It Costs More to Raise Children Now

“People in the past had (more) kids even though they had less wealth.”

That statement is made to try to cajole people into having (more) kids, as though other factors haven’t come into play.

Life has changed.

More people used to live on family farms or above family shops. The kids were working in the family business as soon as they could walk. Or the kids were going to work in factories, mines, or other income-earning jobs.

If mom and dad weren’t working the family farm or shop together, dad could be working his entire career for the same employer, in the same town.

High school is not much more than a century old, and a much smaller percentage of the population went to college.

Now, for many “professional” or career-type jobs, at least a Bachelor’s degree is required by employers. Landing a job, and subsequent promotions, often requires jumping from company to company and relocating. When you have kids, that becomes very difficult. Layoffs don’t help! If you’re getting your health insurance through your employer, it’s much less of an issue if you’re childfree.

Kids were financial assets from an early age, now they are liabilities for 26-plus years.

Most people don’t think it’s good or even acceptable anymore to have kids, especially kids of the opposite sex, sharing small bedrooms, so each additional child can mean needing an additional bedroom. Even if you’re willing to cram your kids into a small place, housing costs have outpaced inflation.

As have automobile costs, and each child needs their own seat, with a special child’s seat contraption, and then a booster seat, almost until they’re ready to drive themselves. This isn’t the old days of packing onto the floor of a van or the back of a station wagon. Speaking of driving themselves, there are more restrictions on teens driving. Having kids usually means needing larger automobiles.

Healthcare costs have also outpaced inflation. Oh, there are glasses/contacts, dental work, orthodontics, therapy…

College costs have also outpaced inflation. But before college, there’s hiring tutors. Public schools involve certain costs, too, but if you find them unusable, how much do you think private schools cost, hmmm? Oh, “Just homeschool!”? Who’s paying off mom’s student loans then, eh? Homeschooling usually isn’t entirely free, and means much less time and ability to earn income.

I won’t even get into the costs of day orphanages (daycare).

Birthdays. More kids today have a party every year. That doesn’t just mean you have to pay for your own kid’s party every year. There’s buying gifts for, and attending their friends’ parties, too. The time itself is costly. And of course there’s the really big birthday parties: Sweet 16, quinceañeras, bar and bat mitzvahs, which are rivaling weddings for expense and trouble.

Recreation and entertainment costs have gone up. Do you know what it costs to visit a major theme or amusement park now? Professional sports games/matches?

Are you going to pay for your child’s wedding??? 

None of this is even taking into consideration that your child might get involved in something as simple as a schoolyard fight that, nowadays, will require you to hire lawyers. Those aren’t cheap.

What if your child has special needs or a disability? This can not only be costly in money, but time, effort, and freedom as well. And that might continue the rest of your life.

Let’s not forget taxes and all of the other ways government of various levels collects money from us that have increased.

And what happens if the person you made the kid with decides they don’t want to be married anymore? How much is a divorce and ongoing battles over custody, support, and other matters going to cost? How much will the support cost? Therapy for the kids?

No matter how much the fertility rate panic pushers try to gloss over things, children are expensive, draining, and limiting.

People often want to have the same “things” others have, if they see it’s a better life. People also see what other people go through and realize they don’t want that in their life. Many childfree people see what parents deal with, and say “No thanks!” The panic pushers don’t want people to believe their “lying eyes.”

Maybe some of those people in the past or elsewhere are poor mainly because they had more children? It’s also possible poor people have (more) kids because they are something that is “theirs” and they think they can control. Everything else is only theirs until it gets repossessed or their landlord raises rent.

None of these people telling you to have (more) kids are going to be there to pay your bills, or deal with the toils and troubles. No, that will be up to you. And some of those people will be first in line to criticize you if you don’t handle parenting exactly the way they want you to. Because it isn’t simply, “Have kids.” No, no, no… it’s “Have kids, then do everything else the way we say, too.”

