Smitty-48 wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:21 pm
Also a very high probability that, as soon as you have children, your mate will become totally attached to them with little time for you, and she very plausibly will just ditch you, take the kids with her, and make you pay for it.
That part has to be reigned in.
But it wont be.
Putty is fine, but like Dara says, don't bust a nut in that.
You can't save everybody, just save yourself the trouble.
Future of the species? Cloning ftw.
Last edited by Smitty-48 on Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
heydaralon wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:27 pm
Are children the ultimate sunk cost fallacy?
Who knows?
I just know that I ain't gonna let some ho squeeze me for cash at state gunpoint for 2 decades. Not happening.
If you never have any, you won't miss them, because you can't miss what never existed.
That's pretty much how I feel about it.
I know a few dudes who are paying child support for kids they never see. One guy is fairly certain the kid is not his, but he paid for it for years without verifying, so I guess he can't extricate himself from the govt paycheck siphon. I don't know the whole situation, but I know he had to spend money on a lawyer and go to court and all that shit on top of the child support. Fuck. That.
At least 40% of American children born in 2016 were born out of wedlock. Facebook is filled to the rafters with single mother parasites. I would never entrust my financial wellbeing to any woman my age. I wouldn't trust a millenial women to care for a goldfish. In any custody dispute as a man you are the bad guy and you pay. When the game is rigged, your best bet is not to play.
heydaralon wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:13 pm
Its kind of weird that all the doom and gloom people on here who think that the world is going to be hellish in the next gen or so want to force another life into that tragedy. Like, did Anne Frank have an obligation to be pregnant in Treblinka just so that she could have her family line continued? If you think the world is going to shit and we are in a hopeless situation and soon to be living Cormac McCarthy's the Road or Gulag Archipeligo 2.0 or whatever, I don't see the logic in inviting another person to the party. Not saying I have a crystal ball, or any good answers to these big questions, but its kind of selfish in a way.
For one, it’s the ultimate biological imperative. It drives nearly all natural activity.
For another, it’s the people that want kids who are most concerned about the future. People without them have no reason to care what happens later.
There’s an argument that without this concern for the future generations, we would have imploded as a species many centuries ago.
You are an atheist. Why the fuck is that important to you at all? If one species of millipede or trilobyte goes extinct, does that hit you in the feels?
You think our economy is going to collapse and that we will all be corporate slaves living impoverished lives of misery. If you were living on a plantation as a slave in Lynchburg in 1800, would you feel that it is in the best interest of you and your future offspring to procreate?
Again, I don't have a definite answer to this, but most people on here including me are pessimistic about the future, but we have children. Maybe the future would be waay better if less people did so, because then the future society would have less people fighting over resources. Hell, less traffic is an argument unto itself.
You’ll find that most life forms care a great deal about the future of their children, without a Divine Directive.
heydaralon wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:27 pm
Are children the ultimate sunk cost fallacy?
Who knows?
I just know that I ain't gonna let some ho squeeze me for cash at state gunpoint for 2 decades. Not happening.
If you never have any, you won't miss them, because you can't miss what never existed.
That's pretty much how I feel about it.
Unless you really have a desire to have them, you shouldn't have them, having kids out of a sense of duty or posterity, just ends up with unwanted kids.
Only people who have a strong desire to have them should, everybody else can just be uncles.
For one, it’s the ultimate biological imperative. It drives nearly all natural activity.
For another, it’s the people that want kids who are most concerned about the future. People without them have no reason to care what happens later.
There’s an argument that without this concern for the future generations, we would have imploded as a species many centuries ago.
You are an atheist. Why the fuck is that important to you at all? If one species of millipede or trilobyte goes extinct, does that hit you in the feels?
You think our economy is going to collapse and that we will all be corporate slaves living impoverished lives of misery. If you were living on a plantation as a slave in Lynchburg in 1800, would you feel that it is in the best interest of you and your future offspring to procreate?
Again, I don't have a definite answer to this, but most people on here including me are pessimistic about the future, but we have children. Maybe the future would be waay better if less people did so, because then the future society would have less people fighting over resources. Hell, less traffic is an argument unto itself.
You’ll find that most life forms care a great deal about the future of their children, without a Divine Directive.
What is your point?
America is doomed! we will all be living miserable impoverished lives and its gonna suck! Goldman Sachs and McDonalds will enslave us! Better have kids so that someone will know I existed. I'm sure my children working at the WallyWorld gulag in our failed state will be so happy that I birthed them.
I'm sure those kids born in North Korean prison camps are super happy to be thrown in the mix.
