> But if you don't have kids, it's easier to save money to fund your own retirement. Kids are expensive. Empirical studies have found the opposite: if you don'

> But if you don't have kids, it's easier to save money to fund your own retirement. Kids are expensive. Empirical studies have found the opposite: if you don't have kids you tend to spend more on yourself, which means you have (on average) a higher life-style during working years which you take in retirement. A higher / more lavish lifestyle means you need higher income and more savings… which many folks with a lavish lifestyle generally don't do. People with kids spend less on themselves and so are in the habit of a less lavish life-style and so need less savings in retirement because their spending habits are lower. As a general rule if you have kids you need 40-50% of your working-age income in retirement, but you do not have kids you need 50-60%. * https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/retirement/retire-planning/book-excerpt-retirement-income-for-life-getting-more-without-savingmore/article37971172/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/retirement/re... * https://archive.is/bzJMV https://archive.is/bzJMV As for having kids and saving for retirement, there's ways to balance both: * https://www.moneysense.ca/columns/retired-money/the-rule-of-30/ https://www.moneysense.ca/columns/retired-money/the-rule-of-...