They want you to feel guilt and shame for wanting to be somewhat secure, wanting to enjoy your life and freedom, not wanting to struggle. They’ll say what approaches “But you CAN afford kids! You can rent a few square feet in Montana & live in a tent!”

Haven’t we heard over and over again that people sacrifice and struggle and work hard so that future generations have a better life, and can live better than previous generations? And yet if you try to actually fulfill that by living a better life, these panic pushers freak out. These fertility cultists seem to be saying, “No, not a better life for you! Someone else, down the line!”

In addition to monetary costs, many people staying with the default of being childfree also think children should have parents who will stay together, cooperate, and treat each other well, but are perceiving, correctly, that they can’t provide that, or there’s a significant risk of not being able to provide that.

The claim that concerns about the costs of raising children aren’t warranted doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

The Costs of Raising a Child

Oh No! Not Lower Fertility Rates!

If you don't know what "fertility rates" are, it refers to the average number of children born to a group.

There are people freaking out that certain populations are having fewer children. Who? Well:

• People who want more taxpayers around to support the government-run ponzi schemes like Social Security
• Government agencies (and their unions) that rely on saying they need to serve children in order to keep their funding
• Businesses that sell a lot of overpriced, quickly consumed or outgrown stuff for children
• Businesses that "serve" children, such as day orphanages
• Racists who are afraid the "wrong" people will outnumber their descendants

Now why are people having fewer children? Here are the reasons I can think of right now, in no particular order:

Most Men Shouldn’t Marry Nor Have Children

Most men shouldn’t marry nor have children, so most boys should not be raised with the assumption that they will or should marry, and they definitely shouldn’t be raised with the assumption that they will have a lasting, happy marriage.

I realize there are religions out there that pretty much mandate people marry and try to have children. I can’t argue with every different religious organization that claims to have authority over your life. What I do know is that the Bible, taken as a whole and rightly divided, does not mandate you marry and have children. Don’t tell me contraception, tubal ligations, hysterectomies, and vasectomies are wrong because they are are unnatural, as you accept artificial medical treatments, live in a home that has been constructed, and drink water and eat food that has been processed in some way.

Most men shouldn’t marry or have children because 1) they aren’t suited to it, 2) aren’t positioned to do it, 3) aren’t living in a culture that supports it, and 4) won’t find a suitable woman with whom they could.

You Can Choose to Persuade Rather Than Parent

There's a lot to like about Western civilization. It's clearly imperfect, but nothing of this world is perfect. Some people are hellbent on destroying Western civilization and others are useful dupes who are working for the same goal, without realizing it. A major component of Western civilization (WC) is Europe. As such, some people who hate WC and some people who love WC equate the concept with "white" people.

Many defenders of WC fret about the "low fertility rate" in European and certain Anglosphere countries, like the USA. Essentially, if the people of these countries don't have enough children to replace themselves (meaning, more than one child per parent, or more than two children per married couple), the countries will either undergo depopulation or immigrants will fill the void, taking up available residences and jobs.

Some of these fretful defenders of WC really do see it as White Culture and are very concerned that "white" people aren't having enough children and are being "replaced" by others.

Whether someone is concerned about white or Western, they see it as the duty of Europeans, Americans (of European ancestry, if white is the concern), etc. to get married and have and raise at least three children and, in some cases, as many as possible. That way, they reason, we can defend and perpetuate Western culture, preserving our heritage.

There's a problem with that, however.

Running Game - The Hot Sauce Trick

If you're running game, ideally you've had a vasectomy and it tests as still being effective. If that's not the case, you shouldn't be having intercourse without a condom, one that has only been in your possession, not hers. You might want to use a condom even if you have had a vasectomy, for STD prevention. NEVER rely on a woman saying she can't get pregnant or is using some form of contraception. Countless men who have relied on that are stuck with children they didn't want or child support payments, dealing with women who are nightmares.

Either way, used condoms go in the trash, not down the toilet, because that can cause plumbing problems. You need to carry a small bottle of Tabasco or habanero sauce with you when you do this.

