do we really want to structure our society like this? Do we want to require so much instability for the workers that they can't even start families? I don't. I'm getting really tired of large multinational corporations blatantly controlling our government, our quality of life, and now trying to control our very culture.

devdas 9y ago
Job switching doesn't have much to do with starting families. Well educated people tend to get together with other well educated, career minded people, and children get deferred.
- TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
  Are you saying you don't think frequent job hopping & moving doesn't strongly affect the choice to deffer starting a family?
Aaargh20318 9y ago
> they can't even start families? You say that like it's a bad thing. Humanity is a plague, we breed uncontrolled and our population keeps growing and growing. There is no need for anyone to start a family, there is no shortage of humans.
- altstar 9y ago
  and you are still here?
  - Aaargh20318 9y ago
    How is that even relevant ?
- Aaargh20318 9y ago
  Would the people who down-vote care to explain why they support unbounded population growth ? That would be great.
  - turk183 9y ago
    I read things all the time that espouse the benefits of large families and how important it is to keep society fit by having more children. It's like they want to keep the Ponzi going by adding more and more people. It's quite clear, especially in places like China, India, and Indonesia that runaway population growth is incredibly destructive to the environment. If government and taxation and retirement systems require more and more population in order to operate successfully it's all coming down at some point.
    - Aaargh20318 9y ago
      > If government and taxation and retirement systems require more and more population in order to operate successfully it's all coming down at some point. Yup. And the longer you wait to fix it, the more painful it's going to be. It also seems like most people are driven purely by instinct, the moment you even suggest they shouldn't breed like rabbits it's regarded as the most offensive thing you could possibly say. It's weird, I don't see how they suggest we keep going. When should we stop ? 10 billion, 15 billion ? Or just wait until society collapses and we go extinct ?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
    Your premise is that anyone having children at all is equivalent to unbounded population growth. If literally everyone stopped having children, humans would obviously become extinct. Moreover, it is generally considered a sound principle that successful professionals should be encouraged to have children. Whatever combination of genes, knowledge and resources allowed them to become successful themselves is more likely to lead to a successful next generation. And high income earners are more likely to accept paying taxes to fund good schools and other programs for children if they have their own children to make use of them.

devdas 9y ago

Job switching doesn't have much to do with starting families. Well educated people tend to get together with other well educated, career minded people, and children get deferred.

TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
Are you saying you don't think frequent job hopping & moving doesn't strongly affect the choice to deffer starting a family?

Aaargh20318 9y ago

> they can't even start families? You say that like it's a bad thing. Humanity is a plague, we breed uncontrolled and our population keeps growing and growing. There is no need for anyone to start a family, there is no shortage of humans.

altstar 9y ago
and you are still here?
- Aaargh20318 9y ago
  How is that even relevant ?
Aaargh20318 9y ago
Would the people who down-vote care to explain why they support unbounded population growth ? That would be great.
- turk183 9y ago
  I read things all the time that espouse the benefits of large families and how important it is to keep society fit by having more children. It's like they want to keep the Ponzi going by adding more and more people. It's quite clear, especially in places like China, India, and Indonesia that runaway population growth is incredibly destructive to the environment. If government and taxation and retirement systems require more and more population in order to operate successfully it's all coming down at some point.
  - Aaargh20318 9y ago
    > If government and taxation and retirement systems require more and more population in order to operate successfully it's all coming down at some point. Yup. And the longer you wait to fix it, the more painful it's going to be. It also seems like most people are driven purely by instinct, the moment you even suggest they shouldn't breed like rabbits it's regarded as the most offensive thing you could possibly say. It's weird, I don't see how they suggest we keep going. When should we stop ? 10 billion, 15 billion ? Or just wait until society collapses and we go extinct ?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago
  Your premise is that anyone having children at all is equivalent to unbounded population growth. If literally everyone stopped having children, humans would obviously become extinct. Moreover, it is generally considered a sound principle that successful professionals should be encouraged to have children. Whatever combination of genes, knowledge and resources allowed them to become successful themselves is more likely to lead to a successful next generation. And high income earners are more likely to accept paying taxes to fund good schools and other programs for children if they have their own children to make use of them.