Why are white people all around the world not having kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ill bite - I am 32 and my DH is 30. Our HHI is 175k and two big reasons we aren't having kids yet - in the immediate we can't afford it (day care is upwards of $1600-1800 a month in DC) and in the long term we can't afford it (our under grad institutions are pushing 60k+ per year NOW) and the other reason is most of our friends aren't even married at this point and the ones that are have not had kids. If we had a kid we would only be breaking even for the next few years and would be in debt if we had 2 and were paying for daycare. Husband is a JD working government and I work in the non profit world and have only a BA.

This is so sad to me I don't think people should have kids if they don't want them. That is clearly a disaster in the making. But if you do want them, I hope you go for it. They turn into people you love - often the most important people in the world to you. How can you (society in general, people in this thread) say they don't enrich one's life?

I'm in an identical situation to the first pp. Middle class people are in a very weird donut hole. There's assistance for the poor and the rich can pay outright, but the majority of us STRUGGLE with daycare costs and no maternity leave. There is little to no support for middle class Americans. Hell I don't even have full day K in my county.

We would absolutely love children and we will have them, but it will be a big financial burden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of affluent Caucasian couples in the DC area are not interested in having children. I don't buy this paradigm.

Maybe not the "vast majority" but certainly a larger percentage than ever before. And those who have kids have less than the replacement. Believe what you want but the numbers don't lie.

I am a white married couple who's relatively affluent. We aren't having kids now. We'd like them, but we worry too much that the costs will send us overboard.

I think a lot of people my age are also concerned that people expect children to be stuck to you for 26 years. Kids are more attached to their parents than any other generation ever. Less independence. I loved playing in the cul de sac or out with friends. But now people expect the parent to be supervising 24/7.

Yep! It's not just the financial burden turning would-be parents away. The entire culture of modern parenthood assumes a slavish devotion to the children. I always tell my husband I would be a 1950s mom in a second. But in 2015? Hell no.

It's really not that bad. I is more intense than in the 1950s - like you can't leave kids in the car anymore to run a quick errand - but you get used to it. And my older kids (9 and 7) play outside in our neighborhood with friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Have you talked to many old people in the US? How many of them wish that they could live with their children/grandchildren instead of living independently as long as they can (or longer)?

Of course, they want to live independently.

But there is a price to pay for independence - loneliness and a distance from children/grandchildren. And lack of support network.

Asian and Slavic cultures don't have that problem. My MIL who lives in the same city sees her child and grandchild maybe once a month on average. In other cultures it would be unthinkable.

You keep saying that, but that doesn't make it true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm in an identical situation to the first pp. Middle class people are in a very weird donut hole. There's assistance for the poor and the rich can pay outright, but the majority of us STRUGGLE with daycare costs and no maternity leave. There is little to no support for middle class Americans. Hell I don't even have full day K in my county.

We would absolutely love children and we will have them, but it will be a big financial burden.

I am certain that the existence of a middle-class person is still less of a struggle than the existence of a poor person.

Or, if you disagree -- quit your job, run through your savings, and then give it a whirl!

[Anonymous]

What's BFE?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 'logistics' lady - you got it! Logistics that make or break your whole life. Once I had a kid, I realized that most people don't need to do this, they can help out their friends & family who are already parents. I told this in a very real way to one of my BFFs. It's very hard to have a kid in the DC-metro area with no family nearby. I wouldn't wish it on any childless couple.

It's hard but not impossible. You and your spouse need to hang together. We raised two children (well, they are teenagers so not yet fully raised) with no family in this area. That should not be an impediment to having kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's BFE?

Bum F$ck Egypt - far out in nowheresville.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the fuck did you people buy a home with a mortgage near $4500/month?

That's your first problem.

Because we can.

Well then, you decided this was more of a priority than having kids, which is what PP posters were saying.

I can afford both but I don't want to waste the money on kids.

Rather spend money on trips and cars and a mansion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, I'm childfree but I think people should have as many kids as they want. Just because you can't handle more children doesn't mean that's true for others.

I can't handle and I'm not. I see many others that can't handle them, but they are having them.

My one friend had 3 kids who grew up in front of TV because she was too busy and all have behavioral problems.

