Rantings and tirades of a frustrated economist.
Meh. If you dont spoil them, give them what they need, a little of what they want, and love, they are worth it.Until you have them, you dont understand. They cant be analyzed as a balance sheet item.
I totally agree Captain. In fact this very point was actually my first blog post.http://landsharkattacks.blogspot.com/2012/05/if-you-cant-feed-em-dont-breed-em.htmlI've said it before and I'll say it again, if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em.
Well, respectfully, here's my analysis:(40% chance of divorce)x($1700/month)x(12 months)x(14 years)=$285,600
I think Americans have heard you. Fertility rates are down across all classes and all ethnic groups in the States.
In America, you can't put them to work, so your analysis has some merit here. But this isn't true everywhere. Indeed, many of the costs surrounding having children are costs imposed by the state. You have to send them off to prison/school so those pathetic excuses for teachers can pretend to work.What probably turns them into a net cost is the destruction of the family's capital goods over recent generations. Farmers and other traditional small businesses folk- folk that used to apprentice young people if they didn't have any of their own- these people likely viewed children as an asset rather than the sinkhole of funds they are for the average office worker with a mortgage.
Cap'n, I'm going to have to go with Rush and Walter Williams. Children are not the chief cause of poverty. Rather, from a political viewpoint, socialism and government overaction are the chief cause of poverty, and from a societal viewpoint, what causes poverty is not parenting, but rather unwed parenting.In economic terms, lack of a safety net and specialization. Moreover, per capita really needs to be couched in the fact that if you're not sending your kids to elite daycares and schools and keeping them fashionably attired in the latest threads, raising kids is really not that expensive. For that matter, as Medicare and Social Security collapse, and they will, it's worth arguing that not having kids can be downright disastrous. Just ask the Japanese, who are developing robots for elder care because of their failure to have kids.
The Captain is quite right in that if you don't have the income children will make your situation worse. The upside, however is if you truly can afford to have children. I suppose we could have had a larger house, but what we could afford was more than adequate as every one of our children had their own room. We of course had to counter the leftist propaganda which was disseminated in the public school system but since our children thought that their teachers were idiots, that was easy. Now that our children are grown and responsible adults in their own right, they do help us out a lot. Sometimes it's little things, sometimes it bigger ticket items. My son gave me his motorcycle when he wanted to bigger one, and to the horror of my wife, and at 65, I'm actually learning how to ride for the very first time in my life. There are many other things that our children do for us, and although we ask for none of it, they want to help us out nevertheless. Our children watched as we helped our parents and now that my wife and I are getting on in years they are helping us in turn.The desire for children is ingrained and it is deep. I blame Oh-Bozzo the Clown and other whack job politicians for destroying people's abilities to actually afford children of their own.
I don't care if you have kids, so long as I don't have to help pay for them and they don't cause trouble for me. In other words, the parent/kid isn't sucking off the public tit and/or breaking laws!!
@Fred Watch the video again and pay attention.
So you can be outbred? Raise your brood right and strike at the future.
Post a Comment