[Scotty]

Having a kid for any reason whatsoever would be nothing short of financially catastrophic for me and millions of people around my general income and expense level.

[Mr. Vega]

Interesting that Sandwich doesn't adhere to the orthodox Jewish position that life begins at first breath. No value judgement there, I just find it interesting.

Yeah, you're right Mongoose, it does make a difference after all.

But I still don't think it's a great solution to the problem of an ageing population. It would cause far more problems than it would ever solve. Hell, purely from a pragmatic point of view, how does it help anyone to have a younger population if a large part of that population is unable to support itself and must depend on aid from the state?

While I do support the right to abortion on principle, I have an uneasy feeling about it being exercised irresponsibly.

I always love this particular worry. 'Irresponsible' abortions are largely the fault bad sex ed. Which is pretty much the fault of the same people who then complain about it.

If you think that exhaustion of the Earth's natural resources due to overpopulation is the key long term threat to the human race, so that the only solution is for the human population to come down, then you have to accept that we will have to face a prolonged period of dealing with an aging population. There's no way out of that.

Which is why I can't figure out if Japan is committing suicide or if they're the only developed country that isn't committing suicide. Economic problems that have nothing to do with an aging population aside, maybe they're the only country that is (inadvertently) doing what they need to do to get their resource consumption to a sustainable level in the amount of time they have to do it.

As for the main debate itself, there's no definition of liberty, much less property rights, that doesn't give a woman the right to control the use of her own body. Even if (and that's a big if) there was another life at stake. I have no obligation to donate a kidney to someone who would die without it.

[Mongoose]

Having a kid for any reason whatsoever would be nothing short of financially catastrophic for me and millions of people around my general income and expense level.

See, I feel like so many people who express this particular sentiment are massively selling themselves short.  Yes, having a child is a massive financial commitment.  Yes, your life will be completely different.  But these have been issues that people have been dealing with for as long as civilization has existed (or at the very very least, since the Industrial Revolution if we're limiting things to a modern-ish perspective).  I think of my own grandmother, whose father died when she was still young, and whose mother had to both raise seven children AND manage a family business.  I think of the millions of single parents out there working multiple jobs just to get by.  For better or worse, people are making this work every single day of the year, and they have been for a very long time.  I think just about every parent out there would tell you that there's no such thing as a "perfect time" to have a child; there's always going to be something that comes up.  And yet people make do the best they can.

To be frank, I feel like a lot of the people who express that opinion aren't nearly as troubled by the financial challenges involved in raising a child, but instead by the acknowledgement that being a parent involves making your own prospects and aspirations subservient to another person.

[Luis Dias]

While agreeing 100% with Mongoose there, I still think everyone should wait until they are in their thirties to get kids. You'll be better off. And don't be a lazy ass till that happens.

[General Battuta]

American twentysomethings today have a much bleaker financial outlook than their counterparts last century. It's a rough time for long term planning.

[Scotty]

I make ~$1200/month, of which nearly 70% goes to flat out cost of living expenses (rent, utilities, internet, groceries).  The remaining paltry ~$350 goes to paying off student loans, credit for the months I don't make quite that much (thanks, part-time working!), and car maintenance.  My financial buffer in a given month is maybe +/- $50.  If I get sick for even one day I'm probably in the red that month!

If a kid happened now it would destroy me.  I am 100% sure that this is not a situation unique to me.

[Mr. Vega]

But these have been issues that people have been dealing with for as long as civilization has existed (or at the very very least, since the Industrial Revolution if we're limiting things to a modern-ish perspective). I think of my own grandmother, whose father died when she was still young, and whose mother had to both raise seven children AND manage a family business.  I think of the millions of single parents out there working multiple jobs just to get by.  For better or worse, people are making this work every single day of the year, and they have been for a very long time.  I think just about every parent out there would tell you that there's no such thing as a "perfect time" to have a child; there's always going to be something that comes up.  And yet people make do the best they can.

I noticed you never used the word "should" in here. There's a reason for that.

[NGTM-1R]

The truth is we've financially disincentized having kids pretty heavily. I make a good deal more money than Scotty, but between home loans and my wife's student loans it's doubtful we could afford a child and have any of this stuff paid off before we're seventy-five. We discovered ex post facto we could get a house or have a child; welcome to the American Dream.

