kids vs. retirement

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Funny. My son is angelic with the girls over at the gym that watch your kids while you work out. They're all in love with him because he's so well behaved.

He's saving it up for when he gets home...

 

[FIREd]

I have to chuckle when I read people using their experience with nephews/nieces as a gauge for having/not having children. It's a totally different experience.

So the only way to gauge whether parenthood is for us would be to have kids of our own and give it a ... "test drive"? If, after a few years, we decide parenthood is not for us, hum, I guess I'll shove it back up my wife's uterus and pretend it never popped out

Edited for style...

 

[laurence]

So what are you proposing? Maybe DW and I should have a kid. If, in a few years, we decide parenthood is not for us, hum, I guess I'll shove it back up my wife's uterus and pretend it never popped out How would you propose one gauges whether having a child would work for them? You can chuckle now...

LOL - my two bits is that if you have to wonder, I'd bet against it being a good idea. Kids are a ton of work, a ton of commitment, and get in the way of a social life something fierce! Heck, I really, REALLY wanted kids and even I sometimes hear stories of weekends my DINK coworkers have and envy their weekend for a minute or two.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Hey, I'm pretty sure you arent allowed to say 'uterus' within 4 posts of someone saying 'ovaries'.

I remember an old comedy routine where it was alleged that the uterus is also a tracking device, because men always ask women to help them find things that they've misplaced.

So its common for people to become confused when I cant find something and call out "Honey? I need your uterus for a minute!". The first time I said that in front of my in-laws-to-be it got a little complicated.

 

[Delawaredave5]

so, what's your number? what's the suggested number of kids to have? how much extra can you invest with just one kid? do you feel missed out by just having one child? does the extra loves from having 3,4 or more kids worth the extra 5-10 years of working life?

I think decision on another child should be a "love and emotion" decision - if economics is in the equation, I'd err on the side of "holding pat".

Cost of kids is fairly "linear" (more kids, more cost) -- but I think there's a non-linear cost jump when going from 2 to 3. Usually at 3 kids:
- you need the minivan not the sedan,
- you need 4 bedrooms, not 3
- you need 2 hotel rooms, not 1
- etc

Our decision was 2 kids. Has been wonderful. I'm not sure it would be "50% more wonderful" with 3 kids or "double wonderful" with 4......

I originally was against just 1 child - worried about "only child" impact on development not having siblings. But I now think that's baloney -we have a lot of friends with 1 child and they are just as "normal and adjusted" as families with multiple kids.

 

[P.S.]

I think Enuff's questions are valid. Consider that really in very few industrialized countires (let alone the entire world) do we have the luxury of making these decisions without the factor of money.
People get married for a number of different reasons. And that seems to be acceptable. To declare that economics should not enter into the decision of why you choose to have or not have any or more kids is a bit arrogant.
In some countries (like Italy, Germany) a basic standard of life (health care, pension, etc) may be pretty well provided for but a well paying job is difficult to find. This may result in kids living with their parents longer and may contribute to a lower national birth rate.
Some countries have very little social structure and no pension or retirement opportunities of which to speak. So having children that survive into adulthood is the means to ensure one is cared for in your dotage. Is this not an economic decision? How would you comment on the not uncommon practice in certain countries of selling a child into slavery (e.g. Congo or countries where the sex slave trade is rampant)?
Kids do take alot of resources, be it love, money, time, energy, or whatever else. So why would you have just 2 instead of 3 kids? B/c you don't have enough love? Why is one factor any more justifiable or loftier than another?
fwiw, we have one kid and another will be arriving soon (and judging from the u/s, a carbon copy of the first).

 

[sailor]

Cost of kids is fairly "linear" (more kids, more cost) -- but I think there's a non-linear cost jump when going from 2 to 3. Usually at 3 kids:
- you need the minivan not the sedan,
- you need 4 bedrooms, not 3
- you need 2 hotel rooms, not 1
- etc

Superstitions Or maybe substitute need for want.

1. Last time I checked most sedans sold in US can carry 5 people. If you need to fit small kids in the back, the key is to get narrow child seats (like Radian 65 for example). Even with 5 kids you can get fit them in pre-2007 V70 Volvo station wagon
2. So tell my why bunk beds are so popular?
3. Not if your kids are used to narrow spots, like bunks on a boat Than you can fit three or four of them on a queen bed

Also in few things economy of scale enters the equation, for example:
- babysitter does not charge 50% more per hour for watching 3 kids vs. 2 kids. (in our area we pay 10/14/16 per hr for watching 1/2/3 kids)
- you can frequently have kids do the same activities, so at least your per kid transportation costs are lower.
- for the second kid you need to buy less stuff, even more true with the third one


Sailors,
expecting the third one in December

 

[LOL!]

Also in few things economy of scale enters the equation, for example:
....

You forgot to mention all those restaurants which advertise "... and the kids eat free!"

We've only bought one home in our lifetime: a 4-br 3.5 ba house. We had a toddler at the time. In our ZIP code close to our jobs, a 3-br home was a rare thing indeed and would've still be a tough resell. The incremental housing cost when our second kid came along years later: $0. We had a station wagon before any of our kids were born (actually before we were married, my spouse had a station wagon which she brought into the marriage). Incremental vehicle cost when we were up to 2 kids: $0.

One very easy way to reduce the costs of having children is to try to time the birth about 1 year after the birth of the child of a close friend or relative. As the other child grows, you will have access to a lot of free stuff including clothes, toys, books, musical instruments, sports equipment, junk, etc.

 

[bongo2]

You forgot to mention all those restaurants which advertise "... and the kids eat free!"

They pretty much always require a paying adult per-kid, so that is another example where you do not get scale economies past 2.

Sailor: perhaps after you've had three kids for a while you'll see what we're talking about. Or perhaps not. I'm talking about living a typical modern urban lifestyle. I suppose that is a "want" not a "need". BTW, volvo station wagons are really expensive.

A lot of people have talked about having children in terms of the impact on their personal happiness. I think there is a little more to it than that. It may be worth some personal inconvenience to provide the best life you can to someone else.