A
male
age
41-50,
anonymous
writes:Just curious, as I see tons of family's that have sometimes 3 or more children, yet have an extremely small income. You'd think it'd be the opposite, because the low-income families have neither the time nor the money to properly care for these children. Im sure some of them are accidents, but after the first child you would think they learnt their lesson? They cant all be accidents?My view on children, is I did not want children untill I was POSITIVE I could financially support one, and give him everything he will ever need.Whats your view on this? I understand some parents want a child to love, but I just see so many families with sometimes 4 or 5 children struggling.
View related questions:
money, want children Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
male
reader, Sageoldguy1465 +, writes (19 August 2013):
 Isn't the answer obvious? Low income people don't have the resources to go to the opera, or out to dinner at upscale restaurants, or for weeks on end, to lavish resorts. Consequently, all the poor creatures have available to them, for entertainment, is to stay at home, in their modest hovels, and have intercourse. THIS, of course results in many offspring being spawned....
Good question....
A
female
reader, chigirl  +, writes (18 August 2013):
 Well, this is complex, to start with. And if you're truly curious about this topic you should study sociology and/or anthropology.
But, in the case of "western" otherwise financially capable countries, you're seeing things the opposite way. Rich families tend to have one child or two, or none, and that is how they stay wealthy. They are economical in their lifestyle, and like you, put economic stability first. Hence no children, or few children, and they often come at a later point in life.
Now, people who do NOT value economic stability that much, or don't have the interest of being rich, will not care about being financially "ready" for children, and will prioritize having a family. Hence they stay on the lower income end of the stick, but they would have stayed there anyway, as they are not prioritizing economy and financial wealth.
Having/not having children isn't what makes you poor or rich. It's your sense of economics and business that either make you rich or not, in the western world where your heritage doesn't tie you to poverty for good. A good example of this is families where one sibling is rich, and another is poor. It doesn't have to do with how many children they have, it has to do with their sense of economics.
Families who are poor and have multiple children just do not value financial wealth the same way as a family who is wealthy and has only one child. These families with low income do not see it as a necessity to give their children everything they point at, they simply have other values.
My mother wanted children early, and didn't care to be married first. She got pregnant after knowing my father for 5 months, and my father was without a job, so she should have figured it out at that point that she'd be a single mother. At least, she'd be the only one with an income. My father was off and on when it came to work, very unstable financially. My mother has a good sense of economics, but it is clear as day that her priorities in life were NOT to have a good financial situation where she could give her children everything they wanted. Her priority was to have children at a young age. That is what landed her in the position of a single mother with two children and no financial support from the father.
It's all about priorities.
Also, with government aid in certain countries, people who are poor can have children because they get support from the state to have children, and this support could be what is their main income. So, the financial state/mindset comes BEFORE the children, and is no caused by the children.
I recommend you take a few classes on this at university though, if you find it interesting, as this is a too complex and big topic to be answered in one simple post.
As in the cases of Asia or Africa there is a completely different chain of events that leads to it, and different variables and causes. You need to be more specific really about what families you talk about here, what specific cases of families with many children are you interested in studying?
...............................
A
female
reader, Aunty BimBim  +, writes (18 August 2013):
 There are many reasons why people may have large families, including cultural reasons. There are also nations where birth control is not readily available, maybe for religious reasons or due to a very high cost for birth control.
In some countries with a high infant mortality rate it was often common for people to have many children to ensure at least one or two of them lived to adulthood with the expectation they would in turn take care of the parents, this would be a cultural reason.
And then of course there are the families who have lots of kids without the means to take care of them due to a lack of education, or knowledge.
I am one of six kids, large families were the norm when and where I grew up, we were part of the baby boom.
I really find questions and opinions like yours difficult, sure on the surface, some large families could probably do with a kid or two less, but there are just as many 'bad' parents of single or two children rolling in money whose kids turn out as damaged as any kid could be.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (18 August 2013): I'm from South Africa. So naturally, what your post is about is like practically the norm here. And it's quite frustrating that people do this. And you'd be surprised, all 3 kids in a household, for example, could very well be mistakes. Sometimes low income families do have kids to get free things from the government.. Be it money or housing. They feel as if the government owes it to them. This way of thinking is absolutely ludicrous if you ask me. But hey, there's nothing we could tell people to actually change their minds.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (18 August 2013): Ask a rich and/or conservative person and they will probably complain about how the poorer people are ripping off the govt for benefits, etc.
