Warning: The following is not a universal list. Far from it. In fact, many of these “expenses” are hugely valued among an enormous segment of the population. So much so that it might even seem offensive to label some of these things as simple “expenses.” Plenty of these things enrich and bring joy to those who have chosen to spend their money on them. There’s no intent to insult here. The purpose of this list is to get the undecided or inexperienced to at least consider the alternative of these otherwise expensive, societal defaults.
1. Children
How many of us are the products of a generation of parents who had kids because it was “the thing to do“? Not having kids doesn’t necessarily mean you’re selfish. It means you’re not willing or currently unable to put another little “you” on this planet. Great parents should be applauded and respected. But kids cost money. If you’re not in a place to facilitate their happiness as well as your own, then maybe make a plan to get there or even reconsider.
2. A New Car
If no one bought new cars, there would be no used cars… but why exactly do people buy new cars? Of course there are a million reasons, but a good chunk of the new-car buying public might end up happier if they refused to buy a new car they only sorta want, and instead sought out and purchased a used version of a car they REALLY want.
3. Pricey College / Extra Education
There seems to be a developing, cultural addiction to higher-learning. Gotta get a degree from a big name school right? Not… really. Yes, a degree from a respected institution is going to make you more money in most fields. But if you’re going just to go, then you risk finding yourself getting lost in the lifestyle of pretend adulthood. You might end up getting a degree in something you really have no interest in. You graduate, start to work in that field, then decided to give it up only to… go back and start all over in something else. Find something you like. Focus on it. Make it happen, and don’t be afraid to jettison the cult of higher education if a solid opportunity to put your skills to work comes along. You can always go back. They’ll take your money.
Minimize the debt, maximize the experience.
4. A big, traditional wedding.
More often than not, these are stress-bombs that end up looking and feeling like elaborate stage productions with every ounce of the Bride and Groom’s personalities being stripped from the ceremony. It’s your day. The both of you. Do what you want to do. If that means getting married in a park, then having a nice dinner out with a close group of family and friends, and then a bar crawl in your wedding getups… then good on ya.
5. A big house
Every extra, unused room in a house = one less long weekend getaway you can take a year. Why do you need all that space unless you’re a homebody hoarder? Get out of the house man.
6. A Fat Mobile Phone Plan
There are plenty of options that’ll keep you relatively connected. And taking your nose out of your phone every so often is a good way to… look around at the world around you. The internet can answer all questions, but figuring out the answers for yourself without the help of the smartphone crutch is a great way to exercise your brain.
Look at your phone. Is it really worth it? What would you do with the money if you downsized?
7. Not living close to where you work
Gas. Wear and tear on your mode of transportation. Lost time. It’s not always possible, but if you can find someplace to work that’s 10, maybe 20 minutes from where you sleep at night, you’re going to save a ton of money.
8. Cable TV or Satellite
If there’s a game on you have to see, hit up a sports bar or restaurant (or, actually buy tickets to it). Also, there’s always Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon prime for dramas and comedy. The day The History Channel became “History” and started running “reality” TV shows was the day Cable crossed a bloated sow rubicon.
9. “Vacations” to fulfill family obligations
If you have fun with your family, then by all means spend your vacation time with them. If they’re not that much fun to be around, and you keep blowing your vacation budget on trips of which the only purpose is to avoid guilt trips, then take a step back. It might be time to strongly reconsider the usual interpretation of “you can’t choose your family“.
10. Excessively Nice/Formal Clothes when you have no cause to wear them
Owning a tux is a fantastic thing. But if you don’t go to more than one black tie event every five years, then what’s the point? Same for expensive suits, shoes, etc… If you don’t have cause (or the honest desire) to wear the stuff, and it’s just going to sit in your closet, then get the most for your money on something less expensive that can be managed with careful upkeep. If you’re twenty years old, you might need a suit. Not five. Nice clothes can be a means to an end. But if your wardrobe spending habits are keeping you from going out and enjoying life… then it’s time to change.
We all can’t be Jack Donaghy. Actually, none of us can.
Additions are welcome in the comments. And what’s “lifestyle” mean to you anyway? It’s not as shallow as nice shoes and a closet full of slick clothes, is it? Leave it all below.
#1 I completely agree with but Ill bet youre going to get some comments on that one…
#3 if done right can greatly improve your earning potential and make this entire list moot
#7 Im definitely guilty of – 1 hour minimum commute each way
#7 kills me. I live about 50 minutes from work. Even owning a hybird, I spend about $6.50 to drive to and from work. Hence, I car pool with 3 co workers which saves a lot of money. But my place of employment is in the middle of nowhere. The closest town is where I live and its still very small (less than 30,000).
