5 ms·

Don’t forget, that having kids is really hard. They cost time, money and require support from living environment. There must be kindergartens with sane opening

by lnsru 3y ago

Don’t forget, that having kids is really hard. They cost time, money and require support from living environment. There must be kindergartens with sane opening times, not until 2 PM. There must be supportive employers allowing home office on 2-3 days. Especially when kids are sick. Spoiler alert: before school kids are sick at least once a month. Housing is a real problem, but one can have kids in cheaper area too. There is not need to live in super expensive big city center. Having no kids is simple very easy life without any bigger problems.

satvikpendem 3y ago
This really is the crux of the issue, I've found. There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment, which is not necessarily always the case (postpartum depression or the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable).
- apsurd 3y ago
  no other reason to have kids? we're biologically programmed to have kids. i don't have kids myself, but I'm shocked at how intellectual you're coloring is of the situation. Procreating is our only purpose, as a life form.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    For many species, having offspring is a no-op. The Luna moth literally has no mouth (and I'm not sure if it must scream, either), so when it procreates, it creates yet more offspring that also have no mouths. The moth does not do anything while it exists beyond procreating, as there is nothing it can do; in other words, it existing is simply a no-op, in the computer science sense. Therefore, even if procreating is our only purpose, we can still ponder what the point of doing so actually is. Since we are intellectual beings, we can decide whether it's a logical decision or not, so that we don't end up no-ops either. I've seen friends and family members where kids are born to teen parents, who then have kids as teens, who then have kids as teens, and so on. Those are the equivalent of the moths, those teens have not had the chance to grow and achieve more, they were simply procreating to procreate, and they could not get out of poverty as their entire life was only dedicated to sustenance. Personally, their lives were very sad to me. Finally, do not fall for the fallacy of appealing to nature, as just because something is natural does not mean it is moral. Many animals will forcefully mate with one another or eat their prey alive, that does not mean that humans must do the same. So too for procreation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
    - apsurd 3y ago
      Good feedback! my reply is mainly calling out your "pride and accomplishment" claim as the only other reason to have kids. I agree that there are plenty of reasons to not have kids. and also that plenty of people probably shouldn't have kids from a moral calculus; though importantly it's not our calculus to dictate. In any case i still say that having kids for the sake of humanity is a Just reason to have kids. Problems and all. Humanity is basically a huge injection of problems and chaos. What else are we going to do.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    Not everyone is as primitive.
- throwaway2037 3y ago
  the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable I am always surprised when I see people post about the regret of having children. You are right: It is pretty rare.
- david-gpu 3y ago
  > There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment I used to feel like that... until I had children. It is an experience that can't be understood until you live through it. We can use words to try and describe it, but to a non-parent it will sound like a "nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment" because of how far removed it is from their past experiences. It's like trying to use words to explain music to a person who has never felt it.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    Yes, but having a child is not a reversible decision, so having a child just to see what it feels like is something that I would not risk doing, especially if the risk is non-zero.
    - david-gpu 3y ago
