[Melinator]

The reasons that additional siblings hamper the intellectual growth of children (and particularly middle-borns) are fairly obvious—parental resources are a fixed pie, and children do better when they get more attention (and money).

Same old misdirection. Taxed into penury at all levels of Government, most middle income families cannot afford to give the best of all worlds to more than one or two children. This author's conclusion: have less children.

The Gov't and it's neo-communist limpets will have their thieving hands held out, palms up, when it comes time to force those same children to pay into the "scheme", but heaven forbid they should have to spend some of the money on "tax incentives? (paging George Orwell) on "extra" children. They GUMBINT need that money for booze, drugs, prostitutes, bailing out foreign and domestic "friends", foreign and domestic Wars, parties, travel, welfare state causes - you name it, it's more important than some slave's children.

The fact that the author of this piece does not even touch upon the obscene tax and "service" rates in the U.S. and the obvious affect they have on the ability of U.S. families to raise children, shows extreme incompetence, or deliberate misdirection.

Is it too strong to say I HATE the BASTARDS? Forgive me.

[KfromMich]

The reasons that additional siblings hamper the intellectual growth of children (and particularly middle-borns) are fairly obvious—parental resources are a fixed pie, and children do better when they get more attention (and money

Interesting how this author just jumps to conclusions about siblings hindering intellectual growth. What about the fact that siblings can help each other with homework and younger siblings can learn from the older ones?