4 ms·

All have the same mum, with the oldest being 21. We're in Florida, in the sort of small-city environment that looks like a classic suburb but is separated from

All have the same mum, with the oldest being 21. We're in Florida, in the sort of small-city environment that looks like a classic suburb but is separated from urban areas by lots of rural open space. Empty space for humans is not in short supply, but I do worry that we are choosing to live where the crops grow best. In my case, that would be pineapples and coconut. The decision to have 13 children (so far...) has many contributing factors. A notable one is that I found a wife who is probably more Catholic than the pope.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago
I don’t have know if I have mixed feelings or if I am neutral. I have long rallied against population explosion but I seldom come face to face(online here, as it were) with someone with an actual large family with the same set of parents. For context: my father was my grandmother’s 14th child at the age of 48. She died at the ripe old age of 93 or 95. I am aware of both the joys a large family can bring as well as the toll it takes on not just the family but also the lion’s share of community resources..that are really meant to be the commons ..that it consumes. Our family is now spread all over the world. Because most families were similar to mine, it got too too crowded in India. You have to understand that this story began 60-100 years before you started having kids. And India is a lot older than America. So I have the advantage of being IN your preview. A resource crunch can only be resolved by a search for more resources. If the large family was a blessing, it also became the seed of its own destruction. If you notice..in the USA and on other affluent nations that attract a lot of immigrants, the majority are from countries with a large expanding population. Large families that become more and more unsustainable with each generation. The outflow is due to resources being stretched thinner and thinner. If in Florida, you are an anomaly, you have hacked the system by capturing more from the commons where others maintain smaller families. But if everyone followed your example, then it would be detrimental. If you live in a sparsely populated location with sufficient resources and live responsibly to renew most of what can be renewed, then there is a plan. But the country and govt doesn’t have any such plan and if secluded pockets with higher birth rates start running out of resources, they will have to spread out. And the rate of consumption will increase exponentially if their ground resources are already thin(which it’s likely to be) Because we can’t turn back time, I guess my question to you is if you encourage others to be like you or dissuade them? Alternatively, how do you envision the world if everyone emulated you because it sounds appealing?
- souprock 6y ago
  The USA is 161 to 171 years older than India, judging by independence or the current form of government. Going back more, both were part of the same country. I don't think there is a long-term option to avoid hitting resource limits. If one person doesn't grab the resources, some other person will. Consider the Shakers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers From a peak of over 4000 people, they are down to just 2, but that didn't stop population growth. Other people made up for the loss. An example is the Amish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish I would certainly like to live among other large families, but I would also prefer to delay hitting resource limits. I guess that means I would encourage others who are very local to me, while dissuading those beyond my neighborhood. In any case, exponential growth of any group on the entire planet will wipe out any savings that other groups might make.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago

I don’t have know if I have mixed feelings or if I am neutral. I have long rallied against population explosion but I seldom come face to face(online here, as it were) with someone with an actual large family with the same set of parents. For context: my father was my grandmother’s 14th child at the age of 48. She died at the ripe old age of 93 or 95. I am aware of both the joys a large family can bring as well as the toll it takes on not just the family but also the lion’s share of community resources..that are really meant to be the commons ..that it consumes. Our family is now spread all over the world. Because most families were similar to mine, it got too too crowded in India. You have to understand that this story began 60-100 years before you started having kids. And India is a lot older than America. So I have the advantage of being IN your preview. A resource crunch can only be resolved by a search for more resources. If the large family was a blessing, it also became the seed of its own destruction. If you notice..in the USA and on other affluent nations that attract a lot of immigrants, the majority are from countries with a large expanding population. Large families that become more and more unsustainable with each generation. The outflow is due to resources being stretched thinner and thinner. If in Florida, you are an anomaly, you have hacked the system by capturing more from the commons where others maintain smaller families. But if everyone followed your example, then it would be detrimental. If you live in a sparsely populated location with sufficient resources and live responsibly to renew most of what can be renewed, then there is a plan. But the country and govt doesn’t have any such plan and if secluded pockets with higher birth rates start running out of resources, they will have to spread out. And the rate of consumption will increase exponentially if their ground resources are already thin(which it’s likely to be) Because we can’t turn back time, I guess my question to you is if you encourage others to be like you or dissuade them? Alternatively, how do you envision the world if everyone emulated you because it sounds appealing?

souprock 6y ago
The USA is 161 to 171 years older than India, judging by independence or the current form of government. Going back more, both were part of the same country. I don't think there is a long-term option to avoid hitting resource limits. If one person doesn't grab the resources, some other person will. Consider the Shakers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers From a peak of over 4000 people, they are down to just 2, but that didn't stop population growth. Other people made up for the loss. An example is the Amish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish I would certainly like to live among other large families, but I would also prefer to delay hitting resource limits. I guess that means I would encourage others who are very local to me, while dissuading those beyond my neighborhood. In any case, exponential growth of any group on the entire planet will wipe out any savings that other groups might make.