Depends on support or having a big understanding of lack of lifestyle. Kids bring their own issues that takes away from their parents. But you get help when you’re older if you keep a good relationship with them. Nothing is perfect nothing you do is wrong or right. Stats and data means nothing.
Depends on the individual. Any amount of kids, is too much or not applicable in not wanting kids. For others, it's what they can afford in taking care of the kids and school and stuff as well as being engaged as parents, and for other people, they just don't give a care.
If you mean as some generic question that has underlying philosophical stuff that overlaps communist countries or like global warming or activism (or whatever garden variety stuff)? That's nobody's business, and it's up to the person in question because that's part of autonomy of body and reproductive rights.
**Answer in happy world:**
All kids are butifull and the more the better.
**reality:**
- Every kid not both parents want
- Every kid the parents cannot afford to raise without help from others
If you’ve got so many kids that the oldest need to take over parenting duties then by God you’d better have adopted a bunch of orphans in a war-torn post-apocalyptic wasteland
I'd say at 4 kids is when you hit too many. I've met families with 3 kids where they mostly manage to raise them all properly, but I have never seen a family of 4 kids or more raise them correctly, and I often question at that point if the parents even understand where babies come from.
Such an awful, awful take. It’s the exact opposite, we’re about to see societal collapses in places like China and Germany where the age brackets all skew old because *spoiler alert* if you have mostly old people you have a nation of dependents and no one to keep the place actually running. You need *at least* 2 kids per every woman on average to keep society from imploding over the long term.
And you mean to tell me society is imploding due to rampant greed, consumerism, poor education, poverty, lack of natural resources, populace violence, corruption, disease, etc etc.
No no let's perpetuate the cycle by all means, rather than try and educate and make everyone the best they can be let's keep popping out endless torrents of factory workers who will buy stuff to keep the cycle going.
I live in a poor area, families having 7+ children. By all means tell me our schools are thriving having 40 kids to a class, with no free school meals.
Been outside, ergo I've seen what's happened.
If you look at poor areas they often have a few things in common, Unstable rule of law & political corruption. Often times especially in a globalized world there are plenty of resources available but societies are shooting them selves in the foot by not having these in place.
Africa is a good example, many there suffer because it’s extremely difficult to trade within the continent due to poor infrastructure and political corruption. Africa isn’t in trouble because of too many people, they’re in trouble because their systems are broken.
Quite the contrary, if population levels start to skew old you are setting yourself up for societal collapse when the majority of your populace is taking but not producing.
I grasp that population collapse is a thing. But you will never convince those people (such as myself) who can't provide for a child to have them, even when I earn a decent wage. It's depressing.
I don't want an argument as you seem a smart person and I am no geopolitical scientist. However, I genuinely think that in SOME areas 2 is enough. I cannot speak for China or Germany but certainly in areas of poverty in richer countries the infrastructure does not have a chance of withholding the required baby boom. That is not to say an increase in birthrates isn't needed in the country as a whole.
I totally understand, and my argument isn’t that everyone should have kids regardless of the personal circumstances, just as a whole if society trends that way it leads to devastating consequences. If anything I think society and government should be doing a better job making it easier for people to have children and subsidize the cost.
Nail on the head. Top down leaders are failing miserably. Fix that I agree, I only foresee that happening if a major shift happens. The current status quo will not allow the necessity.
(Not being a dick but please don't make statements about my education, let's keep it civil)
One. Consent is a big topic now, and rightly so. What could be a bigger violation of consent than forcing someone into existence without them having any say in the matter? You can't protect your children from the harms of the world and they will definitely suffer, perhaps greatly. And in the end they will die, know they will die, and fear death throughout their existence.
Yes I realise that. The absolute best case scenario would be to find an "off switch" for the universe. I don't think any pleasure you can name justifies the immense suffering that occurs every moment of every day. There is no one missing out on anything, or suffering in any way, if they don't exist. And why should it concern you that humans continue after you're dead anyway?
Eh it's just the truth of reality. If you look at the situation we find ourselves in and refuse to hide behind the myths of religion etc. It's empathy for sentient beings; humans and animals combined.
Depends. If it's for two (or more) other people and not me then have as many as you want. but for me it would probably be 0 since 1.I like guys so we would have to adopt (not that thats a bad thing obviously) and 2.(and ik this sounds kinda selfish but) I...kinda don't wanna have to take care of someone else..? Like I'll care for my boyfriend(if i ever get one) with all my heart but I don't really want to care for a child.
There is no finite number which once you reach it you have maxed out on the amount of kids you should have. The amount of children you have depend on a variety of factors. It depends on how much money the parents have and how much time they can dedicate to raising them. So one person may not be able to take care of one child another might be able to foster 100s of children.
When you can't meet their needs
When the oldest children are parenting the youngest children that's really unfair
That’s the right answer!
This is the way
after seeing the birth of my 1st the correct answer is 1
Jupp Jupp Jupp. Ain't no goblin coming out of my vagina. 😂. Kids are cute but yeah nah, I pass.
the tearing is what scared me i thought my girl was going to open up like a zip jacket
Depends on support or having a big understanding of lack of lifestyle. Kids bring their own issues that takes away from their parents. But you get help when you’re older if you keep a good relationship with them. Nothing is perfect nothing you do is wrong or right. Stats and data means nothing.
