Why on earth are some people still having kids now?

HRE wrote:

If you lived in the British Isles in 950 AD you had to worry that Vikings would come, carry off your crops, livestock, and wife, then kill you. If you lived in Central Europe a couple centuries or so later the same was the case but with Mongols rather than Vikings. As recently as the very late 19th Century you could never be sure you weren't soon to die in an outbreak of typhus or cholera. Life probably has never been safer than it is today, which is not to say it's risk free.

The big difference is that people in those times had no choice. There was no reliable birth control at that time.

I feel like my life is a lot better, fuller and more meaningful, because of the fact that I had kids. It's been a lot harder, more expensive and has required work. But I don't regret it. I'd do it all over again. My kids are teenagers now and they're great kids. If they weren't maybe I'd feel differently. But I'm happy with the choice.

Sometimes the harder path, is the best path. For me, it has been.

Babies are still being born on earth because they can't birth them on Mars yet.

30 year old guy wrote:

HRE wrote:

If you lived in the British Isles in 950 AD you had to worry that Vikings would come, carry off your crops, livestock, and wife, then kill you. If you lived in Central Europe a couple centuries or so later the same was the case but with Mongols rather than Vikings. As recently as the very late 19th Century you could never be sure you weren't soon to die in an outbreak of typhus or cholera. Life probably has never been safer than it is today, which is not to say it's risk free.

The big difference is that people in those times had no choice. There was no reliable birth control at that time.

There was always infanticide.

If we want the human race to go on past the next 100 years people have to have kids.

And yes, I love being part of a family. We had two kids so we are not expanding the population by doing so seeing as the two of us will pass on.

People that don’t want kids, don’t want to be bothered. It is pretty much the definition of selfishness. As I said before that’s fine. We are on an anonymous message board. Be honest.

OP,

Many feel the same way you do.

I hate kids and they hate me so never had a desire.

Don’t listen to these boomer idiots who paid $20,000 for a house and made the same salary 50 yrs ago that we get now. Everything costs more now.

And for those in our demographic, everyone I know that has an ugly kid or two got an inheritance or giant sum of money from one or both sets of parents. Most in CA also got a giant down payment for a home in a nice area like Irvine. It is not easy, that’s why you see so many 35 yr olds having their first kid. Unless maybe you live in some armpit like Ohio then maybe the game changes.

People with kids are bored. Anyone with any kind of vibrant life has no desire. Same with dogs. Both are expensive and provide nothing useful.

You sound like a sensible guy. Marry someone who has a job.

MelRnr wrote:

One can always make excuses not to have kids. When I'm making more money, when we have a bigger house, when we have more time, etc. I had the same thoughts way back. But once you and your wife have a child, you just seem to make it work out. It never seems like the right time, but actually any time can be the right time.

As far as specifically now, what better time than when we're still mostly working from home and don't have to spent time commuting.

Absolutely true. You make it work. I had my first kid in 1985 making $30k (~$74K in today's dollars, sound familiar?). My wife worked. I bought a 1150 SQ ft condo the next year (Silicon Valley - NOT inexpensive).

Had another kid the year after that. Not saying it will be for you as it 2as for my generation. I will say that I f',ING hit the lottery on when I came into the professional workforce and started accruing assets. I graduated and started working in 1983. Go look at a historical chart of the Dow Jones from, say 1915 to now. Sheeeeit, I lucked out.

You sound like a smart guy, so check out the book called Ten Global Trends Every Smart Person Should Know by Ronald Bailey and Marian Tupy. It provides evidence to prove that there is no time in human history greater to be alive than right now, as technological advances have improved human health the environment and standard of living across the globe.

You must be terrible at managing your time and money. You must work way to many hours for 75k to only have a few free hours per week on Sunday night. To only have free hours on Sunday night is ridiculous. Having offspring is a pretty normal thing. Some people prioritize it.

Humans are naturally programmed to have children. It's not an accomplishment to have a child although a lot of people act as if it is for validation the reason they have the child is selfish--to make their own life better or more fulfilling first and foremost. Sure, some do a great job of raising their children--but that's their duty anyways. The many who don't raise their children well and have bad genes are the ones who make adequate parents look so good because there's a litany of incompetent and selfish parents. Unfortunately these are the demographic which is having the most children while the higher value people of society can't reproduce at the same eate because they're outnumbered substantially.

CarlyRaeJepsensMalort wrote:

inb4 flagpole chimes in telling you you're throwing that money away. something something you could get a better return in the market, etc. also how much extra are we talking? unless it's like multiple thousands i still am not seeing how the math adds up.

1) Well, you didn't get in before me, and you were wrong anyway. I have 2 children who are now adults. I am all for people who want children to have children.

2) I am unclear what you are asking there, but it APPEARS you are not sure kids cost that much money? If that's the case, think again, sister. They start costing before they are even born...Dr. visits, home preparation, prenatal vitamins, etc. Then either one stays home for a while and loses income or you pay for day care. Then, you now have another mouth to feed, so food costs, diapers, clothes that don't last long because kids grow quickly, a bigger house, a bigger car, health insurance costs more, you spend more on water, on electricity, costs associated with k-12 school, a third car when they are old enough to drive, pay to play, sports equipment and fees, instrument for band that may or may not be a requirement (my daughter had a $10,000 clarinet that was my wife's, and we bought our son a $3,000 trumpet...and neither of them were in marching band because they ran cross country), fence the yard because you're getting a dog, pay for family vacations, orthodontist, and then there's COLLEGE. We did very well with both of our kids with regard to cost due to some crazy financial aid from one elite college and the combination of athletic and academic scholarship from another...all told for both kids for college, we spent about $70,000 total (and that's VERY LOW these days), not including trips to see them or bring them back home as both were in out-of-state colleges. My wife was a stay-at-home mom for 15 years...a loss EASILY of $900,000 in income if not more, and if we had invested all of that plus all the money we spent on the kids instead of having kids, Jeebus, I'd be ready to buy my own private island by now.

3) So, kids are very expensive...BUT if they are a life priority, you make it happen. We wanted kids. We made it happen.

Reason4U wrote:

Having kids is the most basic human thing. It's instinct. Any idiot can do it and it is not some "noble sacrifice"

But why would a man and women (at this day and age of over-population and climate change and lack of resources) choose to have more than 2 biological kids? It is actually more selfish to procreate and have all these extra kids....I mean talk about adding to your carbon footprint!

More people should adopt. They like to adopt rescue dogs. Why not adopt more kids if you want more than 2?

I agree that having kids is not a "noble" sacrifice. It IS in one way a sacrifice, because you can be MUCH wealthier if you never have kids, but it's not noble. If you ONLY adopt, there is an element of nobility there, but there is also a bit of selfishness. People WANT to have children, they don't (individuals don't need to, but the species needs some to) NEED children. SOME people want children so they have someone who will love them and take care of them when they are older. I have never thought that way. I had love to GIVE, so I wanted children. Besides, there is no better way to learn about humans than to have one and watch him/her grow up.

30 year old guy wrote:

Finances - how the hell do you afford kids? I'm making more ($75K/year) than most people my age, and I feel like I'm barely scraping by in a moderate cost of living area. My laptop is 10 years old, my car has 150,000 miles on it, my house is less than 1100 square feet, and my retirement savings is close to nonexistent.

Time - who has the time or energy for kids? I don't have a long commute, rarely work more than 40 hours a week, don't have a manual labor job, and haven't run over 40 MPW since college. Sunday evenings are my only consistently free times, and then it's back to work on Monday before I know it. I'm tired more often than not, and every day is packed with home/car maintenance, cooking, grocery shopping, laundry, cleaning, and so on.

This is why you have kids with a woman. She does those things and you share the work of raising kids/making money.

kids suck balls wrote:

OP,

Many feel the same way you do.

I hate kids and they hate me so never had a desire.

Don’t listen to these boomer idiots who paid $20,000 for a house and made the same salary 50 yrs ago that we get now. Everything costs more now.

And for those in our demographic, everyone I know that has an ugly kid or two got an inheritance or giant sum of money from one or both sets of parents. Most in CA also got a giant down payment for a home in a nice area like Irvine. It is not easy, that’s why you see so many 35 yr olds having their first kid. Unless maybe you live in some armpit like Ohio then maybe the game changes.

Hmm...seems like perhaps you are trying to insinuate all of this about me, so...

1) I'm no Boomer. Gen X, brother!

2) And no, I did not pay $20,000 for my house, and 50 years ago I was 5 years old, so I was making nothing. Actually though, when I bought my house I was making a decent amount less than the OP. Also, I know a 25-year-old guy who is making $60,000, and he's doing great...investing for his future, owns his car outright, doing just fine. He is renting, but he is saving up for a big down payment on a house, and he's got $50,000 saved already in just 3 years out of college.

3) Don't make excuses. Decide what you want and make a plan. It's not that hard.

I won’t address all the OP’s concerns, but I don’t think most of this post squares with reality. I’m 42, own my own business that requires a ton of my time, have an active social life, this week I will run 66 miles (after this morning’s run) and I have a wife and 4 kids that I still have plenty of time to hang with after all that.

As many have said, it’s never the “right time” if you’re looking for all the pieces to fall into place for some artificial sweet spot for starting a family. Time management and proper management of one’s finances can pretty much make up for most adverse circumstances.

It comes down to desire more than anything else. If you desire to have a family, you do whatever it takes to make that feasible. More money makes it easier, but not having “enough money” doesn’t generally prevent people from making it work. It is ok if you don’t want a family, but if time and money are the main concerns, I think you’d be surprised how much a few adjustments to lifestyle can impact what is possible.

Flag dawg, i was basically just making a joke that i expected you to criticize the OP for paying extra principal on his mortgage instead of throwing that extra money into VTSAX or similar instead. i thought that was pretty standard flagpole financial advice. i.e., since the interest rate on OPs mortgage is almost certainly lower than the average rate of return on the s&p, it makes more sense to put your money there instead of paying down the low interest mortgage.

but anyway, thanks for the long-winded paragraph about the cost of kids. i know that stuff. my wife and i are already paying out the nose for ultrasounds and such since we both have sh.t insurance. but we'll be okay. also i'm a man my name is just a fun portmanteau of a famous pop star and infamous liquor from chicago.

You need to get our more