5 ms·

Fuck the job. Do your one kid a favor and have another kid. Siblings are just about the most useful things you can have in life.

mkirklions 8y ago
I hope to have a large family for this reason. I dont know if I'll have the time to give kids my full attention. I found my brother was/is the reason I'm a nerd. Sure my dad was a database manager, but I spend hours daily with my brother gaming. I dont even think I wanted to spend a half hour with my 'boring' dad.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  When thinking about having children and about the level of care and attention you’ll be able to give them, I think it’s useful to have the right comparison in mind. If you’re considering having another child, that child’s choices are not between your limited time and attention on the one hand and, on the other, parents who can shower them with time and attention. Instead, the alternative to your limited time and attention is never getting to be alive. When you frame things that way, the answer for parents who are considering another child is pretty much always to give the child the gift of life. In the developed world, at least.
  - ck425 8y ago
    Life isn't automatically good!!! Bad parenting can, and does, create lives that are arguably better to have never existed.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      I think it’s pretty patronizing to make this choice for other people. IMO, there’s only one person whose moral right it is to decide whether a life is worthwhile. And that’s the person whose life it is.
      - ck425 8y ago
        No there's not, because one lifeform's existed can effect others. Additionally when debating if life should come to be, the lifeform in question can't have an opinion until after the fact.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        Think about the kind of life you think would have been better off not existing. Surely there are people alive whose life fits your criteria. Now imagine telling one of these people that it would have been better if they never existed. Probably they'll tell you where you can stick your notions.
        ck425 8y ago
        I'm not suggesting someone goes and tells them, that would just cause more pain. I'm suggesting we stop that life from existing in the first place.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        If you have other reasons for not wanting a life to exist, that’s another matter. But if your only reason is that, in your estimation, that person would have a life not worth living, that seems awfully presumptuous. Life is optional. Let them decide if they want to be alive.
  - mkirklions 8y ago
    >the alternative to your limited time and attention is never getting to be alive. Eh, if anyone should have kids, it should be the financially well off and educated people. Remember that your logic isnt going to stop impoverished people from having 4 kids and welfare.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      Yeah, you and I might not want impoverished people from having kids that they can't afford (since guilt will compel us to step in and assist). But I would bet that 99 out of 100 people who grew up in the worst kind of poverty would happily do so again rather than never have existed. So, from the child's point of view it's a good tradeoff.
  - CalRobert 8y ago
    "is never getting to be alive." I suppose we may differ on this but I don't really view that as a negative. I don't think there's a pool of "potential people" from which we draw when making a new person. An infinite number of beings don't exist, and won't. I actually would love to see more work on the nature of consciousness and the self, and what exactly gives a new foetus or baby its awareness of the fact that it exists. And yet I'm not entirely consistent internally because even though "I want someone to hang out with when I'm old" is part of the reason kids sound fun, most of it is "bringing a new being capable of experience joy into the universe", so I guess I sort of agree, in a roundabout sense.
WhompingWindows 8y ago
Someone once told me: "The best gift you can give to an only child is a sibling. Shows them they aren't the center of the world."
- ck425 8y ago
  You can do that via good parenting too. The myth of the self absorbed only child is just that, a myth.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  This is true. But I was thinking more about just getting through life. Governments and pension systems come and go. But as long as you have living siblings, you’ve got pretty damn good insurance against all the stuff that goes wrong in life.
- therealdrag0 8y ago
  My cousin is an only child and he turned out great and had a great childhood. I kinda envy the amount of family time and adventures they were able to go on. Part of it might be family culture, but seems like with one kid you can "do" a lot more, where as with 3 kids, doing things were often frustrating endeavors and just "maintaining" was more the norm.
eli_gottlieb 8y ago
I'm the older brother in my family and what the hell are you talking about!?
ck425 8y ago
As someone with 4 siblings I'm going to have to disagree with this. Siblings aren't inherently good things to have in life. I know plenty of only children who have never wanted a sibling and plenty of folk who are largely indifferent to their siblings. It depends massively on the personality of the people involved.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  If you think that life insurance, disability insurance, and a social safety net are good things, then you think that siblings are a good thing.
  - ck425 8y ago
    I don't expect my siblings to be any of those for me. It's incredibly unfair to put those expectations on family.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      Yeah, nobody wants to burden other people with dependence. But shit happens. The history of our species is basically one conflagration after another. If I were to die with dependent children–which, up until about 80 years ago was a common occurrence—I know that my siblings would help care for my children. Or even if I just fell ill and needed assistance, my siblings would be there as a safety net. And it goes both ways: I would do the same for them.
      - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
        Family are the people who, when you need help, they have to try to give it. Just had this with my brother. He's got a fairly expensive illness. I asked if he needed help. It never even occurred to him to ask - he's pretty independent. But if he has to have help, I'll try to help.
- alsetmusic 8y ago
  > I know plenty of only children who have never wanted a sibling and plenty of folk who are largely indifferent to their siblings. Then there are siblings who are a literal burden on their families. Some people just use others and walk all over everyone. Someone in my extended family tried to burglarize the home of someone else in the family. That’s not someone I want in my family.
CalRobert 8y ago
I'm conflicted because the carbon footprint of another kid is substantial. Then again, individual action is utterly meaningless. With ~8billion people it just doesn't matter what I do. Only large-scale action that brings about systemic changes matters. And hey, maybe one of my kids will be the one to help fix it! Then again, if people viewed 2 as a nominal max then we'd still be on the right path (a bit below replacement rate would be OK generally speaking) But I already brought one life in to the world when I worry about global collapse and am not sure I want to do that for another. But siblings are pretty great! But if I have an only child I can afford a better school for them.. Anyway, still thinking. So is the partner. Also, "fuck the job" is easy to say except it's not my job, it's the opportunity for my partner to do the thing she's wanted to do her whole life and has worked her ass off for. It's crazy hard to actually build a career in museums and heritage (related... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16792942 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16792942) and maybe she shouldn't have to give that up. Then again, being in an industry where employment is that tenuous sounds like a crappy way to spend life.
- Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago
  Population stability is probably the metric to optimize for if you care about sustainability. Rapidly growing or shrinking populations cause problems. Given how much the West flirts with the replacement rate, I think you should do whatever you feel like doing.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  FWIW, if you care about the environment, the right move is to have kids. All species expand to fill their ecological niche. If you abstain from having children, their spots will just be taken up by other people's children. We are powerless to influence the number of people, but we can influence the proportion of people who have an environmentalist bent. I hear you about the career thing. I have sacrificed immensely to be able to afford a family. But now, when I am surrounded by my children, I think about all of the possibilities that lay ahead of them, all the grand adventures they will have and the adversities they will overcome, and I remark to myself, "I made all of this possible".

