The new smart financial move is walking away

[NotCranky]

Oh yes, CaRenter, I agree, vomit is worse than poop. My wife just reminded me that I disappear whenever there is vomit around and that I have never actually dealt with the puke and clean-up of car seats and such. What can I say, it starts my own gag reflexes even to just type this.

[briansd1]

[quote=AN]
What scheme are you referring to? Why does this scheme make not having kids be selfless? Yet having kids is selfish?[/quote]

In the scheme of things is a just an idiomatic expression.

I meant to say that considering all the consequences of having children, it’s relatively selfish to have children.

[quote=AN]
The act of conceiving a child might be selfish due to personal gratification.
[/quote]

Yes, it is.

For some people it’s not simply the act of having sex.

Some undergo extremely costly procedures to conceive. As a society we all pay for those non-productive reproductive cost which are spread out to all of us. Sounds like socialism for baby making.

Think about the why-should-I-pay-for-you arguments of health care.

[quote=AN]
However, the subsequent 25+ years of sacrifice to make sure you raised a good person requires many selfless acts.
[/quote]

In my mind, bestowing all that “charity” on your own DNA hardly qualifies selfless. But if you want to think of it that way, then it’s your prerogative.

Is feeding your child charitable relative to feeding somebody else’s child?

When you die, if you can leave your estate your kids or your leave your money to your church (or whatever charity). Which act is more charitable?

[quote=AN]
If you never had a child and raised a child before, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I didn’t know how much is involved in raising a child until I had one of my own. 3rd party looking in have no idea. I had no idea.
[/quote]

You’re personalizing your own experience.
That’s hardly objective, but again it’s your prerogative.

For example, if a judge’s house was burglarized, he could draw from his experience and sentence burglars to a long time in prison, exercising his prerogative, and ignoring precedents.

Or he might be more lenient, opting for redemption, depending on the situation. The burglar might have committed a selfish crime, at that time, but he might spend the next 25 years atoning and doing good to society, if given the opportunity.

[quote=AN]
Once again, selflessness and selfishness is not black and white.
[/quote]

I agree. Neither is anything having to do with people and society.

That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.

[briansd1]

[quote=AN]
What scheme are you referring to? Why does this scheme make not having kids be selfless? Yet having kids is selfish?[/quote]

In the scheme of things is a just an idiomatic expression.

I meant to say that considering all the consequences of having children, it’s relatively selfish to have children.

[quote=AN]
The act of conceiving a child might be selfish due to personal gratification.
[/quote]

Yes, it is.

For some people it’s not simply the act of having sex.

Some undergo extremely costly procedures to conceive. As a society we all pay for those non-productive reproductive cost which are spread out to all of us. Sounds like socialism for baby making.

Think about the why-should-I-pay-for-you arguments of health care.

[quote=AN]
However, the subsequent 25+ years of sacrifice to make sure you raised a good person requires many selfless acts.
[/quote]

In my mind, bestowing all that “charity” on your own DNA hardly qualifies selfless. But if you want to think of it that way, then it’s your prerogative.

Is feeding your child charitable relative to feeding somebody else’s child?

When you die, if you can leave your estate your kids or your leave your money to your church (or whatever charity). Which act is more charitable?

[quote=AN]
If you never had a child and raised a child before, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I didn’t know how much is involved in raising a child until I had one of my own. 3rd party looking in have no idea. I had no idea.
[/quote]

You’re personalizing your own experience.
That’s hardly objective, but again it’s your prerogative.

For example, if a judge’s house was burglarized, he could draw from his experience and sentence burglars to a long time in prison, exercising his prerogative, and ignoring precedents.

Or he might be more lenient, opting for redemption, depending on the situation. The burglar might have committed a selfish crime, at that time, but he might spend the next 25 years atoning and doing good to society, if given the opportunity.

[quote=AN]
Once again, selflessness and selfishness is not black and white.
[/quote]

I agree. Neither is anything having to do with people and society.

That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.

[briansd1]

[quote=AN]
What scheme are you referring to? Why does this scheme make not having kids be selfless? Yet having kids is selfish?[/quote]

In the scheme of things is a just an idiomatic expression.

I meant to say that considering all the consequences of having children, it’s relatively selfish to have children.

[quote=AN]
The act of conceiving a child might be selfish due to personal gratification.
[/quote]

Yes, it is.

For some people it’s not simply the act of having sex.