Another had 3 kids. She's overwhelmed. They wear dirty socks and underwear several days in a row. Their teeth are rotten because she's too tired to enforce brushing. They live in a complete mess.

A third family of 4 kids come to our church. The father completly checked out. The mother ignores them when she can. They also lack in hygiene and occasionally someone will catch her three year old running the streets because he sneaked outside while she was checked out.

Honestly, I know only one family that handles their four kids well.

And even if their physical needs are cared for, they lack individual attention from their parents. Human weren't meant to be raised in herds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the fuck did you people buy a home with a mortgage near $4500/month?

That's your first problem.

Because we can.

Well then, you decided this was more of a priority than having kids, which is what PP posters were saying.

I can afford both but I don't want to waste the money on kids.

Rather spend money on trips and cars and a mansion?

I'm not the PP, but why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, the posters above with large HHI are are not too poor. Their priorities are not aligned with kids. Whatever. Do what you want. But stop with the "we can't afford it" crap - it just isn't true.

Daycare plus very basic child needs (diapers, formula) runs at least 25k a year. Do you really think most 30 year olds have an extra 25k laying around?

There are plenty of 30-year-olds in the DC area who have children. I haven't asked them all whether or not they have an extra $25,000 lying around, but the possibilities are 1. yes, they do, or 2. no, they don't, but are somehow managing anyway.

Now, you might not want to manage the way they're managing. And that would be perfectly ok!

But it is absurd to say, "I can't afford to have a child", when there are a lot of people who earn a lot less than you and have a child.

I am 30 and know maybe 3 people who had a child at age 30 in this area. One had incredible financial support from family (bought them a house) and the other had to move from the city to the burbs into a family-owned condo. The third couple got pregnant on accident and the child had severe needs. They had to move way out into MD and the wife had to quit her job. They are barely getting by.

I had my first at 27 and so did a lot of our circle (first baby in late twenties). HHI at the time was around 200-250 which isn't SO far off from the PPs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ill bite - I am 32 and my DH is 30. Our HHI is 175k and two big reasons we aren't having kids yet - in the immediate we can't afford it (day care is upwards of $1600-1800 a month in DC) and in the long term we can't afford it (our under grad institutions are pushing 60k+ per year NOW) and the other reason is most of our friends aren't even married at this point and the ones that are have not had kids. If we had a kid we would only be breaking even for the next few years and would be in debt if we had 2 and were paying for daycare. Husband is a JD working government and I work in the non profit world and have only a BA.

This is so sad to me I don't think people should have kids if they don't want them. That is clearly a disaster in the making. But if you do want them, I hope you go for it. They turn into people you love - often the most important people in the world to you. How can you (society in general, people in this thread) say they don't enrich one's life?

I'm in an identical situation to the first pp. Middle class people are in a very weird donut hole. There's assistance for the poor and the rich can pay outright, but the majority of us STRUGGLE with daycare costs and no maternity leave. There is little to no support for middle class Americans. Hell I don't even have full day K in my county.

We would absolutely love children and we will have them, but it will be a big financial burden.

Psst kids are a big financial burden even for people whose incomes make them "rich."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the fuck did you people buy a home with a mortgage near $4500/month?

That's your first problem.

Because we can.

Well then, you decided this was more of a priority than having kids, which is what PP posters were saying.

I can afford both but I don't want to waste the money on kids.

Rather spend money on trips and cars and a mansion?

I'm not the PP, but why not?

Do any of those things have any lasting value at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And even if their physical needs are cared for, they lack individual attention from their parents. Human weren't meant to be raised in herds.

A herd of 4?

Other things humans weren't meant to: wear shoes, get braces, drive cars, eat ice cream, fly to Paris on an airplane to propose on bended knee beneath the Eiffel Tower. None of those things happened in the Environment of Evolutionary Adaptedness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the fuck did you people buy a home with a mortgage near $4500/month?

That's your first problem.

Because we can.

Well then, you decided this was more of a priority than having kids, which is what PP posters were saying.

I can afford both but I don't want to waste the money on kids.

Rather spend money on trips and cars and a mansion?

I'm not the PP, but why not?

Do any of those things have any lasting value at all?

Who says they have to?

Besides, nothing has any lasting value, in the long run. In the long run, we're all dead.