4 ms·

i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 and then enjoy life when you are 40. at that time you are much better off financially (unless you

by em-bee 3y ago

i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 and then enjoy life when you are 40. at that time you are much better off financially (unless you live in a country where you have to pay for your kids education maybe) which gives you a lot more freedom to explore your interests.

tonyedgecombe 3y ago
Looking back I don't think I would have been ready at twenty. Also I couldn't afford a house at the time but could at thirty.
- em-bee 3y ago
  the expectation to need to be able to afford a house before you can have kids is something that is very wrong with society today. (but at the same time the difficulties today to afford a house is also something that has gone wrong. and i suppose the expectation to have a house made more sense when it was still possible to afford one. either way something here needs to change.)
  - mofosyne 3y ago
    Eh it's rational to expect stable housing before having kids. Even during medevial time, while you don't have much freedom, you have at least the certainty and stability of a place to live and a role to play. I don't think modern society does that anymore.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      well, over here, renting is considered stable housing because we have sufficient protection for renters. i keep forgetting that this is not the case everywhere.
poisonborz 3y ago
That's an opinion an algorithm could come up with based on raw data, but in real life you will not enjoy life the same way when you are 20, especially given at what life stage other 40s are at in most societies.
- em-bee 3y ago
  well that's the thing. i had kids late. but i wasn't really any more ready to have kids in my 30s than i was in my 20s. and on the other hand i don't feel any different as far as life stage goes in my 40s than in my 20s. yes, i am and feel more mature, but my interests haven't changed and i am just as willing to explore the world now as i was then. but now i have the financial means to do that, which i didn't have then. and i am from a country where parenting is financially supported by the government, so there is absolutely no need to have saved money to be a parent. in countries where this isn't the case the situation is perhaps a bit different, but then, lacking financial resources doesn't stop people from having kids, and even those will be better off in their 40s and still be able to explore their interests more than they were in their 20s. the only thing that gets in the way is the expectation from others, to have a house, to have a career, to stop being impulsive when you are older, lack of support from their own parents, etc. i see it happening in china. people get married and have children much earlier. most have very supportive grandparents (because the grandparents want kids) and when these couples are in their 40s and 50s they are still full of energy and are able to enjoy their life.
basisword 3y ago
There's trades offs either way. Personally, I would rather have had the experiences I had in my 20's. Anything you can do in your 40's, you can do in your 50's or 60's. Some of the crazy (good and bad) you can experience in your 20's you don't get a chance to experience again. But, it's a trade off still.
- em-bee 3y ago
  i suppose that comes down to specific activities. pretty much everything that i did in my 20s i am still able to and am doing now. on the other hand there are some activities that i wanted to do in my 20s but i could not because i could not afford them, and now i can't do them because i have kids.
deely3 3y ago
Erm, no. Jobless, homeless student with few kids. I will be very very sorry for my kids.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- em-bee 3y ago
  are you saying you are a homeless student with kids right now? or are you giving an hypothetical example?
  - deely3 3y ago
    hypothethical. sorry if not clear
    - em-bee 3y ago
      no worries, i just wanted to avoid being insensitive. where i come from and in most other countries that i have seen, the idea of a student being homeless is almost unthinkable. being a student alone grants enough support that this simply won't happen, especially if they have kids. it would have to be something really unusual like the student refusing the accommodation they are offered or being mentally ill in some way that prevents them to make the right choice. so to me it appears that homeless students are a distinctly american problem. one that the communities and government there need to work on to fix. the very picture of a single parent with children being homeless is so out of place that i have a hard time imagining that this could happen even in the US. that you can even come up with such an idea says a lot about how bad support for people in poverty in the US really is. that said, obviously, if you are homeless, choosing to have kids is probably not a good idea. but if you decide to have kids and become homeless later, then i would say, shame on the government and community for not providing the needed support. if you live in a country where this is even possible, you should really try to do what you can to contribute to a change. not an easy task, but one that is absolutely necessary.
GoodJokes 3y ago
[dead]
thefz 3y ago
> i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 Please, read that sentence again.
- em-bee 3y ago
  it appears you are coming from an area/culture where this idea is ridiculous or unheard of. i can assure you i meant what i said. there is absolutely nothing wrong with having children at 20, or even earlier. however it requires a community and a society that is supportive of that. it works very well in china, because the culture there does support it. traditionally, the young couple lives together with the husbands family and can rely on their guidance and support raising the children. this way there is no problem with the young parents continuing their studies or working, because the household is managed by the grandparents. where i used to live every morning i would see lots of grandparents who themselves where in their 40s or 50s playing with babies while the young parents were off to work. i understand that in western culture of independence where every couple lives on their own away from the grandparents, and with jokes about in-laws, this is hard to imagine. but really this is a different way to look at life and i believe it has many advantages.
  - balfirevic 3y ago
    > this way there is no problem with the young parents continuing their studies or working, because the household is managed by the grandparents That doesn't bode well for the mentioned freedom and independence that you were going to get if you had children in your 20s.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      you still have more freedom as a grandparent. it's more balanced. you are not locked in to take care of the grandchildren all the time

by em-bee 3y ago

tonyedgecombe 3y ago

Looking back I don't think I would have been ready at twenty. Also I couldn't afford a house at the time but could at thirty.

