Is Being Childfree Selfish? Debating Time Magazine's Touchy New Issue (applied, religion)

[Amy1190]

I wouldn't want to bring a child into this world either. You can try to teach them morals and good behavior, but what's out there now is crap in teens of how people in general out, our culture (or lack thereof) and how the world is a cold and uncaring place.

I also want to be the end of the line. Although I have many half brothers, I am the only child of my mother and father's dysfunctional and short-lived marriage and was born with a whole host of problems both physical and mental. Not in a million years would I be selfish enough to risk passing those down, so that another human being can go through what I went through.

When I die, that will be the end. I will not live on in any offspring and that's how I want it. In my case, "selfish" would have been doing what my dad did and having multiple children with 4 different wives, then disappearing from their lives.

[aliss2]

Originally Posted by Bmachina

Child-free by choice, yet I pay taxes and pay for school levees to support other people's children. I also pay more taxes, while they get tax breaks for pumping out more kids.

Now, I'm one of those parents who thinks it is not selfish to remain child-free, after all, why should anyone be a parent if they don't want to?

But occasionally, child-free people being annoyed at paying school tax and other taxes used for parents/school/whatever. And I have to wonder, why are some of you so annoyed by that? You did go to school, correct? You (and I) benefited from school taxes greatly, as we all generally have a basic K-12 education (I assume). So, what is the issue with those tax breaks?

You can remain child-free, but the only reason you exist is because some woman back 20-40+ whatever years ago decided not to. You have a basic education because others, parents or child-free, payed into school taxes.

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Bmachina

Child-free by choice, yet I pay taxes and pay for school levees to support other people's children. I also pay more taxes, while they get tax breaks for pumping out more kids.

The financial penalties we have, compared to the benefits people get for having larger litters of children is very unbalanced.

the fact that anyone can call a childless person "selfish" is a total insult. We are paying for your offspring in more ways than one. Children are a drain on family, environment and community "resources" no matter how you look at it. It doesn't mean children are "evil", its just a financial fact.

It takes some real balls to accuse childless people who are quietly minding their own business and taking care of themselves, "selfish." Next time you want to do that, feel free to pay me back my higher taxes that you collected as a benefit from having your kids.

While I agree it's wrong for anyone to charge the child free with being selfish, what we all pay out isn't equal regardless. My kids will not be attending public schools even tho I'll pay out, but the costs society will incur if you become a senior citizen will far out match the portion of your property taxes (if you own a home and if you own a home in a good school district) that go towards schools.

[julian17033]

Originally Posted by aliss2

Now, I'm one of those parents who thinks it is not selfish to remain child-free, after all, why should anyone be a parent if they don't want to?

But occasionally, child-free people being annoyed at paying school tax and other taxes used for parents/school/whatever. And I have to wonder, why are some of you so annoyed by that? You did go to school, correct? You (and I) benefited from school taxes greatly, as we all generally have a basic K-12 education (I assume). So, what is the issue with those tax breaks?

You can remain child-free, but the only reason you exist is because some woman back 20-40+ whatever years ago decided not to. You have a basic education because others, parents or child-free, payed into school taxes.

Whereas what your saying might be true in many cases, it is not in my case.

I went from Kindergarten through the 12th grade in private schools that received no funding from anyone in the public sector.

I'm also child free with my wife of 22 years.

Not all of us benefited or suffered by the hand of public education.
I consider paying school taxes like paying extortion money so children don't grow up and become leeches to the system concerning welfare even though many end up being just that.

And concerning being alive due to the choice my biological mother made; I had no choice in the matter, I was not consulted prior to birth. If I had been, the result would have been not to be born into a world of debauchery, disease, filth, moral bankruptcy and being witness to the overall rapid decline of western civilization.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Corbin_Dallas

Why anyone would bring a child into this horrible world is beyond me. Fact is, those who have children are the selfish ones. They have children for selfish reasons. Period.

I'm not sure about the first sentence, but I've never heard a non-selfish reason for having children:
1) I want to be a parent
2) I want to experience childbirth
3) I want a family
4) I want someone to care for and nurture and see grow
5) I just feel it is something I'm meant to do
6) I don't want to be alone in my old age
7) They think they could be good parents and raise good children and the world needs more good people
etc.

Nothing wrong with any of those inherently, but it is hard to see that they are not selfish.

[L0ve]

Originally Posted by aliss2

Now, I'm one of those parents who thinks it is not selfish to remain child-free, after all, why should anyone be a parent if they don't want to?

But occasionally, child-free people being annoyed at paying school tax and other taxes used for parents/school/whatever. And I have to wonder, why are some of you so annoyed by that? You did go to school, correct? You (and I) benefited from school taxes greatly, as we all generally have a basic K-12 education (I assume). So, what is the issue with those tax breaks?

You can remain child-free, but the only reason you exist is because some woman back 20-40+ whatever years ago decided not to. You have a basic education because others, parents or child-free, payed into school taxes.

Don't get me wrong; I am not against paying for public schools, because I want to live in a well-educated, literate society. I was raised by public educators, and attended private schools. What I am saying, is do not call me selfish when I am paying for your kids and your tax breaks.

[Amy1190]

I don't mind paying tax for schools, etc. I want to live in a society where all people have access to quality education as it benefits us all in the long run. If anything, I would like to see more public funds invested in education, especially for poorer kids who need more in the way of assistance.

[Annuvin]

Originally Posted by sponger42

Of course it is a selfish decision. It's a good decision, but it is also made in your own self-interest, and therefore "selfish".

The term selfish means placing my own self-interest above that of everyone else. If I have no kids, who is "everyone else" that I am placing my own self interest over? Who exactly does our choice not to have kids affect outside of my wife and I?

That's right: Nobody.

In the case of you who has kids, you are putting your self-interest to create another human in your image over the concern of an overpopulated planet with dwindling resources and often inadequate food supplies. On a first-world level, your child is also going to inherit your debts, a bleak retirement picture and a world that likely will not be able to produce enough resources to sustain the current population's standard of living at the levels we currently enjoy today. All of this just so your "family name" can live on in some sort of genetic/patriarchal immortality, providing your child makes the same selfish decision you did.

Who was the selfish one again?

As for playing God, you are creating life by producing offspring. In most religions, that is the primary essence of God's power - not turning said children into "pillars of salt" when they misbehave.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Annuvin

If I have no kids, who is "everyone else" that I am placing my own self interest over? Who exactly does our choice not to have kids affect outside of my wife and I?

Society and the planet. The child, if it existed, would be utilizing finite resources. Not saying that is an inherently bad thing, but having offspring does not occur within a small bubble of immediate family only. Most things don't.

[sponger42]

Originally Posted by Corbin_Dallas

Why anyone would bring a child into this horrible world is beyond me. Fact is, those who have children are the selfish ones. They have children for selfish reasons. Period.

One of the often-repeated arguments that bearing children can be selfish, is the idea stated above. However, I assume that anyone who has not chosen to end their life is enjoying living more than they'd enjoy being dead. Therefore, wouldn't any child also enjoy being alive more than being dead, and invalidate this argument?

Originally Posted by Bmachina

Child-free by choice, yet I pay taxes and pay for school levees to support other people's children. I also pay more taxes, while they get tax breaks for pumping out more kids.

The way social security and medicare (or the social support system du jour, or even the basic economy) are structured is for those of working age to support the very young and the very old consumers who cannot work. When you pay in to social security, you aren't banking up money for 40 years down the road when you hit retirement age, you were supporting the elderly of that time. If the population ages and fewer young workers pay into the system, these social programs will be cut back or fail.

The same is true of the overall economy; if the flow of new workers is suddenly cut off by a dramatic drop in birth rates, the economy will collapse and all your investments and savings will become meaningless, witness [the less extreme case of] Japan's economic stagnation which is primarily due to their low birth rate.

Therefore, you should recognize that the people who choose to have children are performing the basic task required for society to function. Having kids is akin to maintaining roads or other essential infrastructure. It's just as silly to complain about school taxes that help maintain the workforce as it is to complain about gas taxes that help maintain your street.

The financial penalties we have, compared to the benefits people get for having larger litters of children is very unbalanced.

This is premise totally false, and easily disproved by fact. The federal tax break for a dependent is $3800. Assuming a tax bracket of 25%, that's a financial "benefit" of $950 per year or about $80/month. The appoximate monthly additional cost to a household for a child (aged 0 through 17) has been determined by the USDA to be approximately $1500/month, meaning that child-rearing families are saddled with the same school taxes as you, plus an additional non-offset expense of $1420 per month per child. State tax breaks reduce this number only slightly.

Now, the USDA makes some pretty libertine assumptions (80K for college, significant increase in housing costs) which I somewhat disagree with. So I've calculated a more realistic number of about $620 in non-offset costs for the first child, $450 for the second, and so on (due to the abiilty to re-use clothing, the assumption that your dwelling is of a fixed size, etc.)

However, the fact of the matter is that childbearing couples bear a very significant financial burden while child-free couples do not. Since society would cease to exist if childbearing couples refused this burden, it is clear that--intentional or not--those who bear children provide a benefit to others at great personal cost to themselves. See my previous post on whether this can be considered selfless or not. (it can, but only if the parents intention is to raise a productive member of society)

It takes some real balls to accuse childless people who are quietly minding their own business and taking care of themselves, "selfish." Next time you want to do that, feel free to pay me back my higher taxes that you collected as a benefit from having your kids.

So would you then be willing to contribute the ~620/month X 2.1 kids/couple(minimum required for stable population) / 2 (since I assume you are filing taxes separately) = $651 for the service parents provide of continuing to produce workers who create the economy on which you depend?

Amazingly--because I agree that the world is overpopulated, or at least nearing capacity--the uneven distribution of population and wealth has already created several 1st-world countries where economic pressure (high housing prices, high education requirements) has forced people to have children at below the population replacement rate (Japan, Singapore, Taiwan). Because of the basic economic statuates I've stated above, the governments of these countries have already taken steps to ease the burden on parents by providing much higher benefits than the United States does, in an attempt to raise the birth rate before the negative population growth damages the economy.

Now, I personally think a better solution is to accept more immigrants from overpopulated contries rather than provide incentives to increase the birth rate, but that's a different debate.

Originally Posted by Annuvin

As for playing God, you are creating life by producing offspring. In most religions, that is the primary essence of God's power - not turning said children into "pillars of salt" when they misbehave.

I don't even know where to begin. Wasn't it God[s] that gave humans and animals the power to create life? Are flies also playing God when they lay larvae in an old slab of meat?