Some undergo extremely costly procedures to conceive. As a society we all pay for those non-productive reproductive cost which are spread out to all of us. Sounds like socialism for baby making.

Think about the why-should-I-pay-for-you arguments of health care.

[quote=AN]
However, the subsequent 25+ years of sacrifice to make sure you raised a good person requires many selfless acts.
[/quote]

In my mind, bestowing all that “charity” on your own DNA hardly qualifies selfless. But if you want to think of it that way, then it’s your prerogative.

Is feeding your child charitable relative to feeding somebody else’s child?

When you die, if you can leave your estate your kids or your leave your money to your church (or whatever charity). Which act is more charitable?

[quote=AN]
If you never had a child and raised a child before, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I didn’t know how much is involved in raising a child until I had one of my own. 3rd party looking in have no idea. I had no idea.
[/quote]

You’re personalizing your own experience.
That’s hardly objective, but again it’s your prerogative.

For example, if a judge’s house was burglarized, he could draw from his experience and sentence burglars to a long time in prison, exercising his prerogative, and ignoring precedents.

Or he might be more lenient, opting for redemption, depending on the situation. The burglar might have committed a selfish crime, at that time, but he might spend the next 25 years atoning and doing good to society, if given the opportunity.

[quote=AN]
Once again, selflessness and selfishness is not black and white.
[/quote]

I agree. Neither is anything having to do with people and society.

That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.

[briansd1]

[quote=AN]
What scheme are you referring to? Why does this scheme make not having kids be selfless? Yet having kids is selfish?[/quote]

In the scheme of things is a just an idiomatic expression.

I meant to say that considering all the consequences of having children, it’s relatively selfish to have children.

[quote=AN]
The act of conceiving a child might be selfish due to personal gratification.
[/quote]

Yes, it is.

For some people it’s not simply the act of having sex.

Some undergo extremely costly procedures to conceive. As a society we all pay for those non-productive reproductive cost which are spread out to all of us. Sounds like socialism for baby making.

Think about the why-should-I-pay-for-you arguments of health care.

[quote=AN]
However, the subsequent 25+ years of sacrifice to make sure you raised a good person requires many selfless acts.
[/quote]

In my mind, bestowing all that “charity” on your own DNA hardly qualifies selfless. But if you want to think of it that way, then it’s your prerogative.

Is feeding your child charitable relative to feeding somebody else’s child?

When you die, if you can leave your estate your kids or your leave your money to your church (or whatever charity). Which act is more charitable?

[quote=AN]
If you never had a child and raised a child before, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I didn’t know how much is involved in raising a child until I had one of my own. 3rd party looking in have no idea. I had no idea.
[/quote]

You’re personalizing your own experience.
That’s hardly objective, but again it’s your prerogative.

For example, if a judge’s house was burglarized, he could draw from his experience and sentence burglars to a long time in prison, exercising his prerogative, and ignoring precedents.

Or he might be more lenient, opting for redemption, depending on the situation. The burglar might have committed a selfish crime, at that time, but he might spend the next 25 years atoning and doing good to society, if given the opportunity.

[quote=AN]
Once again, selflessness and selfishness is not black and white.
[/quote]

I agree. Neither is anything having to do with people and society.

That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.

[briansd1]

[quote=AN]
What scheme are you referring to? Why does this scheme make not having kids be selfless? Yet having kids is selfish?[/quote]

In the scheme of things is a just an idiomatic expression.

I meant to say that considering all the consequences of having children, it’s relatively selfish to have children.

[quote=AN]
The act of conceiving a child might be selfish due to personal gratification.
[/quote]

Yes, it is.

For some people it’s not simply the act of having sex.

Some undergo extremely costly procedures to conceive. As a society we all pay for those non-productive reproductive cost which are spread out to all of us. Sounds like socialism for baby making.

Think about the why-should-I-pay-for-you arguments of health care.

[quote=AN]
However, the subsequent 25+ years of sacrifice to make sure you raised a good person requires many selfless acts.
[/quote]

In my mind, bestowing all that “charity” on your own DNA hardly qualifies selfless. But if you want to think of it that way, then it’s your prerogative.

Is feeding your child charitable relative to feeding somebody else’s child?

When you die, if you can leave your estate your kids or your leave your money to your church (or whatever charity). Which act is more charitable?