[Bobboau]

Interesting that Sandwich doesn't adhere to the orthodox Jewish position that life begins at first breath. No value judgement there, I just find it interesting.

why? he's not orthodox. He's actually Messianic IIRC.

[DarkBasilisk]

Having a kid for any reason whatsoever would be nothing short of financially catastrophic for me and millions of people around my general income and expense level.

See, I feel like so many people who express this particular sentiment are massively selling themselves short.  Yes, having a child is a massive financial commitment.  Yes, your life will be completely different.  But these have been issues that people have been dealing with for as long as civilization has existed (or at the very very least, since the Industrial Revolution if we're limiting things to a modern-ish perspective).  I think of my own grandmother, whose father died when she was still young, and whose mother had to both raise seven children AND manage a family business.  I think of the millions of single parents out there working multiple jobs just to get by.  For better or worse, people are making this work every single day of the year, and they have been for a very long time.  I think just about every parent out there would tell you that there's no such thing as a "perfect time" to have a child; there's always going to be something that comes up.  And yet people make do the best they can.

To be frank, I feel like a lot of the people who express that opinion aren't nearly as troubled by the financial challenges involved in raising a child, but instead by the acknowledgement that being a parent involves making your own prospects and aspirations subservient to another person.

Think we also have to consider the pressures and stresses on the current generation. Have always said "if you tell people with problems 'deal with it', they will, but not in the way you probably want." A lot of people recently have had less of a great time, and been told to just survive and manage on their own. That instills a bit of a mindset of looking after yourself first. And can kinda emphasize with that.

I got through the worst of my personal problems by setting some pretty strong goals for myself. Those goals would more or less be stopped (or highly threatened) from completion if kids. Therefore no kids. I much prefer holding onto the last bits of dreams I was able to keep a grasp on.

[Mikes]

Having a kid for any reason whatsoever would be nothing short of financially catastrophic for me and millions of people around my general income and expense level.

See, I feel like so many people who express this particular sentiment are massively selling themselves short.  Yes, having a child is a massive financial commitment.  Yes, your life will be completely different.  But these have been issues that people have been dealing with for as long as civilization has existed (or at the very very least, since the Industrial Revolution if we're limiting things to a modern-ish perspective).  I think of my own grandmother, whose father died when she was still young, and whose mother had to both raise seven children AND manage a family business.  I think of the millions of single parents out there working multiple jobs just to get by.  For better or worse, people are making this work every single day of the year, and they have been for a very long time.  I think just about every parent out there would tell you that there's no such thing as a "perfect time" to have a child; there's always going to be something that comes up.  And yet people make do the best they can.

To be frank, I feel like a lot of the people who express that opinion aren't nearly as troubled by the financial challenges involved in raising a child, but instead by the acknowledgement that being a parent involves making your own prospects and aspirations subservient to another person.

Ah yeah...  as someone who has to deal with children who were never raised properly by their parents because they never had the time to do THAT as well on top of earning enough money or doing whatever ....  let me tell you ...

... those "neglected" kids become real "bundles of joys" to their teachers and classmates, often lacking even rudimentary social skills or any kind of self discipline.

So yes, anyone can be a parent.

Being a "good" parent however.... you better believe that takes quite a fortune as a basis for everything else, everything else, being first of all, even having enough time to spend with your kid on a day to day basis.

(Instead of working several jobs at the same time without ever being able to even make the attempt to raise your kid properly.)


I.e. Raising a kid doesn't just take money, it also takes huge amounts of time to do it properly. And no, in this instance you really can't exchange one for the other, it needs a large amount of BOTH.

[Sandwich]

Interesting that Sandwich doesn't adhere to the orthodox Jewish position that life begins at first breath. No value judgement there, I just find it interesting.

There's a lot of Orthodox Jewish beliefs I don't adhere to... possibly because I'm not Orthodox Jewish? Personally, I feel like Orthodox Judaism has placed so many precautionary rules and regulations around the original (Biblical) laws and commandments* that they've tied themselves up in knots - but that's just me and my beliefs.

* Eg: "Don't boil a kid (baby goat-kid, not human-kid) in its mother's milk," (which was a pagan ritualistic idol-worship sacrifice in Canaan in Biblical times) has somehow come to mean "Don't eat dairy and meat together, or even within X hours from each other".

Having a kid for any reason whatsoever would be nothing short of financially catastrophic for me and millions of people around my general income and expense level.