But this habit of more kids at the bottom of the socioeconomic range is universal. It goes on throughout the world and its as old as the human race. Blaming it on the current tax laws & social programs in the USA does not make a lot of sense. (But it sure helps to get some people elected.)
When you decide to wait to have kids until you can take care of them better, you are also betting (high) on the idea that you eventually will be doing much better than you are now. Not everyone has a reason to think that way. Many people have no realistic hope of their earning power being a whole lot higher than it is now, and they might very well end up much worse. They just don't know, they don't have much control over it.
Im sure that situation would depress the crap out of you and discourage you from having kids. Initially. But this is their whole life and its not a new feeling for them. They have made peace with that idea, or least enough peace not to shoot themselves in the head tomorrow. They still want the things you want out of life including kids. So where is their incentive to wait years from now? They are as likely to be doing worse as better by then. Its not that they assume the worst, its that they aren't betting all their hopes & dreams on the idea that they will do so much better like you are.
Also, what is your measure of how much money is "good enough"? It was probably heavily influenced by how much money you were raised with. Coming from a different background gives you a different idea of what is enough. It may not change what you want but it changes what you can tolerate and cope with.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (18 August 2013): Seeing that you're from the US, my experience in the UK; where i live the system is if you're a single mum and you get pregnant, whether you're an immigrant, working, unemployed, whatever you automatically get put on the council list or a temporary home. Every other day I read in the papers how people that have never worked a day in their life have shedloads of kids on order to get a big house that the government pays for... They spend all their child benefit on drugs/ drink/ fast food etc.
Try and fathom morality/ the ways of the world... Good luck! :/ xx
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (18 August 2013): HiThere are lots of different way's to look at this, one way could be that if the (higher forces)decide that a child will be born, it will be (Regardless of what us tiny humans decide).My parents had four of us(one set of twins)obviously UNDECIDED, it was still a struggle in the 60's to afford us(with both parents)and not the same benefits that are available today. Back then, only my father worked, it was not really that common for mothers to work(in my memory anyway).Although we were very tight on luxuries(many were)no fridge,shared beds and baths,freezing cold in winter,sunday dinners maybe once a week (corned beef)panagy my grandma's war recipe,cheap but went a long way.we had a great life in other way's, we learnt to value things and to share. We learnt that when someone did'nt have much, we shared the last sweet. We made christmas paper chains together and supper toast from the fire. We played outdoors/indoor games with REAL people instead of computer games. We sulked because Freddie or Annie had a pony and their OWN bedroom with their OWN wardrobe of trendy clothes, but we were reminded that freddie or Annie was a little lonley because they had no little brother or kid sister to play with. I thought the pony was the better deal LOL! growing up in a family of four was most part fun! and I would never change those memories of feeling cold in bed, but having my big sister and twin bruv in there, laughing telling ghost stories in the dark. Struggle is not always unhappy it's making the best of everything.Today I feel sorry because many children are spoilt and get almost everything they want, this leaves little room to value gifts at christmas and birthdays. It's the fastest! biggest!latest! costly! item available in the best dept store and designed by the best and that's if it ever gets out of the box even.It is not always good been able to give a child EVERYTHING, although it is always our best intention to provide so our child wants for nothing. Wanting! brings desire!and makes achievers and go getters and people who beat the odds and never give up.I am one of those accidents (infact all four of us were accidents) so my MOTHER AND fATHER never learnt their lesson. Although My Mother did'nt work while we were little and things were very tight, Trifle once a year and chocolate orange, jam and bananna on toast,we survived and my parents did..married nearly 60 years.we humans are too quick to take all the credit for great mysteries thus claiming the man made stamp or downing it, to a mere accident.Humans can PLAN and control all they want, but when it comes to the bigger picture (NO human life is an accident) this is where a human learns a lesson that he/she has no real control on nature and Gods plans.Well, that's my take on it, hope I helped :)
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (17 August 2013): Some low income people have more children so that the children grow up and help their family with their business/work. In some rich countries, the government pays benefits to the parents, the more the children the more the benefits. Also, some low income families happen to be more religious/superstitious, and they consider it a sin to "kill" the semen.
And one more thing: I have noticed such people are generally happier than the higher layers of the society. They take it easy and go with the flow. Naturally, they don't care much about the number of their children as much as the educated/rich people do.
...............................
|
