4 ms·

I mean, children are just really expensive with no financial benefit no matter how you cut it, regardless of who the parent is. It used to be that children wou

I mean, children are just really expensive with no financial benefit no matter how you cut it, regardless of who the parent is. It used to be that children would look after you in your old age, or would contribute to the family relatively young, etc etc, or in a single-income household with a stay at home parent incurred no material cost to the family beyond a mouth to feed. Nowadays, in a dual-income household, children cost an income to look after or daycare until they are old enough to look after themselves. Financially speaking, there's no benefit (not that children are a financial decision, but certainly the financial logic today is worse than many times in the past)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tuatoru 2y ago
> children are just really expensive with no financial benefit This is how screwed up our society is. It should be "work is so badly organised that it gets in the way of doing the important things in life".
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  To some, children are not important, and that is okay. Those who do want children should of course have a robust support system and accommodations made available, but those who don’t should be equally empowered to not have them. Unwanted children are an enormous source of suffering in the aggregate.