mkirklions 8y ago

I hope to have a large family for this reason. I dont know if I'll have the time to give kids my full attention. I found my brother was/is the reason I'm a nerd. Sure my dad was a database manager, but I spend hours daily with my brother gaming. I dont even think I wanted to spend a half hour with my 'boring' dad.

toasterlovin 8y ago
When thinking about having children and about the level of care and attention you’ll be able to give them, I think it’s useful to have the right comparison in mind. If you’re considering having another child, that child’s choices are not between your limited time and attention on the one hand and, on the other, parents who can shower them with time and attention. Instead, the alternative to your limited time and attention is never getting to be alive. When you frame things that way, the answer for parents who are considering another child is pretty much always to give the child the gift of life. In the developed world, at least.
- ck425 8y ago
  Life isn't automatically good!!! Bad parenting can, and does, create lives that are arguably better to have never existed.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    I think it’s pretty patronizing to make this choice for other people. IMO, there’s only one person whose moral right it is to decide whether a life is worthwhile. And that’s the person whose life it is.
    - ck425 8y ago
      No there's not, because one lifeform's existed can effect others. Additionally when debating if life should come to be, the lifeform in question can't have an opinion until after the fact.
      - toasterlovin 8y ago
        Think about the kind of life you think would have been better off not existing. Surely there are people alive whose life fits your criteria. Now imagine telling one of these people that it would have been better if they never existed. Probably they'll tell you where you can stick your notions.
        ck425 8y ago
        I'm not suggesting someone goes and tells them, that would just cause more pain. I'm suggesting we stop that life from existing in the first place.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        If you have other reasons for not wanting a life to exist, that’s another matter. But if your only reason is that, in your estimation, that person would have a life not worth living, that seems awfully presumptuous. Life is optional. Let them decide if they want to be alive.
- mkirklions 8y ago
  >the alternative to your limited time and attention is never getting to be alive. Eh, if anyone should have kids, it should be the financially well off and educated people. Remember that your logic isnt going to stop impoverished people from having 4 kids and welfare.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    Yeah, you and I might not want impoverished people from having kids that they can't afford (since guilt will compel us to step in and assist). But I would bet that 99 out of 100 people who grew up in the worst kind of poverty would happily do so again rather than never have existed. So, from the child's point of view it's a good tradeoff.
- CalRobert 8y ago
  "is never getting to be alive." I suppose we may differ on this but I don't really view that as a negative. I don't think there's a pool of "potential people" from which we draw when making a new person. An infinite number of beings don't exist, and won't. I actually would love to see more work on the nature of consciousness and the self, and what exactly gives a new foetus or baby its awareness of the fact that it exists. And yet I'm not entirely consistent internally because even though "I want someone to hang out with when I'm old" is part of the reason kids sound fun, most of it is "bringing a new being capable of experience joy into the universe", so I guess I sort of agree, in a roundabout sense.

WhompingWindows 8y ago

Someone once told me: "The best gift you can give to an only child is a sibling. Shows them they aren't the center of the world."

ck425 8y ago
You can do that via good parenting too. The myth of the self absorbed only child is just that, a myth.
toasterlovin 8y ago
This is true. But I was thinking more about just getting through life. Governments and pension systems come and go. But as long as you have living siblings, you’ve got pretty damn good insurance against all the stuff that goes wrong in life.
therealdrag0 8y ago
My cousin is an only child and he turned out great and had a great childhood. I kinda envy the amount of family time and adventures they were able to go on. Part of it might be family culture, but seems like with one kid you can "do" a lot more, where as with 3 kids, doing things were often frustrating endeavors and just "maintaining" was more the norm.

eli_gottlieb 8y ago

I'm the older brother in my family and what the hell are you talking about!?

ck425 8y ago

As someone with 4 siblings I'm going to have to disagree with this. Siblings aren't inherently good things to have in life. I know plenty of only children who have never wanted a sibling and plenty of folk who are largely indifferent to their siblings. It depends massively on the personality of the people involved.

toasterlovin 8y ago
If you think that life insurance, disability insurance, and a social safety net are good things, then you think that siblings are a good thing.
- ck425 8y ago
  I don't expect my siblings to be any of those for me. It's incredibly unfair to put those expectations on family.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    Yeah, nobody wants to burden other people with dependence. But shit happens. The history of our species is basically one conflagration after another. If I were to die with dependent children–which, up until about 80 years ago was a common occurrence—I know that my siblings would help care for my children. Or even if I just fell ill and needed assistance, my siblings would be there as a safety net. And it goes both ways: I would do the same for them.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      Family are the people who, when you need help, they have to try to give it. Just had this with my brother. He's got a fairly expensive illness. I asked if he needed help. It never even occurred to him to ask - he's pretty independent. But if he has to have help, I'll try to help.
alsetmusic 8y ago
> I know plenty of only children who have never wanted a sibling and plenty of folk who are largely indifferent to their siblings. Then there are siblings who are a literal burden on their families. Some people just use others and walk all over everyone. Someone in my extended family tried to burglarize the home of someone else in the family. That’s not someone I want in my family.

CalRobert 8y ago

I'm conflicted because the carbon footprint of another kid is substantial. Then again, individual action is utterly meaningless. With ~8billion people it just doesn't matter what I do. Only large-scale action that brings about systemic changes matters. And hey, maybe one of my kids will be the one to help fix it! Then again, if people viewed 2 as a nominal max then we'd still be on the right path (a bit below replacement rate would be OK generally speaking) But I already brought one life in to the world when I worry about global collapse and am not sure I want to do that for another. But siblings are pretty great! But if I have an only child I can afford a better school for them.. Anyway, still thinking. So is the partner. Also, "fuck the job" is easy to say except it's not my job, it's the opportunity for my partner to do the thing she's wanted to do her whole life and has worked her ass off for. It's crazy hard to actually build a career in museums and heritage (related... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16792942 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16792942) and maybe she shouldn't have to give that up. Then again, being in an industry where employment is that tenuous sounds like a crappy way to spend life.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago
Population stability is probably the metric to optimize for if you care about sustainability. Rapidly growing or shrinking populations cause problems. Given how much the West flirts with the replacement rate, I think you should do whatever you feel like doing.
toasterlovin 8y ago
FWIW, if you care about the environment, the right move is to have kids. All species expand to fill their ecological niche. If you abstain from having children, their spots will just be taken up by other people's children. We are powerless to influence the number of people, but we can influence the proportion of people who have an environmentalist bent. I hear you about the career thing. I have sacrificed immensely to be able to afford a family. But now, when I am surrounded by my children, I think about all of the possibilities that lay ahead of them, all the grand adventures they will have and the adversities they will overcome, and I remark to myself, "I made all of this possible".