[quote=AN]
If you never had a child and raised a child before, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I didn’t know how much is involved in raising a child until I had one of my own. 3rd party looking in have no idea. I had no idea.
[/quote]

You’re personalizing your own experience.
That’s hardly objective, but again it’s your prerogative.

For example, if a judge’s house was burglarized, he could draw from his experience and sentence burglars to a long time in prison, exercising his prerogative, and ignoring precedents.

Or he might be more lenient, opting for redemption, depending on the situation. The burglar might have committed a selfish crime, at that time, but he might spend the next 25 years atoning and doing good to society, if given the opportunity.

[quote=AN]
Once again, selflessness and selfishness is not black and white.
[/quote]

I agree. Neither is anything having to do with people and society.

That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]
That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.[/quote]
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think having and raising children is more selfless than not having children (by ones own accord). You think it’s the other way around. I say making sacrifices for 25+ years for your own DNA (but still another person that’s not yourself) is more selfless than spending that 25+ in self indulgence. You think they’re the same or the other way around. BTW, raising children doesn’t always mean you’re raising your own DNA. I think foster parents are even more selfless.

I tried not to personalize anything. It’s just a fact that there are a lot of little things that goes on in raising a child that people who never raised a child will never know (unless they do a lot of research). Even if they do a lot of research, one can only imagine how it might make them feel, but nothing beat first hand experience.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]
That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.[/quote]
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think having and raising children is more selfless than not having children (by ones own accord). You think it’s the other way around. I say making sacrifices for 25+ years for your own DNA (but still another person that’s not yourself) is more selfless than spending that 25+ in self indulgence. You think they’re the same or the other way around. BTW, raising children doesn’t always mean you’re raising your own DNA. I think foster parents are even more selfless.

I tried not to personalize anything. It’s just a fact that there are a lot of little things that goes on in raising a child that people who never raised a child will never know (unless they do a lot of research). Even if they do a lot of research, one can only imagine how it might make them feel, but nothing beat first hand experience.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]
That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.[/quote]
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think having and raising children is more selfless than not having children (by ones own accord). You think it’s the other way around. I say making sacrifices for 25+ years for your own DNA (but still another person that’s not yourself) is more selfless than spending that 25+ in self indulgence. You think they’re the same or the other way around. BTW, raising children doesn’t always mean you’re raising your own DNA. I think foster parents are even more selfless.

I tried not to personalize anything. It’s just a fact that there are a lot of little things that goes on in raising a child that people who never raised a child will never know (unless they do a lot of research). Even if they do a lot of research, one can only imagine how it might make them feel, but nothing beat first hand experience.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]
That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.[/quote]
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think having and raising children is more selfless than not having children (by ones own accord). You think it’s the other way around. I say making sacrifices for 25+ years for your own DNA (but still another person that’s not yourself) is more selfless than spending that 25+ in self indulgence. You think they’re the same or the other way around. BTW, raising children doesn’t always mean you’re raising your own DNA. I think foster parents are even more selfless.

I tried not to personalize anything. It’s just a fact that there are a lot of little things that goes on in raising a child that people who never raised a child will never know (unless they do a lot of research). Even if they do a lot of research, one can only imagine how it might make them feel, but nothing beat first hand experience.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]
That’s why we may have to agree that having kids is relatively more selfish than not having kids, all things considered.[/quote]
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think having and raising children is more selfless than not having children (by ones own accord). You think it’s the other way around. I say making sacrifices for 25+ years for your own DNA (but still another person that’s not yourself) is more selfless than spending that 25+ in self indulgence. You think they’re the same or the other way around. BTW, raising children doesn’t always mean you’re raising your own DNA. I think foster parents are even more selfless.

I tried not to personalize anything. It’s just a fact that there are a lot of little things that goes on in raising a child that people who never raised a child will never know (unless they do a lot of research). Even if they do a lot of research, one can only imagine how it might make them feel, but nothing beat first hand experience.

[GoUSC]

When did this go from a discussion about the housing market and the pros v cons of walking away to a discussion about getting married and having kids????

[GoUSC]

When did this go from a discussion about the housing market and the pros v cons of walking away to a discussion about getting married and having kids????

[GoUSC]

When did this go from a discussion about the housing market and the pros v cons of walking away to a discussion about getting married and having kids????

[GoUSC]

When did this go from a discussion about the housing market and the pros v cons of walking away to a discussion about getting married and having kids????

[Author]

Posts