[GovernmentShrinker]

For most families, children ARE the problem. And if they're the sort of people who'll never have them because they think they can't afford them, they're probably better off not having children. If having children and raising them yourself (not dumping them in daycare and government schools, while both parents work to pay off their debts) isn't a bigger priority than ever-increasing material wealth and comfort, don't have them. For people who really make having and raising children the priority, they'll be able to finish their educations, get out of debt, and make the down payment on a modest home within a few years, and then skip all the unnecessary stuff and easily afford to have children.

[John O]

For most families, children ARE the problem.

While I agree with most of what you wrote I still disagree with this. Look at most dual income no kids couples and you'll see people in exactly the same financial condition. They are broke at a higher level but they are still broke. They spend too much and save too little. They have allowed their debts and possessions to own them and now they are trapped in the two earner cycle.

My point is that if people live responsibly then children are not that much of a burden. I have a two (and a half she will always add) year old and she doesn't cost much more than what I and my wife spend anyway.

Children are not the problem. Fiscal irresponsibility is the problem