Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Successful intelligent couples often decide not to procreate because there is pain in the world or because we are overcrowded. In their hearts these couples believe they are doing the right thing for humanity.
Meanwhile, China has discovered that curtailing reproduction has backfired and they will soon have an aging population with not enough young people in the pool. The one child per couple is a disaster, but at least there is one kid in the picture. However, it seems one kid is not enough! Most of the couples I talk about have ZERO children even though they are well educated and from a higher socioeconomic level.
Why do you think European countries freely admit so many Muslim migrants. They know quite well that without young folks the future is bleak.
What will happen in 100 years if all educated economically successful couples do not have children? What if ALL the kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background?
I've met a few couples who chose not to have kids without any health reasons.
They are either very selfish people, or have (had) a major hidden marital problem.
Successful intelligent couples often decide not to procreate because there is pain in the world or because we are overcrowded. In their hearts these couples believe they are doing the right thing for humanity.
Meanwhile, China has discovered that curtailing reproduction has backfired and they will soon have an aging population with not enough young people in the pool. The one child per couple is a disaster, but at least there is one kid in the picture. However, it seems one kid is not enough! Most of the couples I talk about have ZERO children even though they are well educated and from a higher socioeconomic level.
Why do you think European countries freely admit so many Muslim migrants. They know quite well that without young folks the future is bleak.
What will happen in 100 years if all educated economically successful couples do not have children? What if ALL the kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background?
Well, unless you're some kind of a racist looking to maintain Aryan dominance over the Western world, I really don't care who they are, what religion they believe in, or what they look like. As long as they don't try to change the fundamental fabric of Western civilization.
Here's the thing: China's failure came because of their ancient and disgustingly sexist culture that still places boys far above girls. Therefore, a one-child policy really sucks for a couple who had a girl. Because they still believe that all inheritance, money, land, etc. MUST go to a son, not a daughter. If a wealthy couple has a girl, it means their entire fortune, their business interests, their lands, and all of their holdings will pass to another family -- namely the couple's in-laws.
As a result, the ratio between men and women became uneven -- in fact very skewed. There were far more available men than there were available women. Unfortunately infanticide of daughters was common because, as I said, you needed to have a son. My neighbor spent a lot of time in China back in the 60's and 70's and she talked about how you could find the corpses of girl-babies just lying along the side of the road.
It is their culture, not necessarily their "one child" policy that has caused an aging population to erupt. And let's face it, here in the States, we're facing the same exact problem. If I were to take an educated guess as to why this is happening in many countries, it would be because of WWII. You had nations like China which was devastated and lost a significant portion of their population ... or you had countries like the U.S.A. which, after the war, young soldiers came home and got busy -- if you know what I mean. That's why we call that generation of children, "Baby-boomers." And now, they're all hitting retirement age, and that's a problem because there aren't as many young people as there once was paying into the Social Security kitty.
BUT ... that will pass. Not to sound morbid, of course, but once the baby-boomer generation dies off, things will return to normal, we'll be back on an even keel. It is the same with China.
Now to address your question directly -- the ability to procreate is considered a fundamental right. It's not written anywhere, but because there are no laws or regulations that curtail it, procreation is a right.
SO is NOT having children. No one is going to force a couple to have kids. What's more, not every couple SHOULD have children. I mean, think about it. Should a convicted pedophile have children, hmm? There are abusive parents, neglectful parents, parents who are just plain stupid. I wish FEWER couples would have children so that, just maybe, more responsible and loving parents would have kids and fewer addicts, criminals, welfare queens, jet-setters, and imbecilic parents would have them.
And, the days of an entire family being raised on a single income, heh, that ship has sailed. With both parents in the workforce, a huge number of children are growing up essentially feral. Fewer and fewer parents seem to be in the business of actually raising children and have, instead, given that honor to the internet. The results have been ... shall we say ... less than desirable.
Which means, I suppose, that I'm trying to say that it's about quality not quantity. It's not about filling up the country with barely literate, barely functional kids that grew up with practically no guidance or nurturing from parents. If a couple really doesn't want children, it is monumentally unfair to the children born to those parents, wouldn't you think?
I've met a few couples who chose not to have kids without any health reasons.
They are either very selfish people, or have (had) a major hidden marital problem.
No exceptions.