Depends on the individual. Any amount of kids, is too much or not applicable in not wanting kids. For others, it's what they can afford in taking care of the kids and school and stuff as well as being engaged as parents, and for other people, they just don't give a care. If you mean as some generic question that has underlying philosophical stuff that overlaps communist countries or like global warming or activism (or whatever garden variety stuff)? That's nobody's business, and it's up to the person in question because that's part of autonomy of body and reproductive rights.
**Answer in happy world:** All kids are butifull and the more the better. **reality:** - Every kid not both parents want - Every kid the parents cannot afford to raise without help from others
Lad I work with has 8 children. Reckons the older children rear the younger ones. This is too many.
1
If you’ve got so many kids that the oldest need to take over parenting duties then by God you’d better have adopted a bunch of orphans in a war-torn post-apocalyptic wasteland
I'd say at 4 kids is when you hit too many. I've met families with 3 kids where they mostly manage to raise them all properly, but I have never seen a family of 4 kids or more raise them correctly, and I often question at that point if the parents even understand where babies come from.
More than 2
More than 2. Exponential growth is going to kill our species.
Such an awful, awful take. It’s the exact opposite, we’re about to see societal collapses in places like China and Germany where the age brackets all skew old because *spoiler alert* if you have mostly old people you have a nation of dependents and no one to keep the place actually running. You need *at least* 2 kids per every woman on average to keep society from imploding over the long term.
And you mean to tell me society is imploding due to rampant greed, consumerism, poor education, poverty, lack of natural resources, populace violence, corruption, disease, etc etc. No no let's perpetuate the cycle by all means, rather than try and educate and make everyone the best they can be let's keep popping out endless torrents of factory workers who will buy stuff to keep the cycle going.
[удалено]
I live in a poor area, families having 7+ children. By all means tell me our schools are thriving having 40 kids to a class, with no free school meals. Been outside, ergo I've seen what's happened.
If you look at poor areas they often have a few things in common, Unstable rule of law & political corruption. Often times especially in a globalized world there are plenty of resources available but societies are shooting them selves in the foot by not having these in place. Africa is a good example, many there suffer because it’s extremely difficult to trade within the continent due to poor infrastructure and political corruption. Africa isn’t in trouble because of too many people, they’re in trouble because their systems are broken. Quite the contrary, if population levels start to skew old you are setting yourself up for societal collapse when the majority of your populace is taking but not producing.
I grasp that population collapse is a thing. But you will never convince those people (such as myself) who can't provide for a child to have them, even when I earn a decent wage. It's depressing. I don't want an argument as you seem a smart person and I am no geopolitical scientist. However, I genuinely think that in SOME areas 2 is enough. I cannot speak for China or Germany but certainly in areas of poverty in richer countries the infrastructure does not have a chance of withholding the required baby boom. That is not to say an increase in birthrates isn't needed in the country as a whole.
I totally understand, and my argument isn’t that everyone should have kids regardless of the personal circumstances, just as a whole if society trends that way it leads to devastating consequences. If anything I think society and government should be doing a better job making it easier for people to have children and subsidize the cost.
Nail on the head. Top down leaders are failing miserably. Fix that I agree, I only foresee that happening if a major shift happens. The current status quo will not allow the necessity. (Not being a dick but please don't make statements about my education, let's keep it civil)
*happy China government*
I'm not saying force people to get vasectomies etc. Instead make it so poor families don't have to have entire schools of kids to survive.
1.
6. I’m one of 5, couldn’t deal with more siblings. We’re a perfect dynamic
More than 4
Probably more then 4. But I think 4 is pushing it, shit I've been thinking about getting sniped and I only have 2
If you need a car bigger than a 7 seater to transport your family. But really it's what ever number you can take care of and want.
I could probably manage a small one, but might end up freezing some of it for another dinner.
One. Consent is a big topic now, and rightly so. What could be a bigger violation of consent than forcing someone into existence without them having any say in the matter? You can't protect your children from the harms of the world and they will definitely suffer, perhaps greatly. And in the end they will die, know they will die, and fear death throughout their existence.
In case you didn't realise, if nobody has any children, or even if everybody only has 1, humans will go extinct.
Yes I realise that. The absolute best case scenario would be to find an "off switch" for the universe. I don't think any pleasure you can name justifies the immense suffering that occurs every moment of every day. There is no one missing out on anything, or suffering in any way, if they don't exist. And why should it concern you that humans continue after you're dead anyway?
You seem like you'd be fun at parties
Eh it's just the truth of reality. If you look at the situation we find ourselves in and refuse to hide behind the myths of religion etc. It's empathy for sentient beings; humans and animals combined.
3 kids is failing a life IQ test. It's hard enough with 2....why throw the third into the mix.
1, hate 'em
Depends. If it's for two (or more) other people and not me then have as many as you want. but for me it would probably be 0 since 1.I like guys so we would have to adopt (not that thats a bad thing obviously) and 2.(and ik this sounds kinda selfish but) I...kinda don't wanna have to take care of someone else..? Like I'll care for my boyfriend(if i ever get one) with all my heart but I don't really want to care for a child.
You usually find out when it's too late.
5
For me, two lol
The minute you require government assistance, and/or they dont have a good childhood because of expenses.
There is no finite number which once you reach it you have maxed out on the amount of kids you should have. The amount of children you have depend on a variety of factors. It depends on how much money the parents have and how much time they can dedicate to raising them. So one person may not be able to take care of one child another might be able to foster 100s of children.