The Joy of Motherhood

[jimmy olsen]

Notwithstanding that, I still maintain that as a species we have simply transcended biology - we are now running our own evolution that is much faster (and thus much more relevant) than natural selection. Plus, at least in the West, we have developed elaborate systems of law, medicine, technology, finance (pension schemes etc.) etc., which no longer forces old people to rely on the support of their descendants to survive.

Ergo: reproduction on a species/culture level remains necessary, but on an individual level is no longer relevant.

Human evolution has speed up over the last 10,000 years.

[garbon]

I think children are a very reliable investment.  The chances your kid will survive into adulthood and support him or herself are very high...whereas the chances any other investment will pan out are far lower.

I mean with a car or a pet or almost anything else you will probably put a whole lot of money into it and get nothing.

Unless the child eventually takes care of you or pays for your living costs, you don't get anything either.

[Valmy]

Unless the child eventually takes care of you or pays for your living costs, you don't get anything either.

It is sort of a given in most families this happens.  Do you think Marty is just going to let his parents rot?  Of course not he will visit them and eventually look after their interests when they get too old to do so themselves.

Now you may lose out and be estranged from your kids I suppose.  I think that probability is far lower than losing out on most investments.

[garbon]

It is sort of a given in most families this happens.  Do you think Marty is just going to let his parents rot?  Of course not he will visit them and eventually look after their interests when they get too old to do so themselves.

I don't think it is a given at all.  Besides, in the case of my family, my grandparents (mother-side) had 4 children and yet only two of those children helped take care of them.  Were those other two a good investment?

Or on the other side, my grandfather had 9 children, one of those children takes care of him.  Were the other 8 a good investment?

[Caliga]

Do you think Marty is just going to let his parents rot?  Of course not he will visit them and eventually look after their interests when they get too old to do so themselves.

[Martinus]

Notwithstanding that, I still maintain that as a species we have simply transcended biology - we are now running our own evolution that is much faster (and thus much more relevant) than natural selection. Plus, at least in the West, we have developed elaborate systems of law, medicine, technology, finance (pension schemes etc.) etc., which no longer forces old people to rely on the support of their descendants to survive.

Ergo: reproduction on a species/culture level remains necessary, but on an individual level is no longer relevant.

Human evolution has speed up over the last 10,000 years.

That's not true, at least not in genetic sense. It has been replaced by change induced because of culture and human-created environment (which is part of culture).

[Ed Anger]

I keep kids in Pokeballs, and arrange fights with other parents.

[garbon]

I keep kids in Pokeballs, and arrange fights with other parents.

Umm...they'll suffocate.

[Valmy]

I don't think it is a given at all.  Besides, in the case of my family, my grandparents (mother-side) had 4 children and yet only two of those children helped take care of them.  Were those other two a good investment?

Or on the other side, my grandfather had 9 children, one of those children takes care of him.  Were the other 8 a good investment?

If that is all they require then yes.  I do not think your Grandfather wants or needs 9 caretakers.

[garbon]

If that is all they require then yes.  I do not think your Grandfather wants or needs 9 caretakers.

How do you figure that? That's 8 children who don't really benefit him.

[The Brain]

I'm never having babies, thank you very much. 

[Syt] You're missing out! [/Syt]

[Ed Anger]

I keep kids in Pokeballs, and arrange fights with other parents.

Umm...they'll suffocate.

[Valmy]

How do you figure that? That's 8 children who don't really benefit him.

But they are there if he needs them.  They simply are not needed.

Also I guess I was coming from the idea that creating family members is a worthwhile investment in itself.  That is a network that can be very close and can benefit you.  Having a bunch of expensive cars just doesn't have the same return.  Similarly, having tons of realestate property is not the same as having actual cash, but they are resource you can tap into if you need them.  A key difference is you do not have to pay taxes on children-actually you get to play fewer taxes which is rather unique as far as investments go.

[Malthus]

It is sort of a given in most families this happens.  Do you think Marty is just going to let his parents rot?  Of course not he will visit them and eventually look after their interests when they get too old to do so themselves.

I don't think it is a given at all.  Besides, in the case of my family, my grandparents (mother-side) had 4 children and yet only two of those children helped take care of them.  Were those other two a good investment?

Or on the other side, my grandfather had 9 children, one of those children takes care of him.  Were the other 8 a good investment?

The point is to have someone to take care of you. If you have zero children, there is zero chance of this.

[ulmont]

The point is to have someone to take care of you. If you have zero children, there is zero chance of this.

Unless you remarry someone 30 years younger than you.