5 ms·

> and most important of all investments by the time you turn 30 try to get married and have at least one kid. Why?

kamaal 12y ago
In my experience. And this may vary between cultures. The earlier you have kids, the earlier you will be through the responsibilities you have towards those kids. At least this is how it is in our culture(Indian). The later you have kids, their main years when they many need some help from you to support them/pay college fees etc will coincide with your retirement years. And those retirement years will be when you will have to work towards having hard cash savings. If you spend that part of your life, spending money and not saving for retirement- you are not likely to carry much into post-retirement years. Having kids early means, you can see duties through by the time you reach 50. Post that you can have responsibility free, happy retirement years.
- spacehome 12y ago
  Using your own suggestions, wouldn't it be better to postpone children as long as possible, diligently save that money, and give it to you children 15 years later, after it's had time to compound? I'm not understanding your reasoning. You seem to labor under the assumption that if you don't have children to help while you're in your 40s, the money you make will magically disappear.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- Dewie 12y ago
  If you (generic you) are approaching the thought of having children with the mindset of "getting all that responsibility over with", you should perhaps consider if children is something that you want in the first place.
- Fomite 12y ago
  If it's purely return on investment and not damaging your retirement, then you advice should be "Don't have kids".
- joelrunyon 12y ago
  > Having kids early means, you can see duties through by the time you reach 50. That doesn't necessarily follow if you have several kids or you have lots of space between them. It seems you'd be better of just "not having" kids if you're simply trying to "get it over with."

In my experience. And this may vary between cultures. The earlier you have kids, the earlier you will be through the responsibilities you have towards those kids. At least this is how it is in our culture(Indian). The later you have kids, their main years when they many need some help from you to support them/pay college fees etc will coincide with your retirement years. And those retirement years will be when you will have to work towards having hard cash savings. If you spend that part of your life, spending money and not saving for retirement- you are not likely to carry much into post-retirement years. Having kids early means, you can see duties through by the time you reach 50. Post that you can have responsibility free, happy retirement years.

spacehome 12y ago
Using your own suggestions, wouldn't it be better to postpone children as long as possible, diligently save that money, and give it to you children 15 years later, after it's had time to compound? I'm not understanding your reasoning. You seem to labor under the assumption that if you don't have children to help while you're in your 40s, the money you make will magically disappear.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Dewie 12y ago
If you (generic you) are approaching the thought of having children with the mindset of "getting all that responsibility over with", you should perhaps consider if children is something that you want in the first place.
Fomite 12y ago
If it's purely return on investment and not damaging your retirement, then you advice should be "Don't have kids".
joelrunyon 12y ago
> Having kids early means, you can see duties through by the time you reach 50. That doesn't necessarily follow if you have several kids or you have lots of space between them. It seems you'd be better of just "not having" kids if you're simply trying to "get it over with."