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.
One- not every parent hangs onto baby items for years and years in case they have another one. You can't share diapers. There will always been need for more clothes if babies are of opposite sex, different baby essentials like swings and such if one doesnt work for one baby (trust me- we went through four of them before we found the one to calm my colicky son) extra medical costs if one of them has a medical condition that the other doesn't. To think having additional children doesn't cost more is insane! As children age, their requirements change and vary from one another.
And to especially say what you did that I bolded- you are off your rocker if you believe that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens
We have this new and unusual concept in our family. We call it "sharing"
Do two cost more than one? Sure. Do two cost twice as much? Not even close. Besides two without Iphones at 14 are better than one with two Iphones. It is very easy to make adjustments to afford more kids if you want more kids. Different people have different definitions of what a person
"needs" to be able to afford to have a child or children. If you boil it down to just real actual "needs" the average american family can support about 25 children.
I come from a family that includes quite a few geniuses (probably not me). However of all of my siblings, only one brother had one child. Isn't it my reponsibility to give the world a shot at having more genuses who can then solve the ecological problems and otherwise improve life for others?
So, you share diapers? You share clothes if children end up being of the opposite sex? You share extra medical costs if one of them ends up having a medical issue the one doesn't? Not everyone stores their babies stuff for years and years in case they have another baby...
As far as insurance goes, the difference in premiums between a single child and more than one child is negligible--so much so that insurance companies don't care how many kids you have if it's more than one.
I know there's more to it and it does matter in places (double the copays, for instance). Just throwing it out there. Health insurance is not twice as much by any stretch.
No one mentioned that it costs twice as much to have more kids. The fact of the matter is just because you can afford one child doesn't necessarily mean you can afford two or more. That is all.
No one mentioned that it costs twice as much to have more kids. The fact of the matter is just because you can afford one child doesn't necessarily mean you can afford two or more. That is all.
This person did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mortpes
The cost is of course also an issue. Two children are double the cost, and so on.
I apologize, I got mixed up with the several posters saying that two cost a lot more than one. Childcare is the biggest expense, IMO, and if you stay at home it's not an issue. I know not everybody can do that.
As far as insurance goes, the difference in premiums between a single child and more than one child is negligible--so much so that insurance companies don't care how many kids you have if it's more than one.
I know there's more to it and it does matter in places (double the copays, for instance). Just throwing it out there. Health insurance is not twice as much by any stretch.
Actually, our insurance charges the same for kids whether it's one or ten. Now if one has a medical problem, that child will "cost" more in health care, but there's no guarantee that the first one won't be that child. There's also no guarantee that it will always be the same child who "costs" you more, medically.
Actually, our insurance charges the same for kids whether it's one or ten. Now if one has a medical problem, that child will "cost" more in health care, but there's no guarantee that the first one won't be that child. There's also no guarantee that it will always be the same child who "costs" you more, medically.
Interesting. We've always had the option of "single + child" or "family."
I have 4 children and they are all very close. They would be lost without each other. One time when we just had our oldest son, we were told by my husband's friend, "you have to have another child, you really aren't a parent until you have at least 2 kids so they can fight and say, mom so-and-so is looking at me!"
I m one of three and my husband is one of four, and we always said we wanted two. Well.... once the second was a year old, we decided we wanted just one more. So happy to have my 3 kids! They are very close in age and super close. They play hard and fight hard, but at the end of the day, they seek each other out and I keep my fingers crossed that they remain close as adults.
I truly feel that the greatest gifts I gave my kids are their brothers.
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.