See, I feel like so many people who express this particular sentiment are massively selling themselves short.  Yes, having a child is a massive financial commitment.  Yes, your life will be completely different.  But these have been issues that people have been dealing with for as long as civilization has existed (or at the very very least, since the Industrial Revolution if we're limiting things to a modern-ish perspective).  I think of my own grandmother, whose father died when she was still young, and whose mother had to both raise seven children AND manage a family business.  I think of the millions of single parents out there working multiple jobs just to get by.  For better or worse, people are making this work every single day of the year, and they have been for a very long time.  I think just about every parent out there would tell you that there's no such thing as a "perfect time" to have a child; there's always going to be something that comes up.  And yet people make do the best they can.

To be frank, I feel like a lot of the people who express that opinion aren't nearly as troubled by the financial challenges involved in raising a child, but instead by the acknowledgement that being a parent involves making your own prospects and aspirations subservient to another person.

Yes, as a father of 3 daughters (all of whom were, shall we say, surprises - not mistakes!), I agree with and can attest to this 100%.

I make ~$1200/month, of which nearly 70% goes to flat out cost of living expenses (rent, utilities, internet, groceries).  The remaining paltry ~$350 goes to paying off student loans, credit for the months I don't make quite that much (thanks, part-time working!), and car maintenance.  My financial buffer in a given month is maybe +/- $50.  If I get sick for even one day I'm probably in the red that month!

If a kid happened now it would destroy me.  I am 100% sure that this is not a situation unique to me.

That's about what I was making when I first got married. As time went on, I found myself with increased expenses, and thus ended up with the motivation to get off my butt and find a better/another source of income. Also, there's reasons the average wage goes up as you get older.

[General Battuta]

That's about what I was making when I first got married. As time went on, I found myself with increased expenses, and thus ended up with the motivation to get off my butt and find a better/another source of income. Also, there's reasons the average wage goes up as you get older.

You are not speaking from a position of purchasing power parity here at all. I don't know how old you are and I'm guessing you live in another country. $1200 a month is poverty in the US today, and in some areas it's so bad the only solution is 'leave the area'.

[Bobboau]

That very much depends on where you live and what your circumstances are. If it wasn't "leave the area" would not be any sort of solution.

[General Battuta]

Yeah, that's my...my point?

I guess I see what you're saying. I'm saying it's poverty everywhere and in some areas it's damnably poor, you couldn't even pay rent (or scrape together the fees to get a lease).

[Bobboau]

You could own a house with that in Fayetteville IL, and that's just assuming single (or combined) income.

are we talking past each other?

[General Battuta]

I think so.

[Scotty]

You could own a house with that in Fayetteville IL, and that's just assuming single (or combined) income.

are we talking past each other?

I'm betting I could "own a house" in the sense that my mortgage payment would not be $1200 a month.  However, that doesn't really tell the whole story!  Typically, in order to be a stable, sustainable living situation mortgage/rent should be about ~30% of monthly income, at least here in the US.  Any more than that, and the money has to come out of other, equally vital things like groceries, gas, utilities, car payments/maintenance, home repair/maintenance, clothes, health insurance, etc.

Sandwich, I'm glad that you managed to find better work to improve your income.  Unfortunately, the US job market is utterly ****ed when it comes to that sort of thing at the moment, and it only gets worse the further down the ladder you have to start.  To put it a bit further into perspective, I already have two jobs, and am currently looking for a third because those two don't adequately cover my expenses well enough to build up any sort of savings whatsoever.

[General Battuta]

Millennial income distribution is startlingly worse than the US norm and I'm not sure if that's just an artifact of youth/early career or if it's yet more evidence **** got ****ed up deeply.

[Bobboau]

what I was referring to was the fact that in many parts of the country there are houses for less than $60k At current rates you can get an $60k FHA loan with only like $2k down for about $300/month. assuming $1200/month take home pay that would leave you with $900/mo. I spend about $200/mo on utilities, and I live in about the most expensive place in the country, but lets assume that, so now you are at $700/mo = $175/week which you can assume $75 for food, $25 for gas, so you still have $75/week left over. it's certainly not the lap of luxury, but it's livable, especially if you are living with someone with a comparable income. and it leaves you with enough to pay for classes at a community collage, which can get you half way to a bachelors degree and when you are done with that you don't have student loans.