em-bee 3y ago
the expectation to need to be able to afford a house before you can have kids is something that is very wrong with society today. (but at the same time the difficulties today to afford a house is also something that has gone wrong. and i suppose the expectation to have a house made more sense when it was still possible to afford one. either way something here needs to change.)
- mofosyne 3y ago
  Eh it's rational to expect stable housing before having kids. Even during medevial time, while you don't have much freedom, you have at least the certainty and stability of a place to live and a role to play. I don't think modern society does that anymore.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    well, over here, renting is considered stable housing because we have sufficient protection for renters. i keep forgetting that this is not the case everywhere.

poisonborz 3y ago

That's an opinion an algorithm could come up with based on raw data, but in real life you will not enjoy life the same way when you are 20, especially given at what life stage other 40s are at in most societies.

em-bee 3y ago
well that's the thing. i had kids late. but i wasn't really any more ready to have kids in my 30s than i was in my 20s. and on the other hand i don't feel any different as far as life stage goes in my 40s than in my 20s. yes, i am and feel more mature, but my interests haven't changed and i am just as willing to explore the world now as i was then. but now i have the financial means to do that, which i didn't have then. and i am from a country where parenting is financially supported by the government, so there is absolutely no need to have saved money to be a parent. in countries where this isn't the case the situation is perhaps a bit different, but then, lacking financial resources doesn't stop people from having kids, and even those will be better off in their 40s and still be able to explore their interests more than they were in their 20s. the only thing that gets in the way is the expectation from others, to have a house, to have a career, to stop being impulsive when you are older, lack of support from their own parents, etc. i see it happening in china. people get married and have children much earlier. most have very supportive grandparents (because the grandparents want kids) and when these couples are in their 40s and 50s they are still full of energy and are able to enjoy their life.

basisword 3y ago

There's trades offs either way. Personally, I would rather have had the experiences I had in my 20's. Anything you can do in your 40's, you can do in your 50's or 60's. Some of the crazy (good and bad) you can experience in your 20's you don't get a chance to experience again. But, it's a trade off still.

em-bee 3y ago
i suppose that comes down to specific activities. pretty much everything that i did in my 20s i am still able to and am doing now. on the other hand there are some activities that i wanted to do in my 20s but i could not because i could not afford them, and now i can't do them because i have kids.

deely3 3y ago

Erm, no. Jobless, homeless student with few kids. I will be very very sorry for my kids.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
em-bee 3y ago
are you saying you are a homeless student with kids right now? or are you giving an hypothetical example?
- deely3 3y ago
  hypothethical. sorry if not clear
  - em-bee 3y ago
    no worries, i just wanted to avoid being insensitive. where i come from and in most other countries that i have seen, the idea of a student being homeless is almost unthinkable. being a student alone grants enough support that this simply won't happen, especially if they have kids. it would have to be something really unusual like the student refusing the accommodation they are offered or being mentally ill in some way that prevents them to make the right choice. so to me it appears that homeless students are a distinctly american problem. one that the communities and government there need to work on to fix. the very picture of a single parent with children being homeless is so out of place that i have a hard time imagining that this could happen even in the US. that you can even come up with such an idea says a lot about how bad support for people in poverty in the US really is. that said, obviously, if you are homeless, choosing to have kids is probably not a good idea. but if you decide to have kids and become homeless later, then i would say, shame on the government and community for not providing the needed support. if you live in a country where this is even possible, you should really try to do what you can to contribute to a change. not an easy task, but one that is absolutely necessary.

GoodJokes 3y ago

[dead]

thefz 3y ago

> i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 Please, read that sentence again.

em-bee 3y ago
it appears you are coming from an area/culture where this idea is ridiculous or unheard of. i can assure you i meant what i said. there is absolutely nothing wrong with having children at 20, or even earlier. however it requires a community and a society that is supportive of that. it works very well in china, because the culture there does support it. traditionally, the young couple lives together with the husbands family and can rely on their guidance and support raising the children. this way there is no problem with the young parents continuing their studies or working, because the household is managed by the grandparents. where i used to live every morning i would see lots of grandparents who themselves where in their 40s or 50s playing with babies while the young parents were off to work. i understand that in western culture of independence where every couple lives on their own away from the grandparents, and with jokes about in-laws, this is hard to imagine. but really this is a different way to look at life and i believe it has many advantages.
- balfirevic 3y ago
  > this way there is no problem with the young parents continuing their studies or working, because the household is managed by the grandparents That doesn't bode well for the mentioned freedom and independence that you were going to get if you had children in your 20s.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    you still have more freedom as a grandparent. it's more balanced. you are not locked in to take care of the grandchildren all the time