Why?

Because adding a few drops of such sauce to a used condom you then place in the trash will let you know if she tries to retrieve the condom to use your sperm against your will. Yes, women have tried this, and yes, the hot sauce trick has worked.

What a Woman Can Do With Your DNA

There are some simple facts of biology. Men usually produce millions of viable sperm cells on an ongoing basis. A man is able to do so starting in puberty and lasting most of the rest of his life. Sperm cells can leave his body while he's asleep. He doesn't have to have an orgasm to expel sperm cells.  New human life takes place inside women. Women get pregnant, men do not.

There are some basic realities of current law. Once a woman has possession of a man's sperm cells, he has lost any control, legally, he has over them.

When a sperm cell leaves a man's body, he loses all control of his own DNA.

Here are the things a woman can do with YOUR sperm cells, men:

Why Are They Surprised?

On Monday, December 30, Michael Medved sounded like he was baffled as to why more and more Americans are placing having (more) children on a much lower place on their list of priorities. Or, at least, he sounded upset. [This entry has been bumped up from 1/1/2020.]

He really needs to have someone who is proudly child-free on the show; someone who can articulate well why they don't see a need for themselves to have children or to encourage others to have children. I'm not talking about an abortion advocate or a population hysteric. Just someone who recognizes that the world has changed and children do not fit into their plans.

Being an observant Jew (of the more conservative - small "c" bent), Medved has no doubt been steeped in a subculture that encourages members to produce as many new congregants as they can (though perhaps not as strongly as Roman Catholicism or Mormonism). More individually, he's a grandpa. The days of struggling to actually raise children is a distant memory for him. Experiences as a  non-custodial grandfather are very different than those of a parent.

Children change EVERYTHING.

The Factory is Closed

I wanted to do it, but my wife was even more desirous of it than me.

I got a vasectomy.

Things are still a little tender, but other than the sharp pain of the initial needle stick to start the local anesthetic, it wasn't painful or uncomfortable at all. Cold packs and over-the-counter pain medication helped.

I know some devout folks are completely against vasectomies. I haven't read or heard a good explanation as to why. On the Bible Answer Man radio program, Hank Hanegraaff likes to answer calls on the subject by citing his own large family (because, you know, each of us can take a six-figure salary running a ministry) and says that God opens the womb and closes the womb. However, most people who say we should "leave it up to God" whether or not we have more children don't take that attitude with just about anything else about their bodies or life in general. Hey, God gave you those wrinkles and age spots! No more makeup for you!!!

"But children are a blessing" a lot of people say. Uh, yeah. Eh... look, I love my children but I don't have time to unpack that one right now.


Why get a vasectomy? Because we don't think we can responsibly parent any more children, but we do get around to having intercourse every week or two. We have a girl, we have a boy, they are both very stubborn and strong-willed. My wife is in no condition to mother more children. (I have thought she isn't holding up her end of the deal as it is, in terms of being a Stay-With-Kids-Mom who gives the children what they need.) I'm feeling old, and when I get home from working the children want to do things with me and I try to engage them, but I'm tired out and want nothing more than to be left alone after that initial welcome home. So, I go ahead and engage them but inside I'm griping and wanting to just sit down and rest. Money is tight and I don't foresee a significant rise in my income.We don't have the money, time, energy, space, or desire to have more children. That's why.

Kevin Federline Needs a Vasectomy

This LATimes.com blog posting reports this item:

His current girlfriend, volleyball player Victoria Prince, 28, is pregnant with her first child with baby-daddy KFed, according to People magazine.

Britney Spears' onetime husband and father of her two boys -- Jayden, 4, and Preston, 5, -- also has two other kids -- Kaleb, 6, and Kori, 8 -- with ex-girlfriend Shar Jackson, an actress-singer who starred in "Moesha." Federline left his baby-momma to be with Spears, who divorced the failed rapper in 2007.

