• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Why should we bring children into the world?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I thought about putting this in off topic, but since the discussion will revolve around the current political situation, I decided to put it here.

If we go back 100, 200, 500, 1000 years we had rampant disease, periodic starvation, wars,,, and people still reproduced.

Today, we live in an oppressive society that is overly regulated.

The US is deep in debt, and has no solution in sight.

Seems every nation and their brother and sister has nuclear weapons.

Cost of living has outpaces wages.

With all of this and more, why would anyone want to bring a child into the world?

Even basic stuff, such as home ownership is a fading dream for most people.

College education cost a fortune.

There was once a time when a person could finish high school, then go to work in a shipyard, steel mill, car factory,, and earn a good living. But those days are far behind us.

Why would I want to bring a child into the world, only to watch that child struggle with college, struggle to buy a home, struggle to find a job,,,.

As humanity progresses, shouldn't things get easier? Shouldn't getting an education get cheaper and easier? Shouldn't owning a home get cheaper and easier? Its as if humanity reached a pinnacle in the 1970s, and it was downhill from there.

Wages have stagnated since the 1990s, while cost of living has skyrocketed, especially the cost of home ownership.
Historically, population hasn't grown as quickly as it has during the past century. It took from 1800 until about 1925 for the population to go from 1 billion to 2 billion. We hit 7 billion people in Oct 2011, and are expected to reach 8 billion by 2025. Or, if you'd rather make an argument of growth rate, it took 125 years to double from 1 billion to 2 billion. It only took about another 45 years to double again. And to double from 3 billion to 6 billion took less than 40 years. (Though at that rate, it's about another 40 years to double from 4 billion to 8 billion; it seems the growth rate as a percentage has stabilized.) We keep managing to figure out better ways to produce food; farm technology & transportation in the earlier 1900 absolutely couldn't have supported today's current population. Sooner or later, I think we'll reach a maximum carrying capacity. When? I couldn't even begin to guess. In fact, perhaps we've already exceeded it - remember, a lot of crops depend on fertilizers that we gain from resources that we are depleting. Those resources are finite.

As far as nuclear states, there are only 8 or 9: China France India Israel Pakistan Russia the UK and US. with nukes. we've got about 26 hundred more than anybody else, whatever. Oh, and North Korea is a fledgling nuclear power. That's a pretty tiny proportion of all the countries.

Cost of living, housing - incredibly dependent upon what part of the country you live in. Overall, as a percentage of income, things like food have decreased significantly over the past few decades (though it's rising a little bit right now.) In the early 60's, it was estimated that Americans spent about 1/3 of their income on food. Now, it's a single digit percentage of household income that's spent on food. (I wonder if the increasing amount of available money as a result also helped fuel rising home prices?) On the other hand, in the 1960's, we had telephones & an antenna on our roof to pick up a handful of television stations. Now, in its place, we have a cell phone for every member of the family, data plans on those cell phones, cable or satellite stations for the television, and an Internet data plan. That $25/mo or whatever it was in 1960 has ballooned to $300/mo or more for many families.

And, as far as watching your offspring struggle to find a job, colleges aren't necessarily THAT expensive - a lot of states offer excellent programs for quite affordable prices. Sure, those jobs in the auto industry, steel factory, etc., have dried up to a large degree, but there are a lot of other opportunities for people willing to not blindly enter college expecting a job regardless of their degree. There are many fields in high demand. My younger son - they had more companies looking to hire students than there were students in that major (and it was only a 2 year degree - quite affordable.) The job he landed wasn't just given to him - he worked his ass off at college so that he could get a good job - the cream of the crop of available companies to work for. Within a couple weeks - a month before graduation - he had no less than half a dozen job offers.

In summary - why have kids? Well, if you're going to raise kids to be lazy and ignorant, there really isn't a point. (Well, except that the kids who aren't lazy and ignorant will have someone to flip burgers for them at lunch time in future years.) But, if you're willing to work hard with your kids to instill a strong work ethic, and to work hard in school - there are still nearly endless opportunities for such kids. Yep, this paragraph about sums up this thread. :)
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,329
91
91
"I am not trying to be negative, I am trying to be honest.
I have 4 children with my first wife, they range in age from 25 - 16. "

Theres the real world experience I was looking for. . .
So as a parent of 11 and 9, I also have the same fears and knowing what I know now as a believer in peak oil, I also question if I had to do it over again.
In 2000 you still felt their lives would/should be even better than your life, now? I agree I'm not so sure anymore, not necesarily same reasons.

