4 ms·

I will try not to complain about my parents, but one of the big side-effects is that I do not want kids and have had a vasectomy to prevent that. Not the only

I will try not to complain about my parents, but one of the big side-effects is that I do not want kids and have had a vasectomy to prevent that. Not the only reason, but a relevant one. I think more people should choose not to have kids and our societies/governments should stop pushing so hard to have more due to traditional values or so economies can grow. It is time for us to focus on quality and not quantity. I think we are approaching 8 billion people in this world: not only is this not sustainable, but we could be better raising our children by having fewer. Why does this relate to this topic? Because of the concept that many feel they were raised poorly. The people that should not be having kids usually do. One of the reasons I do not want kids is because I do not think I will do a good job. Instead, I think I can better support my friends that want to raise kids. If I feel I'm finally prepared to take on the responsibility, then I like to think I would force myself to adopt. Regardless, I think we could iteratively improve parenting by encouraging (never forcing) those that are mentally prepared to do so. I think educated, younger generations are already having fewer kids, but guess I wanted to shine light on the good side of this.

hcurtiss 5y ago
You seem very thoughtful and set in your calculus. It's probably no help, but for what it's worth, two kids is less than replacement value. Were every couple to have only two kids, the odds are some would die and you would have a shrinking, not growing, population. Having kids, at least in my experience, is a true blessing, and something that I think will bring me great joy for many decades. To each their own, but I wouldn't worry too much about environmental impacts or global carrying capacity.
- frankish 5y ago
  I do not want to take away any positives from having kids; however, I do think we should strongly consider whether we would actually be good parents and if we would be able to prepare them to live in a world where the bar is raising exponentially. Even if we find fulfillment in children, I question if it is really the best option for them in the long-term or if we may be selfish in our desires to have them. I think shrinking population is one thing I would like to see. Until we start moving to other planets, I do not see the benefits of a growing population. Many people still live in poverty and lack a good education, which I believe parenting has the most influence on.
  - jelsisi 5y ago
    > in a world where the bar is raising exponentially Something I've thought about as well. If I had kids, I doubt they would make it into the college I go to. The acceptance rate for UVA was 60% for my parents generation, 25% for mine, and probably in the single digits if my hypothetical children were to apply.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kbenson 5y ago
This is an important topic that I think it unfortunately too taboo to discuss in most places and instances. On the one hand, the blanket belief that reproductive rights are core and cannot be curtailed is so ingrained in some subcultures that even broaching it immediately makes people think of human rights, and on the other, overcrowding is a thing and planning for the future is important. For example, I can't imagine denying someone the chance to have the joy that is a child, but I'm also not sure there's a lot of benefit in the modern world in people having ten (or twenty) children, where I have a hard time believing they can even have a full relationship with their children because there's so many of them (leaving out the obvious issues with too much population growth). Also, how would we go about changing the status quo? Criminalizing too many children is far too dystopian for my taste, and incentive programs just mean that families with many children have less resources, which hurts the children, not the parents that make that decision. Honestly, I'm not even sure what's been discussed already on this topic, because it's somewhat taboo to speak about in our society.
- frankish 5y ago
  First and foremost, I strongly believe in educating or encouraging, but am strongly against forcing/coercing. A big part is likely just normalizing that it is okay not to have kids: in particular, there is so much social pressure to have them. There is also significant government incentive for a population to grow both for the economy and for retirement programs like Social Security. I do think the best thing we can do is live by example. We can choose not to have kids. Additionally, being heavily involved with helping our friends or families that have kids may be beneficial as well: not just babysitting, but helping get them curious and engaged in school, save for their higher education, or ensuring the mental well-being of the family in general.
  - kbenson 5y ago
    > A big part is likely just normalizing that it is okay not to have kids Maybe, but I'm hesitant to say that's a solution, because it implies that we can or should offset the problem (as much as we can assume there is one) by asking some people to have no kids while others continue to have many. It's not a bad thing to do, but it's not really a solution. > There is also significant government incentive for a population to grow both for the economy and for retirement programs like Social Security. To some degree, this is a chicken and egg and/or catch-22 problem. Our economy is based on growth, because growth was seen as inevitable, and since our economy is based on growth, we incentivize growth. That works until growth becomes constrained, and then it doesn't. Whether from outside or inside forces, understanding and possible moving towards an economy that is less coupled to growth is an important thing for us to study for the future (even if it only helps us understand our current economy better in the end). > I do think the best thing we can do is live by example. We can choose not to have kids. That's not the correct example. If everyone followed the example, the human race would cease to exist. Leading by example should be leading by what we expect people to do. That means leading by some people not having kids, and some people having a sustainable amount. That's not exactly different than it looks like right now if you consider some people to be leading by example, and it doesn't seem to actually do much (but population growth greatly falls off with industrialization and coming out of poverty, so maybe it does?)
reader_mode 5y ago
>I think more people should choose not to have kids and our societies/governments should stop pushing so hard to have more due to traditional values or so economies can grow. If your retirement plan is point blank shotgun than this is sustainable. Otherwise pray for automation, depending on how old you are, it might work out.
- robryan 5y ago
  It is a pyramid scheme though, each generation needing to be bigger than the last to support the previous generations retirement. It has to end at some point.
  - ta2157 5y ago
    Each generation doesn't have to be bigger than the last. Two people create two children, those two children create two children, the grandparents die, the grandchildren create two children, etc. That stabilizes the population (technically population goes down due to accidental deaths, diseases, etc. but you get the idea).
  - reader_mode 5y ago
    Not really - you can increase productivity, the end game of that being full automation. Lifespans are increasing and automation claims turned out over optimistic so far - if you are close to retirement the last thing you want to see is a shrinking working population, shortages and inflation.

hcurtiss 5y ago

You seem very thoughtful and set in your calculus. It's probably no help, but for what it's worth, two kids is less than replacement value. Were every couple to have only two kids, the odds are some would die and you would have a shrinking, not growing, population. Having kids, at least in my experience, is a true blessing, and something that I think will bring me great joy for many decades. To each their own, but I wouldn't worry too much about environmental impacts or global carrying capacity.

frankish 5y ago
I do not want to take away any positives from having kids; however, I do think we should strongly consider whether we would actually be good parents and if we would be able to prepare them to live in a world where the bar is raising exponentially. Even if we find fulfillment in children, I question if it is really the best option for them in the long-term or if we may be selfish in our desires to have them. I think shrinking population is one thing I would like to see. Until we start moving to other planets, I do not see the benefits of a growing population. Many people still live in poverty and lack a good education, which I believe parenting has the most influence on.
- jelsisi 5y ago
  > in a world where the bar is raising exponentially Something I've thought about as well. If I had kids, I doubt they would make it into the college I go to. The acceptance rate for UVA was 60% for my parents generation, 25% for mine, and probably in the single digits if my hypothetical children were to apply.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kbenson 5y ago

This is an important topic that I think it unfortunately too taboo to discuss in most places and instances. On the one hand, the blanket belief that reproductive rights are core and cannot be curtailed is so ingrained in some subcultures that even broaching it immediately makes people think of human rights, and on the other, overcrowding is a thing and planning for the future is important. For example, I can't imagine denying someone the chance to have the joy that is a child, but I'm also not sure there's a lot of benefit in the modern world in people having ten (or twenty) children, where I have a hard time believing they can even have a full relationship with their children because there's so many of them (leaving out the obvious issues with too much population growth). Also, how would we go about changing the status quo? Criminalizing too many children is far too dystopian for my taste, and incentive programs just mean that families with many children have less resources, which hurts the children, not the parents that make that decision. Honestly, I'm not even sure what's been discussed already on this topic, because it's somewhat taboo to speak about in our society.

frankish 5y ago
First and foremost, I strongly believe in educating or encouraging, but am strongly against forcing/coercing. A big part is likely just normalizing that it is okay not to have kids: in particular, there is so much social pressure to have them. There is also significant government incentive for a population to grow both for the economy and for retirement programs like Social Security. I do think the best thing we can do is live by example. We can choose not to have kids. Additionally, being heavily involved with helping our friends or families that have kids may be beneficial as well: not just babysitting, but helping get them curious and engaged in school, save for their higher education, or ensuring the mental well-being of the family in general.
- kbenson 5y ago
  > A big part is likely just normalizing that it is okay not to have kids Maybe, but I'm hesitant to say that's a solution, because it implies that we can or should offset the problem (as much as we can assume there is one) by asking some people to have no kids while others continue to have many. It's not a bad thing to do, but it's not really a solution. > There is also significant government incentive for a population to grow both for the economy and for retirement programs like Social Security. To some degree, this is a chicken and egg and/or catch-22 problem. Our economy is based on growth, because growth was seen as inevitable, and since our economy is based on growth, we incentivize growth. That works until growth becomes constrained, and then it doesn't. Whether from outside or inside forces, understanding and possible moving towards an economy that is less coupled to growth is an important thing for us to study for the future (even if it only helps us understand our current economy better in the end). > I do think the best thing we can do is live by example. We can choose not to have kids. That's not the correct example. If everyone followed the example, the human race would cease to exist. Leading by example should be leading by what we expect people to do. That means leading by some people not having kids, and some people having a sustainable amount. That's not exactly different than it looks like right now if you consider some people to be leading by example, and it doesn't seem to actually do much (but population growth greatly falls off with industrialization and coming out of poverty, so maybe it does?)

reader_mode 5y ago

>I think more people should choose not to have kids and our societies/governments should stop pushing so hard to have more due to traditional values or so economies can grow. If your retirement plan is point blank shotgun than this is sustainable. Otherwise pray for automation, depending on how old you are, it might work out.

robryan 5y ago
It is a pyramid scheme though, each generation needing to be bigger than the last to support the previous generations retirement. It has to end at some point.
- ta2157 5y ago
  Each generation doesn't have to be bigger than the last. Two people create two children, those two children create two children, the grandparents die, the grandchildren create two children, etc. That stabilizes the population (technically population goes down due to accidental deaths, diseases, etc. but you get the idea).
- reader_mode 5y ago
  Not really - you can increase productivity, the end game of that being full automation. Lifespans are increasing and automation claims turned out over optimistic so far - if you are close to retirement the last thing you want to see is a shrinking working population, shortages and inflation.