      I used to think like that, too. If you ever have a child, you will understand, like so many of us before.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - satvikpendem 3y ago
        Again, just because you understood doesn't mean I or others necessarily will. It seems to be just like religious belief, in a way, only the risk is much higher and more concrete than Pascal's Wager.
        david-gpu 3y ago
        All I'm saying is that you are not alone. Many of us have had the same doubts and found the experience to be (very) positive. You won't find answers to this by trying to rationalize it, because you can't know what it's like until you experience it, if you ever do. You do you, my friend. I could no possibly have less at stake here, one way or another. Have a nice day.
- Amezarak 3y ago
  Humans are animals. We are not rational beings divorced from the instincts of all life. When people don't want to reproduce, it is the same as it is with other animals: there is something deeply wrong with the social or natural environment. Things like "housing is too expensive" or "the future is bleak" are rationalizations. You don't want to because our social environment in most of the western world is totally broken. Natural selection will solve the problem in enough time, as societies that lead to these conditions fall apart or die out.
  - jofla_net 3y ago
    Couldn't put it more simply or succinctly if I tried. The topic is huge, yet the absence of further discussion by others is quite telling. I think natural selection is actually very much alive and well its just not in ways we've traditionally been taught to recognize. One of the stronger signals is that there is probably LESS, pressure to do or to live in any such fashion as there has ever been throughout all of human history. Basically nobody could care less. So in turn, only the already-inclined among us are opting to have children.
- rs999gti 3y ago
  > simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids That's fine for you but what about society? A few western societies are below the child replacement rate. How do these places keep their society and social programs going without growing the tax base with new births? Are immigrants expected to move in and have their own children to insure the tax base stays stable?
  - Lacerda69 3y ago
    "because society" is probably among the worst reasons to have children.
    - rs999gti 3y ago
      The society that allows you and me to sit in comfort and post on a message board. Yes that one. The same one with pyramid scheme social programs. My main concern is who will pay for pensions and health care when my working generation is old? Most social programs are insolvent or virtual ponzi schemes where CURRENT workers pay for TODAY'S beneficiaries. Thus we need immigrants AND native babies at greater the replacement rate to insure the scheme does not stop.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    Yes, immigration works well, especially in places like the US that have high rates of integration. Perhaps societies should not have pyramid scheme social programs, just as we didn't back in the day. It's not a necessary condition of a technological society.
Earw0rm 3y ago
Or, it must be possible to support some kind of reasonable family life on less than two full time incomes.* * This does not mean "exactly one full time income", aka "woman, get in the kitchen". There are many desirable options between "one traditional full time male earner" and "two people working a combined 90 hours of paid employment". Also doesn't necessarily mean all the trappings of an affluent Western lifestyle, big suburban home with two new cars on the drive, foreign vacations every year etc.
- tappio 3y ago
  We are privileged with my wife. Our combined workload is ~7 days per week, and our two kids are in the kindergarten 4 days per week. I work usually 3 days and my wife 4. This is not possible for most families, but I can highly recommend cutting the total hours if possible.
tmaly 3y ago
Cheaper areas mean farther away from good paying jobs in my mind. Remote sounded good back in 2021, but with the return to office push, it is a struggle to have quality of life today.

by lnsru 3y ago

satvikpendem 3y ago

This really is the crux of the issue, I've found. There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment, which is not necessarily always the case (postpartum depression or the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable).

apsurd 3y ago
no other reason to have kids? we're biologically programmed to have kids. i don't have kids myself, but I'm shocked at how intellectual you're coloring is of the situation. Procreating is our only purpose, as a life form.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  For many species, having offspring is a no-op. The Luna moth literally has no mouth (and I'm not sure if it must scream, either), so when it procreates, it creates yet more offspring that also have no mouths. The moth does not do anything while it exists beyond procreating, as there is nothing it can do; in other words, it existing is simply a no-op, in the computer science sense. Therefore, even if procreating is our only purpose, we can still ponder what the point of doing so actually is. Since we are intellectual beings, we can decide whether it's a logical decision or not, so that we don't end up no-ops either. I've seen friends and family members where kids are born to teen parents, who then have kids as teens, who then have kids as teens, and so on. Those are the equivalent of the moths, those teens have not had the chance to grow and achieve more, they were simply procreating to procreate, and they could not get out of poverty as their entire life was only dedicated to sustenance. Personally, their lives were very sad to me. Finally, do not fall for the fallacy of appealing to nature, as just because something is natural does not mean it is moral. Many animals will forcefully mate with one another or eat their prey alive, that does not mean that humans must do the same. So too for procreation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
  - apsurd 3y ago
    Good feedback! my reply is mainly calling out your "pride and accomplishment" claim as the only other reason to have kids. I agree that there are plenty of reasons to not have kids. and also that plenty of people probably shouldn't have kids from a moral calculus; though importantly it's not our calculus to dictate. In any case i still say that having kids for the sake of humanity is a Just reason to have kids. Problems and all. Humanity is basically a huge injection of problems and chaos. What else are we going to do.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  Not everyone is as primitive.
throwaway2037 3y ago
the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable I am always surprised when I see people post about the regret of having children. You are right: It is pretty rare.
david-gpu 3y ago
> There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment I used to feel like that... until I had children. It is an experience that can't be understood until you live through it. We can use words to try and describe it, but to a non-parent it will sound like a "nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment" because of how far removed it is from their past experiences. It's like trying to use words to explain music to a person who has never felt it.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  Yes, but having a child is not a reversible decision, so having a child just to see what it feels like is something that I would not risk doing, especially if the risk is non-zero.
  - david-gpu 3y ago
    I used to think like that, too. If you ever have a child, you will understand, like so many of us before.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      Again, just because you understood doesn't mean I or others necessarily will. It seems to be just like religious belief, in a way, only the risk is much higher and more concrete than Pascal's Wager.
      - david-gpu 3y ago
        All I'm saying is that you are not alone. Many of us have had the same doubts and found the experience to be (very) positive. You won't find answers to this by trying to rationalize it, because you can't know what it's like until you experience it, if you ever do. You do you, my friend. I could no possibly have less at stake here, one way or another. Have a nice day.
Amezarak 3y ago
Humans are animals. We are not rational beings divorced from the instincts of all life. When people don't want to reproduce, it is the same as it is with other animals: there is something deeply wrong with the social or natural environment. Things like "housing is too expensive" or "the future is bleak" are rationalizations. You don't want to because our social environment in most of the western world is totally broken. Natural selection will solve the problem in enough time, as societies that lead to these conditions fall apart or die out.
- jofla_net 3y ago
  Couldn't put it more simply or succinctly if I tried. The topic is huge, yet the absence of further discussion by others is quite telling. I think natural selection is actually very much alive and well its just not in ways we've traditionally been taught to recognize. One of the stronger signals is that there is probably LESS, pressure to do or to live in any such fashion as there has ever been throughout all of human history. Basically nobody could care less. So in turn, only the already-inclined among us are opting to have children.
rs999gti 3y ago
> simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids That's fine for you but what about society? A few western societies are below the child replacement rate. How do these places keep their society and social programs going without growing the tax base with new births? Are immigrants expected to move in and have their own children to insure the tax base stays stable?
- Lacerda69 3y ago
  "because society" is probably among the worst reasons to have children.
  - rs999gti 3y ago
    The society that allows you and me to sit in comfort and post on a message board. Yes that one. The same one with pyramid scheme social programs. My main concern is who will pay for pensions and health care when my working generation is old? Most social programs are insolvent or virtual ponzi schemes where CURRENT workers pay for TODAY'S beneficiaries. Thus we need immigrants AND native babies at greater the replacement rate to insure the scheme does not stop.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  Yes, immigration works well, especially in places like the US that have high rates of integration. Perhaps societies should not have pyramid scheme social programs, just as we didn't back in the day. It's not a necessary condition of a technological society.

Earw0rm 3y ago

Or, it must be possible to support some kind of reasonable family life on less than two full time incomes.* * This does not mean "exactly one full time income", aka "woman, get in the kitchen". There are many desirable options between "one traditional full time male earner" and "two people working a combined 90 hours of paid employment". Also doesn't necessarily mean all the trappings of an affluent Western lifestyle, big suburban home with two new cars on the drive, foreign vacations every year etc.

tappio 3y ago
We are privileged with my wife. Our combined workload is ~7 days per week, and our two kids are in the kindergarten 4 days per week. I work usually 3 days and my wife 4. This is not possible for most families, but I can highly recommend cutting the total hours if possible.

tmaly 3y ago

Cheaper areas mean farther away from good paying jobs in my mind. Remote sounded good back in 2021, but with the return to office push, it is a struggle to have quality of life today.