As great as Spears' sons may be, once Federline and Jackson parted rather than marrying, he should have gotten a vasectomy. Now there are four children (that we know about) who are in broken homes, and odds are there will now be a fifth. Jackson's comments on this news took the high road. Good for her. But with each new kid made with a new woman, Federline's existing kids suffer.

Just stop it already, sir. Get a freakin' vasectomy and stop making babies out of wedlock. And women who want to mess around with this guy need to either stop letting this guy’s penis anywhere near their vaginas, or they need to remove their ovaries.

Surveying Teens on Raincoat Usage

Today’s teens are largely clueless about the reality of illegitimacy, Jeannine Stein of the Los Angeles Times reports. Oh, and she also reported on their contraception usage.

The results, released Wednesday by the National Center for Health Statistics, found that 17% of 15- to 19-year-olds used periodic abstinence, or the calendar rhythm method, as a form of contraception in the period from 2006 to 2008. In 2002, 11% of teens used that method.

"That was pretty much a surprise," said Joyce Abma, lead author of the study and a demographer with the center. "The rhythm method is associated with a pretty high failure rate — on average, 25% of women will become pregnant during the first year of using that method. It's not a welcome development, especially in combination with the fact that overall, contraceptive use hasn't changed significantly from the last survey."

Yeah, will, the pill doesn't work when it isn't taken, either.

How closely do they stick to it? And do the girls have enough of history to know their cycles well enough?

The poll of 2,767 teens, which was part of the National Survey of Family Growth, also found that more teens than in years past said they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: "It is OK for an unmarried female to have a child." Among male teens in the current survey, 64% agreed or strongly agreed, while in 2002 50% did. Among female teens that number was 71%, not significantly different from 2002.

Sad. Most people, when presented with the cold hard facts, can see the problems associated with children being born out of wedlock. Are these teens being given those facts? Most aren't. Instead, they are being fed a steady diet of moral relativism and accommodation, and how many of them have been raised out of wedlock themselves?

Unfortunately, the babies can't be more or less written out of the picture, like on "Murphy Brown".

In other significant differences from previous surveys, among male teens who had not yet had sex, 12% said the reason was that they didn't want to get a girl pregnant. In 2002, 25% of male teens who had not yet had sex cited that reason. However, condom use among male teens is up — 81% of never-married males in the current survey said they used them at first intercourse, compared with 71% in 2002.

Here's the most effective method of preventing pregnancy: not having intercourse.

Holding a Partner Hostage

Dear Abby printed a couple of letters that caught my eye.

TROUBLE IN SALINAS, CALIF. wrote:

For the last two years I have been going out with a guy I'll call "Ricky."

From what the letter says later, it sounds like Ricky is a minor - a kid. Two years is a long time.

My problem is I don't love him anymore. A few weeks ago I told him I no longer wanted to be with him, and he started crying. He scared me when he said his life was in my hands.

It is not uncommon for teens to feel that way, especially if they've never had a relationship before. Add in that this kid doesn't live with his dad, and you probably have a guy who is far removed from his masculinity. With his mom working, he is desperate for someone to talk with, and so he latched on to this girl. He probably fawns all over her, and even if he was otherwise okay, she'd still probably grow bored with him.

He wants to marry me, and I don't want to lie and say I will. It disturbs me that he still wants to be together even though he knows I'm not happy with him. He believes that if he's happy, I will be, too.

He may be suicidal, as indicated by saying his life was in her hands. She should take him with her to a school counselor, and then tell the counselor what he said. Then, she should leave and it will morally and legally be in the counselor's hands.

Dear Abby responded:

Call his mother, tell her that you are ending the relationship and that he isn't taking it well. She's in a better position to see he gets emotional and psychological support than you are.

That might be a way to handle it, but what she going to do? Quit working?

Take him to the counselor. Adults who find themselves dealing with someone who threatens or hints at suicide if they are dumped should definitely do that. Set up a joint session with a licensed therapist, if not an actual psychiatrist. Start off the session explaining your concerns, tell the other person it is over, and leave. It will be in the hands of the therapist.

Well, on to the real gem of this installment, where someone is discussing an even more devious way of holding someone hostage than threatening to kill yourself...

KNOWS TOO MUCH IN BETHESDA wrote:

My best friend, "Heather," is trying to trick her husband into having another child.

Ah, yes. Now there's real intimacy. Trying to trick your husband into taking on another child, and telling other people about it.

Now, I know there is a school of thought out there that married couples should always welcome children and should not do anything to avoid conceiving children. By golly, they should probably be careful to let sperm optimally mature in his testicles until the time when she's going to be most fertile, and then go at it – in one position only. He should have intercourse with her at each ovulation, and, if he has intercourse with her, then he's virtually demanding more children. (If he doesn't have intercourse with her right then, then he's evil.)

But the majority of married couples don't subscribe to that thinking. I agree with Dr. Laura here – if one of them says "no", the change (which, in this case, would be going for another pregnancy) is a no-go. There are various forms of contraception, and if a wife is leading her husband to believe she is on contraception, she should not be on contraception.

They already have one, but he doesn't think they can handle two.

Maybe they can't. Kids are very time, money, and energy-consuming. Or, she might enjoy pregnancy and being a mother while he might have found that being a father is more than difficult enough with one child, and that his wife being pregnant, then postpartum and nursing and occupied with a baby - makes life hell for him. Pregnancy doesn't just do things to a wife's body (I found my wife especially beautiful and sexy while pregnant, but some men don't have the same reaction), it does things to her moods and her libido. It limits what she can do in general. And that's just the pregnancy. There's at least 18 years of intense involvement after that.

They have been fighting about this, and it has created problems in their marriage.

That's pretty common.

Heather confided to me recently that she is going to stop using birth control "just to see what will happen," and I'm pretty sure she's not going to tell her husband first.

There are many women out there – married or not – who lie by omission or commission about taking contraception. It's a rotten thing to do, and any man who either does not want to be a father or doesn't want any more children should get snipped and make sure his sperm count is zero. He can always bank some sperm if he thinks he may change his mind later.

While I condemn murder, certain things make a woman more likely to be a murder victim. How many women have been killed because they lied about contraception or their fertility? Okay, they were killed because the guy was a murderer, but you can see what I mean. While the guy may be caught and convicted, the victim and her baby are still dead.

Should I tell him, or keep my mouth shut and act surprised when Heather gets pregnant?

The wife made it this woman's business by telling her. It's pretty messed up, but again – all too common, that the wife has more intimacy with this woman than her own husband. So my advice would be YES, tell him. The wife may drop their friendship, but the wife shouldn't have said anything anyway, and has no moral ground to stand when she is telling other people she is thinking about deceiving her husband about something so important.

Dear Abby agreed.

Misplaced Resentment

Who are these guys who get resentful towards a woman they impregnate?

I’m not excusing women who poke holes in condoms, or retrieve the contents of a condom, or who obtain sperm through oral sex with the intent to insert it into their vagina. Using subterfuge to get pregnant is inexcusable, and women who do such things are selfish and intentionally trying to conceive a child with a man who doesn't want one.

I’m talking about guys who voluntarily take a risk and then lash out at their partner-in-risk when the consequences they hoped against come about.

Unless your sperm count is zero, guys, there’s a chance she’s going to get pregnant if you are fornicating. Condoms aren’t always effective. If you are really so concerned, and yet still decide to fornicate, get a vasectomy.

Some guys complain that women voluntary “take” their sperm, allow it to combine with their egg, and grow a baby without their permission. Permission? Huh? Okay I get that women have contraceptive and abortive options, but conception (once the sperm is inside her) and pregnancy is a natural and passive - not a willful and active – process. The woman isn't intentionally doing anything once you have deposited your sperm, either condom or no condom.

When you fornicate with a woman, you are willingly taking that risk.