Sorry.
That's quite a broad generalization.
My husband and I are childless mostly by circumstance. We have been birth control-free for four years and nothing has happened. However, we have discussed doing things like IUI or IVF and it's just not for us. So if we never get pregnant by accident, we are totally happy with it just being the two of us. We have accepted that it likely will never happen without fertility treatments. And we don't want to do fertility treatments.
Does it make us selfish to want to sleep in or fully fund our retirement accounts or go to the movies when we want or a late dinner on a Tuesday? Sure, but that's our life and we don't have to apologize for it or answer to anyone about it.
There are no hidden problems in our marriage and no health issues. We are both very healthy and happy 30 year olds.
Location: Born & Raised DC > Carolinas > Seattle > Denver
9,338 posts, read 7,107,800 times
Reputation: 9487
Key phrase is "are THEY doing the right thing?" None of our opinions matter, as couples decisions are theirs...not ours. They know what's best for them a lot better than we do
Well, unless you're some kind of a racist looking to maintain Aryan dominance over the Western world, I really don't care who they are, what religion they believe in, or what they look like. As long as they don't try to change the fundamental fabric of Western civilization.
This is not about race. This is a philosophical discussion about the consequence to future generations when one segment of the population who is generally well educated and economically successful decides to commit genetic suicide.
Quote:
Sure, there are 7 billion people on the planet, give or take. But for a lot of countries, the problem isn't too many people; it's too few babies. In parts of Europe and Asia, couples aren't having enough babies to keep the population steady.
Some governments have responded by paying people to have kids.
Germany, Japan, Russia, Taiwan — the list goes on and on — none is having enough children to keep population steady.
Even developing countries like Brazil and Iran have seen their birth rates drop.
This can be good for a little while. With a young workforce and fewer babies to take care of, a country can show enormous growth.
But then people start to get old, and governments say uh-oh.
"Who's going to pay the bills? Who's going to pay for pensions?" says Patricia Boling, a political scientist at Purdue.
Here's the thing: China's failure came because of their ancient and disgustingly sexist culture that still places boys far above girls. Therefore, a one-child policy really sucks for a couple who had a girl. Because they still believe that all inheritance, money, land, etc. MUST go to a son, not a daughter.
As a result, the ratio between men and women became uneven -- in fact very skewed. There were far more available men than there were available women. Unfortunately infanticide of daughters was common because, as I said, you needed to have a son. My neighbor spent a lot of time in China back in the 60's and 70's and she talked about how you could find the corpses of girl-babies just lying along the side of the road.
Nice try at deflecting the theme of the thread. Selective abortion is not the issue. Yes. there are more men than women in China-------------but the bigger problem is the lack of young people.
Quote:
BUT ... that will pass. Not to sound morbid, of course, but once the baby-boomer generation dies off, things will return to normal, we'll be back on an even keel. It is the same with China.
Explain that to other nations such as Germany and the Scandinavian countries who are desperate for young people because of a very low fertility rate. They are now importing migrants------------------ some which may end up as terrorists.
Quote:
Now to address your question directly -- the ability to procreate is considered a fundamental right. It's not written anywhere, but because there are no laws or regulations that curtail it, procreation is a right.
SO is NOT having children. No one is going to force a couple to have kids. What's more, not every couple SHOULD have children. I mean, think about it. Should a convicted pedophile have children, hmm? There are abusive parents, neglectful parents, parents who are just plain stupid. I wish FEWER couples would have children so that, just maybe, more responsible and loving parents would have kids and fewer addicts, criminals, welfare queens, jet-setters, and imbecilic parents would have them.
The thread is not about forcing anyone to have or not to have children. The thread is about what will happen to future generations when both you and I are dead. Think about the pro-environment movement who are activists for future generation and not necessarily ours. When "la crème de la crème" of society commits genetic suicide there will be repercussions for future generations.
Quote:
Which means, I suppose, that I'm trying to say that it's about quality not quantity. It's not about filling up the country with barely literate, barely functional kids that grew up with practically no guidance or nurturing from parents. If a couple really doesn't want children, it is monumentally unfair to the children born to those parents, wouldn't you think?
You are contradicting yourself and making my point. Those that elect not to procreate are generally better educated and from higher socioeconomic levels. They have much better tools to raise children than the underclass which continues to reproduce at a fast rate.
Last edited by Julian658; 11-16-2015 at 09:02 AM..
Key phrase is "are THEY doing the right thing?" None of our opinions matter, as couples decisions are theirs...not ours. They know what's best for them a lot better than we do
I have said at nauseam that the discussion is not about individual choices. The discussion has to do about the repercussion of those individual choices for future generations.
I'm one of those who don't plan to have children. I am highly educated and live a good life. Most people who are childless by choice do so because of economic and lifestyle choices. The overpopulation thing is just an add-on, not the main reason.
On a personal level, it might make sense, if you have money. For a society, enough new born are definitely important. The Europeans know that for their welfare state to sustain themselves, they need more young people. Japan will be the first country to demonstrate what it means when half of your population is older than 60. China is smart too. They know that they need more people if they want to build a prosperous society. The thing is, most retirement systems and economic systems are built with the expectation that the pouplation continues to grow. This is essentially a consideration behind immigration policies in north america and europe.
Speaking of the U.S., it is indeed true that more kids of the next generations come from a low socioeconomic background. The problem isn't low birth rate, but the stratification. Rich people, educated people, socially liberal people have a lower birth rate. Religious people, conservatives, immigrants, and people of color have a higher birth rate. Those who are financially independent tend to marry within their class and enjoy their wealth. Those who are dependent have more children who are dependent.
In the future, many young people will have too little to be independent. They also tend to come from backgrounds and cultures that value education much less. Single parenthood, several children, dependence on public assistance, and no future. You will see more protests like those in Mizzou and Yale, probably worse than they are today. The class gap is going to be so big that those at the bottom simply give up on it and expect populist politics to supply oxygen. The society is also going to be cognitively stratified. The poor become less cognitively capable, which limits their employment opportunities and upward mobility. Some of the best jobs in America will hire from a global pool of candidates, leaving behind America's own poor to welfare and campus yelling. And as long as the global talent continues to satisfy corporations' appetite, businesses have little need to support america's own education system and help its own poor. Corporations' diversity today goes heavily toward foreign citizens, than American minorities. While immigrants worked hard to better themselves, america's own spent time protesting and demanding.
Across the top, the rich class will be multinational and multicultural, further alienating the underclass. it's already happening. that's america's future.
I realize this is from page 1, but this is spot on.
Living paycheck to paycheck definitely sucks. Once upon at time I was when still a young, single person. Also my childhood was very similar to what justinbro2002 describes.
That being said, money and economic factors are not the reason for my decision to not produce offspring. I would just be constantly annoyed by the ongoing neediness of children. What is the point of adulthood if you can't reap the rewards of your personal freedom? Becoming a parent means giving up personal freedom for the sake of raising others. Ten to twenty years ago it was an 18 year commitment but now it seems to be a 25 to 30 year commitment in many cases and in extreme cases the children never leave. No thanks!
Thats because the parents allow it. If they would kick their kids out of the house after a certain amount of time then it wouldn't be a problem. Parents have no boundaries. I can tell you that when our youngest is 18, she has two choices, college or move out. If she chooses college thats fine she can live here for a little bit, if not, then under the bridge she goes. Sounds harsh, but I refuse to be halfway through my life and still harboring an adult child in my home. Wont do it. I'll just pack my stuff and move across the country. Ive watched my grandparents **** their retirement years away because of their adult children...they felt sorry for them and enabled them to continue to make poor life choices. The way were raising our kids, we shouldn't have to worry about a thing, but if by some chance one of them or all of them gets wrapped up in the wrong crowd and and starts making poor choices and can't find a way to support themselves, thats isn't my problem, nor will I make it or allow it to become my problem.
As parents, its up to us to provide our kids with a functional homelife without drugs or alcohol and fighting etc. Its up to us to teach them important values and the philosophy of life, how to discern corrupt bad people from good people etc. How to take responsibility for themselves. If by the time their adults and refuse to or can't take the reigns, then thats their problem not ours. We will have done our job and it will be our time to kick back and relax.....thats all there is to it.
No, it's a recipe for disaster. Look at China, Japan, or any of the old Western Europe countries and you'll see the results of this kind of decadence.
I agree! The European countries do not reproduce and now have to import foreigners just to survive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