However did people say in the 50's have such a terrible life? All a person truely needs is food clothing and shelter. We have lots of people here who work in Ethiopia and they come back and say they are happy, probably happier than the typical rat raced American if they have the 3 basics. So, that does give me hope for the future, a lot of what we think makes us happy is consumerism, humans for eons have found happiness with a comfy bed, full belly and sense of purpose
 
Last edited:

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,169
3,214
126
"I am not trying to be negative, I am trying to be honest.
I have 4 children with my first wife, they range in age from 25 - 16. "

Theres the real world experience I was looking for. . .
So as a parent of 11 and 9, I also have the same fears and knowing what I know now as a believer in peak oil, I also question if I had to do it over again.
In 2000 you still felt their lives would/should be even better than your life, now? I agree I'm not so sure anymore, not necesarily same reasons.

However did people say in the 50's have such a terrible life? All a person truely needs is food clothing and shelter. We have lots of people here who work in Ethiopia and they come back and say they are happy, probably happier than the typical rat raced American if they have the 3 basics. So, that does give me hope for the future, a lot of what we think makes us happy is consumerism, humans for eons have found happiness with a comfy bed, full belly and sense of purpose
Parents have been worried about their Children's future since we lived in Caves.
 

TheDev

Senior member
Jun 1, 2012
206
0
0
I thought about putting this in off topic, but since the discussion will revolve around the current political situation, I decided to put it here.

If we go back 100, 200, 500, 1000 years we had rampant disease, periodic starvation, wars,,, and people still reproduced.

Today, we live in an oppressive society that is overly regulated.

The US is deep in debt, and has no solution in sight.

Seems every nation and their brother and sister has nuclear weapons.

Cost of living has outpaces wages.

With all of this and more, why would anyone want to bring a child into the world?

Even basic stuff, such as home ownership is a fading dream for most people.

College education cost a fortune.

There was once a time when a person could finish high school, then go to work in a shipyard, steel mill, car factory,, and earn a good living. But those days are far behind us.

Why would I want to bring a child into the world, only to watch that child struggle with college, struggle to buy a home, struggle to find a job,,,.

As humanity progresses, shouldn't things get easier? Shouldn't getting an education get cheaper and easier? Shouldn't owning a home get cheaper and easier? Its as if humanity reached a pinnacle in the 1970s, and it was downhill from there.

Wages have stagnated since the 1990s, while cost of living has skyrocketed, especially the cost of home ownership.
I'm never going to have children. I agree that everything is getting worse. This is the last generation of prosperity.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
I am not trying to be negative, I am trying to be honest.

I have 4 children with my first wife, they range in age from 25 - 16.
My guess is thirty years from now when you're on your death bed you will be quite content that you had your kids and we'll all still be here, still alive and thriving as a world and spending most of our time as we do today bickering about stupid sh*t like tv and playing with our new gadgets because it didn't all go to hell.

As sanders ki said people have worried about their kids since living in caves. The problems we have now are downright pathetic, we are a bunch of little sissies. Back in the day your kids starved to death or your wife died in childbirth or a simple infection killed you. Now we all have shelter, electricity, food and we always will until we kill ourselves in some massive war.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,450
20
81
College financing has become a scam. Legislatures have abandoned the public universities to the loan sharks. The universities have abandoned their missions to seek enrichment for their administrators and faculty at the expense of the students.
This is one of the saddest aspects of higher education. It seems like the inherent and implicit purpose of public colleges and universities is to serve the best interests of the public. However, many of them have essentially become "for-profit non-profits" that serve the interests of administrators and faculty. Whether or not the education they offer has value and makes our nation and its economy a better place is of no concern to them.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,450
20
81
The rich stole the American dream and the workers helped them do it. Vote your interests, not your fears, and certainly not your hatreds.
The wealthy have succeeded in using the nation's economic success to fool the sheeple into believing that they themselves are wealthy and part of an "ownership society". They have done a masterful job and now the majority of the populace seems to believe that the government should not tax and regulate the financial affairs of the rich. The result has been an endless parade of Joe the Retarded Plumber types.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,450
20
81
Its really not a question to ask Americans or other Westerners: Population growth in the West is negative, people are having to few kids in the west as it is. The places that should answer that question is the 3rd world where 9 kids is as standard as having 1 or 2 kids are here. And those are the places that are propping up our declining population with immigration, if we really want the population to stabalize and for the environment to last...Then ask the 3rd world why its ok to have 7-10 kids per family when the world is already overpopulated.
Perhaps population explosion isn't an issue in most first-world countries, but it is for the United States. We currently have the world's third highest population and are projected to approach 450 million by 2050. Our mass immigration policies are a larger driver of our population explosion.

