4 ms·
That's because people with kids have practically 2 jobs i.e. 2x as much workload and it will be those kids that will pay for your retirement.
by michalu 7y ago
That's because people with kids have practically 2 jobs i.e. 2x as much workload and it will be those kids that will pay for your retirement.
- geomark 7y agoWe all know it's like having 2 jobs. But having kids is a choice. Don't do it if you can't pay for it or you have to keep leaning on colleagues to cover for you. As for the prospects of other people's kids paying for my retirement, that seems very low probability given the projections for the future of social security. When planning for retirement you should assume you receive zero from social security.
- michalu 7y agoAccepting to do the "difficult shift/all nighter/extra" is a choice too. Besides, not giving people with children an extra shift is morally right. A company should get extra workforce and also prioritize employee's and her family's well-being when dividing the work load.
- geomark 7y agoHow much of a choice depends on if you have management that thinks it's the right thing to do to impose upon the childless. If you disagree you are labeled not a team player and suffer the consequences. So you get to hear about your coworker's day at the beach with their family while you had to work the weekend to finish up something they were supposed to do which required cancelling your date at the beach.
- Koshkin 7y agoI am paying for my retirement while I work.