Couples that do not want children. Are they doing the right thing? (Christmas, rating)
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.
As a Bernie Sanders fan I agree with you, but we all know that improving schools does not change the situation at home and the kids still fail. This is an incredibly difficult problem. The per student expense in Washington DC public schools is among the highest in the world with no good results.
I agree with you, my fault. But, nevertheless those in the lower socioeconomic groups tend to have more kids.
Money can't fix everything. In China, rural students from poorer backgrounds are know to perform better often than urban kids. Prestigious universities see a whole lot of students from disadvantaged backgrounds. They didn't receive a handout or admissions preferences. If anything, cards are systemically stacked against them. But they still rise above and shine. There is certainly an admiration of these ambitious and hardworking students who can go against odds. They are also favored in America's best colleges.
It's never really about money. It's about having a full family and two parents. It's about proactive parenting. It's about valuing upward mobility and family stability. It's about valuing marketable education.
As a Bernie Sanders fan I agree with you, but we all know that improving schools does not change the situation at home and the kids still fail. This is an incredibly difficult problem. The per student expense in Washington DC public schools is among the highest in the world with no good results.
I'm a Bernie fan too . No it does not change the situation at home, but not all poor kids come from unsupportive homes. Some, probably most, low income parents really want their kids to move up in the world, they just lack the opportunities and resources to give their kids a leg up. That's why we need make a clear path to college available for everyone and have a strong support system of teachers with high quality education for ALL children. It will give them hope. Also raising wages means parents will have to work less giving them more time for their children to help with school and achieving goals.
In most states, I don't think investing more money is the answer (here in Arizona it is very necessary as the schools can't even afford to pay teachers properly, hence our massive teacher shortage) but rather an overhaul of the curriculum and HOW we teach. Common Core is a good start, but it doesn't go far enough. In the countries with the BEST education systems (Finland, New Zealand, North Korea) the work is much more rigorous than in the US, about 3 years ahead of US students, but they have very little homework and spend less time on studies than we do. We are doing things the wrong way and it shows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
I agree with you, my fault. But, nevertheless those in the lower socioeconomic groups tend to have more kids.
They do, but it has more to do with access to birth control and probably a WANT to have kids, since that is about the only thing they have control over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d
The last time I looked, education is something that's acquired not inherited. Just because Daddy had an Masters degree doesn't mean that Sonny Boy inherits it. DOH!
I think an "educated" person like yourself would know that, so why don't you explain what you really mean in plain English? I think I know what you really mean, but I don't like to assume.
Degrees are not inherited, but if at least one of your parents went to college, you are much more likely to go as well. Kids typically follow in their parents' footsteps in regards to education and career/salary expectations.
1. China ended not just with aging population. China ended with not enough males to create a family and poly female families, with a shared male.
2. USA current birth rate is below reproductive 2.1 child per female. It's 1.7 I believe. At this rate, country population simply can not be sustained and will be declining. Along with health care geared towards maintaining life at any cost. Before you post something smart in response, go visit a dozen of mid level skilled nursing facilities. Also, check what is going on in Europe with "tolerance" towards immigration. Ahh, I forgot. US is actually somehow immune to all this, right? We take only angels... Sorry, my bad.
3. As the result, US population is maintained or increased from outside - by immigration - and by - in numbers - preserving lives. Brave statement "we keep our citizens living longerI I'll suggest to digest after visiting the above mentioned skilled nursing facilities.
4. Moderator cut: Off Topic
5. Ad hoc, over population. Allegedly, Earth population sextupled in only 200 years. Towards mid 19th century it was only - allegedly again - 1 billion. Then it simply exploded - allegedly - somehow magically in the countries that never experienced such explosion before and by far, never had any "improvement in quality of life" to justify such explosion. Either someone turned on some unknown switch to make this happen or, it's a bunch of lies. Yes, go ahead and look up "official" statistics. Official statistics have always been catered to those in power interests and, coincidentally, explosion in human population started AFTER Malthus came up with his theory and it was picked by globalizers to justify population reduction.
I can't believe anyone would care whether someone else has children or not. The sheer Hubris of thinking that's your business is mind-boggling.
