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.
Oops! LOL...
everyboy=everybody, for those of you wh haven't already figured it out
Obviously you lost your brain to diaper rash.
"for those of you who haven't..."
Did it again. I need more coffee.
The Church's jurisdiction doesn't apply to non-Catholics. If you were to attempt to enter the Church, you would have to have your marriage blessed, since if, at the time of your marriage, you had planned to exclude children from your marriage.
Further, all those priests, there. They are all childless. The nuns, too. I guess they're a waste of air, too.
Priests in the Latin Rite of the Church, and religious brothers and sisters, aren't married. Therefore, Church teachings regarding marriage don't apply to them.
Unmarried Catholics aren't obligated to marry and have children. In fact, Jesus recommends celibacy for those who are so graced:
Matthew 19:12"For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
Well, I have three kids who will never be in a govt funded school, and I have to pay the taxes anyway. I don't like taxes, and I think Govt needs to have a gastric bypass, but I do like having paved roads and police and firefighters.
The thing I find laughable about this article is the argument that the decision to have or not have children is solely economic. There are many reason why people have children, economic is only one. Now how many kids can be affected by economics...(I only have three)
No argument there.
I blame the parents, who should take charge of their kids education and hold the school's feet to the fire.
I just help pay the bills.
I couldn't agree more that public education should probably be abolished. I sent my four children to private school, but I never thought it a burden to pay for school taxes since I benefitted from a public school education. There's a lot of difference in having been educated in the 40's and 50's and now. PE will never be abolished, but it could use a radical reform--that will probably never happen either.
You owe me a new keyboard - nothing like spewing coffee all over the place....
LOL, too funny
Very true.
"The Church's jurisdiction doesn't apply to non-Catholics. If you were to attempt to enter the Church, you would have to have your marriage blessed, since if, at the time of your marriage, you had planned to exclude children from your marriage."
Don't be silly. There are many childless Catholic couples. Nobody in the church asks them why they are childless. The priest doesn't ask why they are childless and refuse communion if they don't give the right answer.
You're missing the point of this entire discussion, which is about whether childless people should be allowed to vote or whether they are a drain on society.
By the standards of the person who started this thread, every priest and nun should be refused the vote. Think, Aquinasfan, think.
Your church's attitude is irrelevant to anyone not a member of your church. And the church's attitude is irrelevant to how the government of the USA treats childless people.
I was afraid that that line would cause confusion. Obviously, Church law doesn't apply to non-Catholics. However, natural law arguments regarding natural marriage apply to all marriages. Since the arguments put forth in Humanae Vitae are based entirely (to the best of my recollection) on the natural law, the arguments therein apply to all marriages, Catholic or otherwise.
But again, internal Church law (Canon law) only applies to Catholics.
That's it. No Social Security for you!
Anyone who accepts a Social Security check (or medicare benefits for that matter) might be construed by some as getting "support" from the younger generations...I agree with your sentiments - however I still plan on utilizing SS and medicare.
Have you considered foster-adoption?
My wife and I just adopted three beautiful little boys. Ages 4, 2 and 1. They are three brothers. There were no fees involved.
I've thought this for a a fairly long time.
What an idiotic remark! My wife and I are both retired. We have both worked hard all our lives and likewise always paid our taxes. Whenever we purchased a new home we have been stuck with paying real estate taxes to help pay for someone else's child to be given the chance at an education. Looking at the state of today's ill educated kids, it seems we were ripped off.
What a bunch of utter, utter Bravo Sierra . . .
I think what you meant to say was that the government was being nice to us by letting us keep more of the money I earned. The only "refund" I'm getting is of my own money.
"If I hear of one more tax being created, one more liberty taken away, one more law to confine us - For The Children, I'm going to go out and kick one of the little bastards." - Randall O'Toole
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.