I’m not European nor am I that young, but I share the same sentiment. Commuting by car isn’t good in a lot of aspects and kids are too expensive. Also having kids in this climate seems extremely stressful. Not only do you have to worry about extremely invasive tech, but you also have to worry about the changing climate and the (what seems like) global cost of living crisis
- 1990: “wow, the ozone layer is getting destroyed. Who knows if we might have a planet. Might be better to not have kids”
- 1970: “wow, life is more expensive than ever and the world might end in a nuclear war. Might be better to not have kids”
- 1950: “wow, we just got out of the war and will need to rebuild the whole continent. Might be better to not have kids”
- 1800: “wow, I spend 15 hours a day working in a factory and I can barely sustain myself. Might be better to not have kids”.
- 1400: “wow, I have back-breaking work in a farm and all of it goes to some king and I will never see. What is the point of this? Might be better to not have kids.”
Indeed, anyone can make up quotes about anything, without providing any substance to a discussion.
If you need it spelled out for you, I’ll help: life was never easy, but it never stopped people from stepping up to it and taking the responsibility for it. That includes having kids. Being “afraid of having kids” because of some external issue seems like a bad excuse from people who just don’t want to accept the responsibility.
Saying it’s our responsibility to have kids it’s implying it’s our responsibility to endlessly expand and multiply. That is the domain of viruses and creatures that exceed the environmental carrying capacity of their species
deleted by creator
it’s our responsibility to endlessly expand and multiply.
Not necessarily. We can still encourage people to have kids but keep it close to replacement rate (2.3 kids per woman)
But isn’t it the fact that we have so many people coming into the middle class with middle class resource usage that causes planetary resource overruse? Either we need less people in the middle class, or 7 billion ppl have got to go back to pre industrial levels of consumption
Either we need less people in the middle class, or 7 billion ppl have got to go back to pre industrial levels of consumption
No, we need less people living with the north american standard of consumption. This is not the same as “middle class”.
What a fucking stupid argument. How is it anyone’s “responsibility” to have a kid? Please spell it out.
Here’s my argument: it sounds hard and I don’t wanna. Explain to me how I’m irresponsible. JFC 😂
What is your plan when you get to old age?
Use the hundreds of thousands I would have otherwise spent on kids to live my best life until I die? duh
Understand that we are talking here about a scenario where the global fertility rate drops significantly (less than one child per woman), like what is happening now in South Korea, Spain, Italy, ok?
Given that scenario and the economic collapse that would be coming with it, what would you be spending on, exactly?
Has it occurred to you that all that money that you have been saving and putting in some pension fund will likely not be there if there are no younger people to keep the economy going?
Also: what is stopping you from “living your best life” now that you are young?
Lastly
Use the hundreds of thousands I would have otherwise spent on kids
Yeah, that is not a thing in Germany. Decent public schools, decent health care system, government gives you 250 euro per kid per month, no car dependency, which means that kids are a lot more independent a lot earlier in life… having kids does not cost that much.
There are already way, way too many people on the planet.
And most of them are in Asia, old and about to die in 25 years or so.
The population on China and India is still growing. Have birth rates dropped below replacement levels?
population on China and India is still growing.
Have birth rates dropped below replacement levels?
Yes, India is already below replacement levels and dropping further.
Lol 1950 was a great time to have kids, ever heard of baby boomers? The war boosted the economy, lots of people owned houses and started families. Same after world war 1, there were the “roaring 20s” before the great depression hit.
1950 was a great time to have kids, ever heard of baby boomers?
It is always a great time to have kids.
.Ever heard of global carrying capacity?
Yes, and I’d rather go through demographic collapse instead of global resource shortages that lead to massive amounts of death and suffering.
So what you’re saying is this all could have been avoided if people had less children in the 1400s?
“This all”, good and bad, could/would happen anyway…
I am an USA resident. Two years ago got rid of my car. Walk to work. My wife and I agreed when we first got together 8 years ago no children. Even if I wanted a car or a kid I wouldn’t be able to afford it. If I ever was able and wanted I’d adopt. I know too many people who were in and how shitty the foster system is. My aunt was a Saint and did it and actually adopted some of her fosters but the horror stories I hear.
People who are empathetic, climate conscious, and can think critically SHOULD have kids. You’ll make the future a better place. Imagine if only the people that don’t give a shit have kids.
Imagine having kids because of the things they should do to fix this place instead of because the world is wonderful and full of opportunity.
I wouldn’t wish the future humanity has created on a stranger let alone my own flesh and blood. No thanks.
If we couldn’t fix it, why make more people and lay that burden on them.
I can’t imagine how much you’d have to hate your kids to place that burden on them
Right? If you’re an empathetic, climate conscious, critical thinker, you’d see having a kid as one of the most heinous acts of cruelty within your ability.
Just gonna drop the poor bastard into the global dumpster fire and tell them it’s their responsibility to sort out? Some top-tier parenting right there.
Doesn’t matter if you can’t afford live. Adopt a puppy.
Puppies can’t vote, organise protests, develop technologies, or really do anything to help humans & the planet survive in the long-term. I love puppies but I don’t get your statement in the context of this article and the survey.
I didn’t comment the article. It’s in the same vein as saying somebody should have kids because they are empathetic. It’s not about votes or evolution but rather paying taxes, taking care of the old and so on. Since we are all getting older we need somebody to pay the bill. It’s depressing, but truth is I don’t need a car because I can’t afford it. I arranged my lifestyle to take public transports or a bike, because I can’t afford it. If I can’t afford a car, I probably can’t afford a bigger space for a family, and then the cost of raising a human, when i barely scrape by by myself. Get a better paying job - doesn’t work for everybody. Moving somewhere for another job - doesn’t work for everybody.
You can adopt children, which should be done if possible - there’s enough lost souls in the world.
See how climate change isn’t a factor for getting children? It’s all about them Benjamin’s
You’re not wrong. If one can’t afford, then it’s just not an option, and I agree it’s probably not going to be good for anyone to have a kid in that scenario (whether making a baby or adopting).
That’s not what the article is about though. Yes, technically it’s not about empathetic people either, but in that case I’ve assumed that people who want to save the planet are likely to be empathetic (they think & care about their surroundings). I don’t think that’s too far-fetched.
If you were in a situation where things were affordable, would you get a car?
It’s Idiocracy.
It’s what plants crave.
deleted by creator
Every one in this thread should read this article, https://web.archive.org/web/20230603214937/https://bigthink.com/progress/pessimism-is-a-barrier-to-progress/
End doomerism! It helps no one
Small price to pay so that better people can fly on privater jets