My husband and I met in High School and didn't want kids then. Thirty years later, we're both exceedingly happy we never had children. Most people I know with children do very little else but complain about their behavior, the cost of raising them and the ingratitude they experience when their kids become adults. No thank you.
The United States overpopulation problem is extreme, but nobody wants to discuss that. Not only are we importing poverty on a mass scale, most college-educated people nowadays don't reproduce. It's the poor that have endless kids. I'm in academia and most of my colleagues never had children and the younger ones limit it to one kid or none.
Of course they do. Kudos to them, it's very courageous and goes again the (bad) spirit of the times in our day and age when the last fad to date is to have babies, and more babies, even with artificial means, although our dying planet is already overpopulated.
I think what's happening at some college campuses indicate this trend already. We often talk about how we want to educate these young people, especially those from lower socioeconomic backgruonds. Yet the situation is different. Our colleges are increasingly catering to belligerent young people. The cry-bullying has become a phenomenon and is of concern to academic freedom, campus safety, and basic individual expressions. Obama himself has expressed concerns over the speech bullying on campuses that run against the notions of tolerance and critical thinking.
Too often, our administrators, educators, leaders, and politicians fear the crowds. They do not dare stand up to what they believe is right. They allow people to take over, to force the audience to comply with their demands, all in a fashion an adult impatiently tolerates a child. Colleges have become helicopter parents. Students view college as an extension of their childhood, a period when they pursue interests independent from employment prospects and live a life sheltered from real-world concerns and competition. To satisfy students, colleges have built world-class infrastructure, often fancy in a useless way. Sadly, most of these come from the very tuition students pay. In other words, students demand goods and services paid by their loans and future paychecks. But it's that child-like mentality that prevents students from seeing the bigger picture.
People want free education, and after that, employment. They don't want to know how much these things cost. If the cost pushes up to their future, then they demand that the future is paid by tax payers or some magical money. College students today have become more infant-like, sheltered by adults but also much be tolerated for naughty behaviors.
With more jobs automated, the trend will get worse. The childless by choice rich live a life so different from the poor. Colleges pander to their students in competition for tuition dollars that they depend on today. The cognitive stratification is in full swing.
My husband and I are educated, we have one child, want at least one more. We can afford it. I think if a couple doesn't want kids (for any reason) then they shouldn't. I've seen adults who are the product of being an unwanted child, and it's not pleasant to grow up knowing your mom/dad didn't really want you. I have a few friends who are childless by choice. To me, I don't think depriving yourself of children because of the current population is the way to go. I'm fairly certain the people having multiple children who can't afford it and so on aren't thinking the same, so if you want children, have them, if you don't, then don't!
We did not think along those terms. It was all about the environment, fresh water, logging, clean air, etc. And receiving migrants is a humanitarian move as there is no economic incentive at all.
I agree, but kids from well educated families tend to also get a strong education. If only the non-educated reproduce we may end up with a revolution. Whatever we do as a species has repercussions in the future.
My husband and I are educated, we have one child, want at least one more. We can afford it. I think if a couple doesn't want kids (for any reason) then they shouldn't. I've seen adults who are the product of being an unwanted child, and it's not pleasant to grow up knowing your mom/dad didn't really want you. I have a few friends who are childless by choice. To me, I don't think depriving yourself of children because of the current population is the way to go. I'm fairly certain the people having multiple children who can't afford it and so on aren't thinking the same, so if you want children, have them, if you don't, then don't!
I am in a good paying profession; my wife never had to work. We ended up with five children and now many years later as empty nesters we never have a dull moment. Family events are magnificent and ALL my kids are highly educated. I probably spent a fortune sending all my kids to private school and college, but IMHO it was the best decision I ever made.
I have contemporaries that are childless and basically now have no family. Every action we take has consequences down the road.
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.
. No it does not change the situation at home, but not all poor kids come from unsupportive homes. Some, probably most, low income parents really want their kids to move up in the world, they just lack the opportunities and resources to give their kids a leg up. That's why we need make a clear path to college available for everyone and have a strong support system of teachers with high quality education for ALL children. It will give them hope. Also raising wages means parents will have to work less giving them more time for their children to help with school and achieving goals. 
