Skip to comments.
Finance biggest deterrent to having children, report says
Guardian Unlimited ^
| 10/4/06
| John Carvel
Posted on 10/04/2006 9:39:29 AM PDT by qam1
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-114 next last
To: Turbopilot
One is not able to teach children values if one cannot keep those children fed, clothed, sheltered, educated, healthy, or safe.
Read the biography of St. Bernadette Soubirous and get back to me, will you?
81
posted on
10/05/2006 7:10:26 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: durasell
or, they can have five or six kids and live on the financial edge -- no travel, no high end education, no financial security for the kids.
False dichotomy. There's another "or" you haven't considered:
Or, they can have five, six, ten, a dozen kids and live very modestly, instilling in their children from day one that they need to pull their own weight, help with things around the house, help with their younger siblings, and take care of each other in general. I would argue that such families are many times healthier and happier than your typical DINK couple or family with one or two kids. Why? Because selfishness is given no quarter in a large family.
82
posted on
10/05/2006 7:19:25 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: durasell
I've seen it in ghettos where decent people go on public assistance just to feed the four or five kids.
Well, there are at least three Freepers on this thread who have 4+ kids. I can't speak for the others, but my family has never been on public assistance of any kind.
83
posted on
10/05/2006 7:21:02 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: Tax-chick
Award-winning posts! I followed your comments all afternoon, and there was one great point after another.
Great, now I'm blushing...
84
posted on
10/05/2006 7:25:55 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: diamond6
"When I got married eight years ago, I did NOT want kids, and if I had to, just one. About a year into the marriage, the biological clock started ticking and the maternal desire began. It got stronger and stronger as time went by."
And some of us wait for that desire to kick in, and it truly never does. Does that mean we should have kids anyway? (Rhetorical question, not a personal one). I didn't think so, myself.
To: Turbopilot
It appears parents are delaying children not so much as a lifestyle choice, but because a rational analysis of the time and money needed to raise them properly shows that they are not yet ready. Yes, when they make reckonings based on what's left to them after half their income is confiscated to take care of the kids of irresponsible layabouts who crank 'em out without bothering to ponder those issues first....
86
posted on
10/05/2006 7:31:31 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: Antoninus
Most Republicans
have never cut a coupon in their lives and consider shopping any place below Neiman-Marcus to be "slumming." Wow, you managed to repurpose a direct quote from DU by deleting only one word. Not bad.
87
posted on
10/05/2006 7:35:45 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: qam1
Finance biggest deterrent to having children, report says This sure doesn't tell the whole story because people with less money tend to have more kids. It would probably be much more accurate to say desire for wealth the biggest deterrent to having children.
88
posted on
10/05/2006 7:37:38 AM PDT
by
DungeonMaster
(Man defiles a rock when he chips it with a tool. Ex 20:25)
To: qam1
The tribe with the most babies; wins....
89
posted on
10/05/2006 7:38:51 AM PDT
by
thinking
To: durasell
The Maslow stuff doesn't apply. Nonsense. The prioritization of basic biological needs before security and of security before personal satisfaction applies to any rational person.
90
posted on
10/05/2006 7:43:24 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: steve-b
Wow, you managed to repurpose a direct quote from DU by deleting only one word. Not bad.
Yawn. Your drive-by drivel is beyond tiresome.
91
posted on
10/05/2006 7:43:36 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: steve-b
The prioritization of basic biological needs before security and of security before personal satisfaction applies to any rational person.
Having children is a basic biological need. And a Divine exhortation for that matter.
92
posted on
10/05/2006 7:45:16 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: thinking
Yeah, that's why India conquered Britain.
Oh, wait....
93
posted on
10/05/2006 7:45:30 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: Antoninus
Having children is a basic biological need. Nonsense. If you don't die from not having it, it's not a basic biological need.
94
posted on
10/05/2006 7:46:06 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: Antoninus
Having children is a basic biological need. Nonsense. If you don't die from not having it, it's not a basic biological need.
95
posted on
10/05/2006 7:46:06 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: Antoninus
Your drive-by drivel is beyond tiresome.projection (pr& JEK sh&n): the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way
96
posted on
10/05/2006 7:47:16 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: CSM
Which equates to just under $230K USD. $230K/18=$12,777.777 per year. For some reason I'm not sure I am buying that cost.
It's pretty close. I spent $80K USD on my little sweet dog last year alone. Vet bills are steep these days.
To: steve-b
projection (pr& JEK sh&n): the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way
As usual Steve, you've got nothing. You even project projection onto other people.
98
posted on
10/05/2006 7:53:34 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: steve-b
Nonsense. If you don't die from not having it, it's not a basic biological need.
You're kidding, right? If a species doesn't have offspring, it dies out after one generation. Hence, having children is a basic biological need.
99
posted on
10/05/2006 7:56:38 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: Antoninus
Ah, the fallacy of redefinition.
Lack of a basic biological need causes the death of an individual. (Perhaps you should clarify the definition you are using for that last big word, and include your definitions of "alone", "sex", and "is", just in case.)
100
posted on
10/05/2006 8:01:25 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-114 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson