Reply to Half of British women reach age 30 without having a child

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Half of British women reach age 30 without having a child "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]What the hell do you expect?

Wages don't grow.  Housing is completely unaffordable.  Childcare costs are insane.  Healthcare is ludicrous.  Even if you had kids, stupid minivan to haul them around to soccer practice now costs $40k.  And don't even talk about college costs....

You want to die in poverty?  Have a kid.

Younger generations didn't create these problems. They're the ones that have to live with them though. The only solution is to not have kids just so that you can keep your financial head above water.  [/quote]

It's not money, it's decades of Hollywood and feminist propaganda. It's "cool" and "sophisticated" and "worldly" to piss away your prime fertility years living in the big city and traveling and waiting two hours to be seated for a hip brunch and rising the ladder at your make-work career, so you can piss more money away on shoes, travel, and instagram-worthy furniture. #GirlBoss #LeanIn[/quote]

Maybe a woman’s worth isn’t determined by fertility. And aren’t teenagers really the ones in their prime fertility years? Just think of all the kids you could have to support Social Security and Medicare if you started at 14 instead of waiting until your 20s. Who cares about about school when you could be a mother—the most important part of being a woman. [/quote]

I understand your point, but if this is really the direction our society is going we need to rethink a lot of social norms. Social Security/Medicare will be unsustainable. The retirement age for both will need to go way, way up. People will need to save more for themselves. Long-term care insurance should be required for childless people because there is nobody who will take care of them when they get older. We probably need to have a serious conversation about end of life care too -- should we really be spending 90% of a person's lifetime health care costs in their last 6 months of life when they don't even have children or grandchildren to look in after them? (frankly I think we ought to have a big conversation about end of life care costs in general, but absolutely need to if the birth rate declines especially for people without kids -- should taxpayers spend a million to keep a 90 year old person alive for an extra 6 months who has no next of kin??)[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics