Is having 4+ kids a status symbol?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: It is a symbol in the sense that having more kids will not impact your life outcomes. So the super rich or the super poor have 4+ kids. For the super rich, they can afford it. For the super poor- they were not going to break out of the cycle of poverty anywhat you slice it. so the number of kids does not matter.

For middle class- we stress about paying for childcrae, college, and balance it against saving for our own retirmenent.

Making $100-200K is not middle class. Saving for college or retirement isn't middle class. Real middle class struggle to save anything.

+1 Truly middle class families in 2020 have a lower standard of living than ever before

Truly middle class are also unlikely to have two parents with degrees who care about saving for college.

They are worried about paying all the bills. Those kids will get financial aid.

Many of them won’t go to college or if they do, won’t finish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nowadays it means someone has fertility problems. Their shit doesn’t work so they dump a shit ton of embryos In the uterus and hope something sticks.

They end up with multiples and act “surprised.”

Then these tiny scrawny babies come out and they parade them around even if they are deformed and act like they got “ lucky” and say “ multiples run in our family.”

Yah bullshit.

Those babies cost north of $20k.

I don't know anyone with quadruplets from IVF!

Gosselins have sextuplets

You pick one sensationalist faux celebrity as proof?
This might be the stupidest post here yet, and that’s saying a lot. People aren’t having four kids because they’re infertile. Fertility treatments have come a long way since early 2000s and fewer high order multiples are conceived.

Gosselins didn't even use IVF. She was on some kind of drug that hyperstimulated her ovaries to produce more eggs. They weren't supposed to have sex during some set period because of the high risk of multiples, but they did anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like the wealthy law firm partner families have four or five kids, and the lower middle class or working class families. Regular middle class families have one or two.

I literally don’t know any families with just one child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the mid-1900s 6-10 kids was common among Irish Catholic families. I don’t know if that is true today.

Lol, no that’s not true today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever since I learned about evolution, I was determined to win at it so that in millions of years, my genes will still be hanging around.

So I moved to the Middle East and had 10 wives and 100 children, got them all visas to the USA and I'm well on my way to genetic world domination. .

Okay just kidding. But seriously there are lots of reasons to have lots of kids. Our society is very anti kids and its not healthy.

If anything "our society" is too child focused / childcentric. The fact that a few posters always come in to say otherwise just shows that it's still never enough for some.

Please compare us to literally any other country in the world lol. France has a park at every highway rest stop. So does Germany.

Having lots of kids is definitely looked down on in Europe as low class, more so than here.

You mean where everyone squeezes into tiny apartments and little houses?

Gee, I wonder why people stop at two?

I think you just made a strong case for why 4 kids absolutely IS a status symbol in Europe.

I'm European and no, 4 is considered weird, like you belong to some weird religious sect. People will avoid you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed in my UMC area that having 4+ kids is the new status symbol, it’s mostly the wealthier families that do it and do t have to give a second though to providing college or paying for several kids at once in pricey camps or private school!

There was a thread EXACTLY like this a few years ago - I remember because people said it was true for DC parents and NY parents and was just after the Krim (sp?) children murder around Halloween.

In any event, I am not saying this as a forum policy to tell you to do a search or some crappy like that, but I just wanted to point it out this is not a new thing... this train of thought you are having I mean. If it is true or not, I have not idea.

I can say that if I had enough money to have the life I desire in terms of travels, living in a good house/neighborhood, paying for college and paying for help (cleaning and nanny), I would maybe consider having 4 children. I like children, but I am maxed out (financially and emotionally) at 2. No way in hell I would have any more children if I could not have hired help to do the grind work - packing lunch, laundry, driving kids to activities, helping with homework (now even worse), etc. Plus, I would still want to be able to travel and live in a nice neighborhood. I wouldn't be willing to "make sacrifices" just to have another 1 or 2 children - I love them but not that much.

[Anonymous]

4 kids is absolutely a status symbol. People with 1 also tend to be rich, but it isn’t a symbol in the same way as 4.