4 ms·
When options are thin, hope commands a premium. See: lottery tickets. Would you give up planning for retirement just because all of the options were unreliable
by jjoonathan 4y ago
When options are thin, hope commands a premium. See: lottery tickets.
Would you give up planning for retirement just because all of the options were unreliable? I wouldn't, I'd pick the least bad and try anyway.
- emodendroket 4y agoI think it is at least worth considering that there may have been reasons other than economic reasoning that people chose to have children.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoAnd apparently that results in people having 1.8 children instead of 5.6.
- emodendroket 4y agoI’m not sure what you’re saying. There are other factors that have changed between now and then, such as the general acceptability of being unmarried, family planning tools, reduced religiosity, and woolier stuff like people’s idea of what a good life is.
- gruez 4y agoExcept the linked article argues that in hunter gatherer societies, kids were a net drain even when their parents were approaching retirement, and in agricultural societies there were "retirement" options in the form of land ownership and financial instruments.
- jjoonathan 4y agoSo if you were living in an agricultural society, you would trust their financial instruments and institutions governing land ownership more than you would trust your own family? Really?
- notch898a 4y agoSome of the calculations they made were utterly bizarre. Like assuming the child wasn't paying anything forward until "retirement" of the parent. All adults being net positive is not the same as the elders not benefitting from in-kin capture of investments in a scheme that almost resembles taxation moving benefit upwards in in-kin seniority.