780
More couples are choosing a ‘dual income, no kids’ lifestyle
(www.cnbc.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
780 points (97.2% liked)
News
23310 readers
3570 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Because we can't afford our own lives, how are we supposed to support children? Not even taking into account for how absolutely fucked we all are. Our planet is dying, how can we bring children into this world if it's all falling apart?
Hey you, I have a quick question about the username
Uh oh, this is awkward....
What are your thoughts on misandry?
I mean a lot of us wouldn't even if it they paid us. We finally live in a time where we know better and can choose not to be barefoot and pregnant (unless you live in tx).
But you can't forget that your children can save the planet, if your generation won't.
My parents set the house on fire, I'm looking for a fire extinguisher, and some newsie wants me to know that if I just had kids they could grow up to be firemen.
I don't think that's what is being said at all. I think what's being said is that if the future belongs to the next generation, it's in all of our interests that intelligent and responsible people do not simply give up and allow the idiots to dominate the future. In other words, we all have a stake in the coming generations and simply opting out because we find it somehow inconvenient is not a moral decision.
This is not to say that we all need to have kids, but rather, is to say that we shouldn't necessarily fault those who do choose to have them. Again, if the children are our future, it would be nice if at least some of them were raised by responsible, intelligent and well-educated parents.
That would ring truer if not spoken by an idiot who dominates the present. CNBC is replete with these know-nothing goobers, and even assuming I bought in to their selective breeding strategy for repopulation after the apocolypse, I sure as hell wouldn't endorse their target audience to handle the job.
That's fair on its face, but more as a practical consequence. At some point you have to ask, what would we even do about people having more kids than we'd like. And the answers - from trying to shame them by screaming at them to doing old school Nixon-era sterilizations of whole populations - are incredibly grim and gross.
If you want responsible, intelligent, and well-educated parents tomorrow, you're going to need to house and feed and educate and generally provide quality of life for kids today.
But we hate kids today. That's why, despite the economy growing at a steady clip for the last 20 years, we're at record high child poverty with 1 in 5 kids living in poverty in the 40 richest countries. The current generation does not want to pay money to see them grow up health, strong, and capable.
Given the poor treatment they've received, why would Zoomers be expected to have lots of kids of their own? They have known nothing but declining standards of living, with a promise of worse to come.
What an asshole thing to do. Hey we had fun using up this planet now here, we made you to clean up up the mess. That's what AI and robots are for. Not humans.
Man, fuck them negative votes. Humans do best understand pressure. We need humans to solve this crisis because, humans manufactured it. We make more humans and roll the dice.
Pure selection bias. You primarily hear about the humans who did well under pressure, because the humans that didn't do well rarely make for popular reading material.
I would argue that by the time a child born today is old enough to participate in the solution, the dice will have already landed. Either they'll be living in a city/country/planet whose prior generation has positioned themselves to preserver, or they'll be dying in one whose prior generation didn't.
Having more kids won't solve the problem. We've got 8B people already. One more or less won't tip the scales.
Not having more kids won't solve the problem, either. So no point in getting mad at folks who did choose to have children.
When the problem is too much of something, the solution is less of it. Make of that what you will.
I like to think the solution is much more complex but, I guess you can't get snakes from chicken eggs.
Time to break the cycle of abuse.
It's time to put funding into solutions. Making less people isn't the solution. Managing our resources responsibility is the better solution.
Don't stop making people, start making better quality people.