There are many obligations that come with being a party to a pregnancy. A man really should think that through before taking that risk.

I’m sure there are guys who don’t want to get a vasectomy in case they want to get married and have kids someday. Such men should consider that if they want to do that, fornicating is counterproductive to doing those things well and being happy in those roles. Especially if they are doing it with a woman they don’t really know or care about.

Leveling the Playing Field: Child Support

This entry is part of a series. The introduction is here. The first two suggestions are here.

Suggestions:

3. Opting out of fatherhood after intercourse. Child Support Compliance offices have been established by local governments, distinct from their District Attorney and County Counsel offices. As long as they are going to have this bureaucracy, why not allow men to publicly register with them, pre-conception, as not wanting to be fathers? Women can check the registry before they choose whether or not to risk getting pregnant by such a man. Then she will be assuming the risks of financial obligations to any child she chooses to birth and keep. Currently, the moment even a single sperm leaves a man’s body, he loses all ability to avoid the legal responsibility of being a father. Women, however, not only have many forms of contraception they can use, but pills that cause early abortions, surgical abortion, and even “safe surrender” of a newborn with no strings attached. Why shouldn’t men also have a post-ejaculation choice? If we are a pro-choice society, shouldn’t men also have a choice, just as women do? Any man who fails to register as not wanting to be a father would retain the obligation to financially support any offspring he produces.

4. Child support standardization. Speaking of child support – if it really is about meeting the child’s needs, then why isn’t it standardized based on half of the cost of raising a child? Who are we fooling when a wealthy person is paying five or six figures a month for a child’s support? No child needs that amount of money, barring some sort of unusual medical condition. That is really going to the lifestyle of the custodial parent. My father, married to my mother, used to make it clear that if he ever won the lottery, we would not be living a lavish lifestyle. No court could have forced otherwise. Yet if he had won and my mother divorced him, the court could have forced him to give me a lavish lifestyle. What kind of sense does that make? I should note, that, conversely, a man should still have to support his offspring’s needs even if he has a lower-than-average income – this standardization would work both ways. Since it is about the “needs of the child” (or so we’re told) the man's income level shouldn’t make a difference.

More suggestions in subsequent posts, as well as my advice to my fellow men given how things are now.

A Jerk Walks Into Dr. Laura’s Den

Today, Dr. Laura was talking with a guy who was angry because he and his wife had agreed (according to him, anyway) to wait until they'd been married five years before having children, and that she agreed to have an abortion if she got pregnant "too early".

She got pregnant "too early" and decided against abortion, and so this guy was taking it out by not being the father he should be to his kid.

Dr. Laura told him - like she tells women - to pretend to be happy for the sake of his child. She told him to stop thinking of himself as the center of the universe, and to love his wife and child, and he’ll feel like the center of their universe.

She also asked why a woman would stay with a man who wanted her to kill her baby, which is a really good point. That woman should have taken off before conceiving a baby with him.

Like me, Dr. Laura recognizes killing babies to be wrong. She did bring that up with the caller, but he thinks that somehow, the baby only becomes a baby when he or she makes it to the second trimester. Which brings up the question... what was growing inside his wife before that?

Anyway, it is possible that the woman agreed to his conditions, but any guy with a brain recognizes that women change their minds, especially after eating wedding cake and even more so when they have a baby growing inside them and their hormones are runnin’ wild. There is also a chance the woman got pregnant on purpose, knowing the law would hold this guy to his financial obligations, if not his emotional ones. But like Dr. Laura said, she should have left the guy before that could happen.

The guy has serious problems, and he needs to get over them. He’s made a baby with his wife and he needs to give that child his all. If he doesn't want another kid, he should undergo the snip-snip. But there’s a woman out there who married him and stayed with him, and kept having sex with him, and made a baby with him.

When I was a shy, introverted teen, I actually used to worry that I'd never have a serious girlfriend. I should have looked around and realized that even serial killers stuck on Death Row get chicks throwing themselves at them.