Must Watch Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5871651411393887069#
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,450
20
81
It depends if think humanity has a future that is bright or dim. If you believe that some day we will have a Star Trek like utopia then it is the current generations job to suffer through and pop out children who may some day make the technology to get there a reality. If you believe that our future is apocalyptic then you should not have children.
I don't think that humanity will ever attain a Star Trek-like utopia. We just do not have the necessary IQ nor the temperament for it. Look at the savage masses in the Muslim world. Can a species where a religion like that can become prominent given current technology ever advance far beyond where we already are? We also have masses of people with low IQs here in the U.S. Heck, the world's supposedly "greatest nation" cannot even figure out how to provide health care for its people when numerous other nations have already provided concrete examples.

The United States is a Nation of Morons in a world full of morons.

I predict that humanity will eventually blow itself back to the stone ages where it belongs as a result of some sort of religious warfare and/or major global Malthusian crisis. A sentient species cannot maintain wealth and prosperity without it's necessary prerequisite--reason.
 
Last edited:

peonyu

Platinum Member
Mar 12, 2003
2,038
23
81
Perhaps population explosion isn't an issue in most first-world countries, but it is for the United States. We currently have the world's third highest population and are projected to approach 450 million by 2050. Our mass immigration policies are a larger driver of our population explosion.

Must Watch Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5871651411393887069#
The growth in the US is almost entirely from immigration - its artificial growth. Before the 1965 immigration act which allowed mass immigration to begin again [our doors were more or less shut since 1924 to 1965], most estimates pegged the US population @ 250 million by 2050. Of course we are wayyyy past that now, but again we have had mass immigration since 1965 to thank for it. The same goes for the UK and France, both countries have naturally declining populations but they both are seeing gains from immigration.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,294
0
76
I don't think that humanity will ever attain a Star Trek-like utopia. We just do not have the necessary IQ nor the temperament for it. Look at the savage masses in the Muslim world. Can a species where a religion like that can become prominent given current technology ever advance far beyond where we already are? We also have masses of people with low IQs here in the U.S. Heck, the world's supposedly "greatest nation" cannot even figure out how to provide health care for its people when numerous other nations have already provided concrete examples.

The United States is a Nation of Morons in a world full of morons.

I predict that humanity will eventually blow itself back to the stone ages where it belongs as a result of some sort of religious warfare and/or major global Malthusian crisis. A sentient species cannot maintain wealth and prosperity without it's necessary prerequisite--reason.
No idea what you're rambling about. There's never been a better time in human history to be born into the world.

You're pessimism towards humanity is indicative. I don't trust people like you.
 

HeXen

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2009
7,817
30
91
point stands. 7 Billion people is a craptard lot of people. Is there or has there ever been any animal in the world our size/mass that achieved 7 billion? And its growing, the planet only has so much land space while still maintaining plants and animals needed for our own survival. How many could it successfully sustain, keep fed and jobs for future growth once we start to hit over 10 billion? Technology could answer that with a yes, but that would be a faith. I suspect something would have to give, there has to be a balance.

What is also insane is if you consider averaging each humans footprint in waste and consumption, times 7 billion. it blows my mind how our planet manages it. Earth is big sure, but most of the easy habital places are quite filled with people.

http://www.footprintnetwork.org/pt/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Do we fit on the planet?

Today humanity uses the equivalent of 1.5 planets to provide the resources we use and absorb our waste. This means it now takes the Earth one year and six months to regenerate what we use in a year.

Moderate UN scenarios suggest that if current population and consumption trends continue, by the 2030s, we will need the equivalent of two Earths to support us. And of course, we only have one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dissipate

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2004
6,829
0
0
point stands. 7 Billion people is a craptard lot of people. Is there or has there ever been any animal in the world our size/mass that achieved 7 billion? And its growing, the planet only has so much land space while still maintaining plants and animals needed for our own survival. How many could it successfully sustain, keep fed and jobs for future growth once we start to hit over 10 billion? Technology could answer that with a yes, but that would be a faith. I suspect something would have to give, there has to be a balance.

What is also insane is if you consider averaging each humans footprint in waste and consumption, times 7 billion. it blows my mind how our planet manages it. Earth is big sure, but most of the easy habital places are quite filled with people.

http://www.footprintnetwork.org/pt/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Ants have a much larger footprint on the planet in terms of biomass. No one is complaining about all the resources ants use though.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS