2 ms·

"Parents in the US have children for recreational purposes" Really?!? I don't know a single parent who would list or even hint that they needed "recreation" whe

"Parents in the US have children for recreational purposes" Really?!? I don't know a single parent who would list or even hint that they needed "recreation" when deciding to have a child. Let's assume you were half-joking, I still don't see having kids as something anyone takes lightly no matter what country you are born in. "child birth rates do not fluctuate with the demand for labor" Another horrible reason to have kids. I hope this isn't your metric for deciding upon your prior statement about recreation. Just because the US doesn't need the labor, does not mean parents are having kids "recreational". Kids are not a tool of society that should be effected by labor output. Also the numbers on net worth most likely take into account home values that have recently fallen off a cliff. While it's still accurate to say that most people have a zero or negative net worth you can't assume the value of the home/amount owed on the mortgage will always be static.

downandout 14y ago
When I say "recreational" I mean that there is no need for parents to have children, other than the fact that they are biologically motivated to. We have more people than resources in this world. That is a problem, and the only way to fix it is to encourage people to be realistic about the potential for their children to have happy, productive lives in a society that almost certainly has no use for them.
- reinhardt 14y ago
  Overpopulation is a myth. Actually in the first world underpopulation is greater risk, most European countries have a lower fertility rate than the 2.1 children replacement rate. Even at a global level the world population will reach a plateau somewhere around the middle of the century.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
VMG 14y ago
> I don't know a single parent who would list or even hint that they needed "recreation" when deciding to have a child. Your friends are not a representative sample of the population of the united states. Those who choose to have children are responsible for providing for them, not their neighbors. People who can't take care of their children should be discouraged from procreating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention

downandout 14y ago

When I say "recreational" I mean that there is no need for parents to have children, other than the fact that they are biologically motivated to. We have more people than resources in this world. That is a problem, and the only way to fix it is to encourage people to be realistic about the potential for their children to have happy, productive lives in a society that almost certainly has no use for them.

reinhardt 14y ago
Overpopulation is a myth. Actually in the first world underpopulation is greater risk, most European countries have a lower fertility rate than the 2.1 children replacement rate. Even at a global level the world population will reach a plateau somewhere around the middle of the century.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

VMG 14y ago

> I don't know a single parent who would list or even hint that they needed "recreation" when deciding to have a child. Your friends are not a representative sample of the population of the united states. Those who choose to have children are responsible for providing for them, not their neighbors. People who can't take care of their children should be discouraged from procreating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention