Here ya go...
Posted on 03/06/2006 7:12:09 AM PST by FreedomSurge
Economically, every society needs children.
Children are the producers of the future This means that children are in a sense a necessary economic good. A society that does not produce enough children, or that cannot produce enough children who grow into economically productive adults, is doomed to poverty.
Every long-term investment we make, whether in the private or public sector, is predicated on the idea that there will be a future generation which will actually produce a return. It doesn't matter what economic or political system rules the present, it will need children to secure its future. Even the most self-centered individual would eventual realize that if the next generation cannot produce, his own welfare will suffer.
So, collectively we all need children and benefit when they grow into productive adults, but the cost of raising children is increasingly being borne by fewer and fewer in the general population.
Childless adults are rapidly becoming economic free riders on the backs of parents.
In the pre-industrial era, children almost always contributed to the economic success of the family directly. Agriculture depended heavily on the labor of children, and children brought further benefits by extending support networks via marriages. In the industrial era, however, children began to contribute less and less while consuming more and more. Nowadays, children usually return very little if any economic benefit to the parents.
Being a parent costs one economically. Although we socialize some cost, such as education, parents pay most of the cost of raising a child. Parents also lose out in non-monetary ways such as in a loss of flexibility in when and where they work. If an individual sets out to maximize his lifetime income, avoiding having children would be step one.
In our atomized society, children do not provide a boost in status, networking or security that offsets their very real cost. I think this economic loss may explain why many people shy away from having children. Many people simply do not want the loss of status that will come from having their disposable income consumed by rug rats.
Like all free-rider situations, this one will eventually cause a collapse that hurts everyone. As the percentage of parents in the population shrinks, the cost of being a parent will rise. More and more people will be tempted to conserve their own resources and let someone else shoulder the burden of creating the next generation. Eventually, the society will either produce too few children or, probably more likely, will not produce enough children with the skills and habits needed to carry on the economy
There is already grousing in some blue zones by the childless that they shouldn't have to subsidize the "breeders'" children. How long before child-hostile places like San Francisco become the norm?
I'm not sure how to address this problem from a public-policy perspective, but the next time you run into someone bragging because he chose not to have children, call him a parasite and see how it works out.
LOL...probably!
We've kindof come to mutural agreement that FreedomSurge can't think...
"This has got to be the dumbest thread EVER posted on FR. "
It ranks right up there, for sure. This kind of thread...the ones that start with an incredibly stupid opening statement...are the meat and potatoes of Free Republic. They're a gathering point for all the philosophies represented by Freepers. It is in these threads where we find out who to pay attention to when they write and who to simply ignore.
We need these threads to tell the wheat from the chaff.
I never called people who choose not to have children selfish. I do believe that their time horizons for making decisions tend to be short. I believe the time horizons for those who have children is much longer.
I also believe that those who make decisions based on longer time horizons make better decisions and consider the effects of their decisions much more fully.
Heh... Many many children result from decisions made on ~very short~ time horizons.
This whole debate is a ridiculous red herring.
Oh really? A red herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original topic. So, if this is a red herring, then what is the original topic?
Very true. However, once the child is born do the majority of parents still make most of their decisions based on short term time frames? If you are taking care of a child the time frame has to be shifted forward. And if you love your child it has to be shifted very much to the future.
Based on your comment I will change my comment to "Only those who are caring for children or have cared for children should be allowed to vote"
The red herring, as I see it, is that people without children don't care about the future of the country, and therefore don't deserve a vote. That's a fallacy if I ever heard one. If my use of the term 'red herring' distracts you from using your head to really think through the ramifications of the idiotic policy you've offered to us for consideration, please ignore it.
Don't think for one instant that you can or should want to continue to tax people whom you don't wish to give a vote. It's ridiculous. We fought a war about that once ;~D
You got me. In a fit of childless selfishness, I voted for stripmining Yosemite and for the fedGov to give everyone a Ferrari.
We are all concerned about the future, whether we have children or not, what about the PRESENT? What our politicians (not really representatives) do today will affect the present and the future. Should one alive now not have a vote? Do their lives not count?
Some do. Three of the worst decision makers I know (1 couple, 1 single mom) have kids. Nothing about the process of having kids garauntees a positive change (or any change at all) in a person's thinking. Poor decision makers are poor decision makers are poor decision makers, whether or not their loins have borne fruit never really seems to change that.
By the standards you're applying Bill Clinton is a better person than the Pope. Think that through a bit.
Good grief. Aside from the preposterous "logic" that having children is both necessary and sufficient for caring about the future, that would be a disaster politically. If you think the extra-Constitutional stuff that government does "for the children" today is bad, just wait until politicians pander *exclusively* to parents.
I hate coming in late on these threads, when all the obvious weaknesses have already been exposed.
But this one is glaring:
Children (and adults) are no longer expected to produce; lots of multigenerational public pets.
Sort of takes the wind out of the sail of the argument.
If on the other hand, children are fed and housed (but not the adults who profit from them) then this might be a rational statement.
Where's my Ferrari?
Well, you see, I was so shortsighted I forgot to get it in writing...
Economically, we should ban abortion then, right?
Here ya go...
Ooooo.... shiny....
Yes, I am now completely incapable of making a rational decison. Thank goodness I can't vote!
Ok, if that is the red herring, then as I asked you, what is it distracting from? Face it: you used the term improperly. Thus, your argument (if any) has very little merit.
If my use of the term 'red herring' distracts you from using your head to really think through the ramifications of the idiotic policy you've offered to us for consideration, please ignore it.
Yet another problem with your presentation: this is not my argument! I came in on this to simply say that the childless do indeed benefit from those who choose to raise children.
Don't think for one instant that you can or should want to continue to tax people whom you don't wish to give a vote. It's ridiculous. We fought a war about that once.
That was never my argument, and I reject the idea that any law abiding, alive citizen should be denied the vote.
Scourge of God and FreedomSurge are proud...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.