Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


View Poll Results: How many kids do you want to have?
0 13 21.31%
1 7 11.48%
2 13 21.31%
3 10 16.39%
4 7 11.48%
5 5 8.20%
6 4 6.56%
I'm not sure. 5 8.20%
It depends. 4 6.56%
Other. 0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 61. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 4th, 2012, 10:28 AM   #111

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,621

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1991sudarshan View Post
I heard that the Western Countries are encouraging the married couples to have more babies to counter the decrease in the birth rate . Is that true ?
Not in the UK.
redcoat is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 4th, 2012, 10:48 AM   #112

Lokayata's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2012
From: California
Posts: 304

0 because, for one, I don't want to make the sacrifices parents have to make. As others have said, I don't want to have to put someone else's needs ahead of my own. Also the freedom; having children really ties you to them. You can't do things without thinking about them for almost two decades. I want to keep my independence. Also I have very strong loner tendencies and I don't like having others be closely tied to me. Even pets much of the time. Plus, I don't want to be responsible for someone else.

Also the whole concept of reproduction and offspring is very off-putting. And the whole process from conception through to childhood...no way.

Overall though it just does not appeal to me at all. I have zero desire to have children.

Last edited by Lokayata; November 4th, 2012 at 11:06 AM.
Lokayata is offline  
Old November 5th, 2012, 05:42 AM   #113
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Michigan, USA.
Posts: 386

I want a kid. A, because men can't have kids on their own, and adoption in America is very costly process in both time and money. I do want to give a child a warm home though, and maybe I'll become a foster parent if I have the money and energy. There's a serious issue with the system here, and I want to make it more bearable for the children in it. Until then, I have the luxury on being able to plan beforehand, allowing me to set everything in accord when I feel ready in being a dad.
Nemotheelvenpanda is offline  
Old November 5th, 2012, 08:48 AM   #114

Perix's Avatar
Golan&Imbarligator
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Romania
Posts: 7,877

wow! for me one is enough
Perix is offline  
Old November 5th, 2012, 12:11 PM   #115

infestør's Avatar
Surprise pølse!
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Ẍ
Posts: 3,831
Blog Entries: 3

the question should not be " How many children do you want to have? Why/why not?" but it should be "why poorer people make at least 3 children/breed so much?"

infestør is offline  
Old November 6th, 2012, 09:50 AM   #116
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
From: Sweden
Posts: 834

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1991sudarshan View Post
I heard that the Western Countries are encouraging the married couples to have more babies to counter the decrease in the birth rate . Is that true ?
Perhaps, but not only married people...Child benefit, parental benefits and kindergartens make it easier to have children.
starkodder is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 11:02 AM   #117
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Bulgaria
Posts: 1,985
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by infestør View Post
the question should not be " How many children do you want to have? Why/why not?" but it should be "why poorer people make at least 3 children/breed so much?"

Idiocracy - YouTube

That is a very accurate video. I wondered the same stuff the other day - how come in the past people were so much smarter than now?

That's the answer
Stefany is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 04:49 PM   #118

Tuthmosis III's Avatar
His Royal Travesty
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: the middle ground
Posts: 2,725
Blog Entries: 3

The video is funny stuff, but there are solid ecological priniciples involved here, as Paul Colinvaux explains (The Fates of Nations, 1980: pp. 41-42):

"Each human way of life will have its own characteristic size of family. This obviously applies to people living in different places, where resources may be good or bad for child rearing, but it also applies to different standards of life, to rich and poor. If a family is poor and its members live among people who are poor also, the number of children in the typical family will reflect their poverty. Bringing up children to live in poverty does not demand much preparation for the child. It will need food over the years, but only of the simplest sort, and the time for which the child will be a net drain on the family's food will be comparatively short. There need be none of those years of elaborate schooling or technical training, when the child contributes nothing to the family, yet has to be fed, clothed and housed. The poor child is cheap to rear, or, as an ecologist would say, it requires few resources. It is, therefore, quite possible for a family living in a culture of relative poverty to find the resources for many children.
"The poor tend to have large families, as we are repeatedly told by those who anguish over the bounding populations of that poverty-stricken portion of the nations euphemistically called 'the developing countries'. These large families are fully predictable from a knowledge of the human breeding strategy. Because it takes scant resources to raise a child in poverty, the hopelessly poor will opt for large families. They are doing their Darwinian thing, estimating the number of children that can be raised to compete for niche-spaces in their world of chronic poverty and then arranging to have families of this calculated size.
"The wealthy, on the other hand, must plan for each child to be able to compete for niche-space in a world of wealth. Tradition for the wealthy requires that each child be supported for more years, that it be given more things, that it have a larger home, perhaps even that it be provided the horrendous costs of Harvard or Heidelberg. When the Darwinian cost-accounting is done in a wealthy family, the stark fact is that the certain and successful rearing of a child, fully equipped to become itself a parent in its parents' world, requires a very heavy investment. Wealthy parents, like poor parents, seek to raise the largest number of children that they can afford, for this is their animal breeding strategy which has never changed. But wealthy people cannot afford very many children, despite their wealth."
Tuthmosis III is offline  
Old November 10th, 2012, 10:22 AM   #119

Mr Kal's Avatar
Citizen
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: British Isles
Posts: 9

I'd quite like to have one of my own and then adopt one of the other gender.

If I were going to have any at all, I think this would be the minimum.
Mr Kal is offline  
Old November 10th, 2012, 11:01 AM   #120
.
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Valles Marineris, Mars
Posts: 4,835

kinda depends where i am if i am in china i can have only 1 because the pop. is too big..... or i would want 2.....3 is too much work
Gorge123 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
children, why or why


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Children in war Yorgos War and Military History 0 December 23rd, 2010 11:43 PM
Children of Abram Tuman bay Middle Eastern and African History 70 September 3rd, 2010 05:44 AM
How far should we protect our children? vera Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 69 August 12th, 2010 12:25 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.