#1 should be Tobacco
#2 should be Alcohol/Drugs
#3 should be Eating Out
Agree with some more than others, but definitely disagree with #3. There may be a lesson about not having to go right after high school and only getting a degree when you know what you want to do, but higher education should never be considered an unnecessary life killing expense.
I disagree with your point on #3. Sure, maybe it greatly improves your earning potential; but the vast majority of college graduates do not experience this and are saddled with a huge hunk of debt for 10-20 years or longer. Personally I bought into this, attended a expensive private college with a good reputation, and have what I guess is a pretty good job. I strongly believe the education received was not all that different from what I could have gotten at a much more affordable public institution. Given on the job training, I’m also reasonably sure that I could have done my job after high school. College has become the admission ticket to employment rather than something with much intrinsic value.
Come on man…. drugs are good and when you do them people think that you’re cool..
1/2 No argument. 3 – once and a while is great, good to experience some fine cuisine here and there but you are right. Too many do it far too often. Everyone can benefit from a good home cooked meal.
Exactly. It appears that the author has ignored the obvious vices that plague many on this Planet instead going for the quick boost to readership brought on by introducing controversy.
Don’t take the above as an attack. A site must at times “stir the pot” to increase readership to appease their advertisers.
I wish more unfit parents would have thought a bit more before they did the deed, but in today’s selfish world we have sex to satisfy our wants and not for it’s intended purpose of procreation.
Hard to argue with the list. Being guilty of 7 of them, I can certainly confirm they are big expenses. I will say 2 was driven by 1 – Needed a family size car and when shopping the best value was actually on a new car. Demand for used cars these days is pretty high and the discounts aren’t as significant as they used to be. On 4, both me and my wife in retrospect would have rather spent that money on something else. We all had a great time. But its a ton of money for what amounts to a party.
$26,000 on my wedding, for what turned out to be 5 years of marriage. If she isn’t an actual princess, she doesn’t need a fairy tale wedding.
Phew, I thought you were talking about me! I don’t own a tux!
I dunno…I kind of agree with Joe. Just as an example, I know, have heard, or have read about plenty of people who want to get an MBA. When you ask them what they want to do with it, many say, “I dunno….” They just think that the end destination has to be better than where they are right now. Most don’t ever consider, and some even outright refuse to consider, that it might be slightly better than or the same as where they are right now, only with the burden of another 1-2 years of full-time tuition. School is absolutely essential when done right, but don’t just assume that any degree is a magic ticket to a better life .
“College has become the admission ticket to employment rather than something with much intrinsic value.”
This supports his argument.
I have to say the wedding thing resonates highly with me. My cultural background, you have to have giant elaborate weddings and it’s offensive if you don’t invite every family friend and relative. My older brother’s wedding all in was about 55k, which blows my mind. It was an awesome wedding, everyone had a blast, and I definitely think we more than got our money’s worth (Hilton hotel was new, they gave us ridiculous deals to start new business). I told my parents though to save their money, I refuse to do something crazy like that and if I do I am doing it on my own tab.
I can tell you though that in the last two years I’ve been to two, six figure weddings and it is mind blowing.
Since Pierrot predicted it, I’ll go ahead and jump in on #1.
Having children is probably the most important and satisfying thing you’ll ever do in your life, and recent generations’ growing rejection of children is extremely sad. Being a parent is a fundamental part of the human experience, and avoiding it (or amazingly, even looking down on it.), is a great loss for individuals, and society as a whole. People are focusing on being able to afford fleeting pleasures and missing what matters in the end.
Just a few points:
Having children (and marriage to a degree), forces you to stop living in a “it’s all about MEEEE world” and consider others first, or at least it should. It can be key part of your development into a whole person.
Being able to impart your wisdom and guide a child is one of the most satisfying things you can do as a person.
When you’re 70 and sitting in your house alone, with little to show for your life other than a pile of stuff and some photos, are you going to care much about those shoes you bought when you were 27, or your extra vacation?
Children are your legacy. (For most people, their only legacy) They’re what you leave behind to the world when your moment is gone. You want to change the world? Have kids, and raise them right.
Anyway…
Look, I know this is hard for people without kids to grasp. They just see expenses and work. However, until you have them, you really don’t understand children (this is especially true of men.). I don’t mean this is in a derisive way. I’m serious. You really can’t understand. There’s a depth of innocence in kids that can’t be explained, and your feelings towards your own will surprise you.
Don’t be sucked in by society’s profit-driven devotion to hedonism and make a huge mistake. Skip the shoes, have the kids.
Gotta say I agree with all of these except #1. I think the majority of people are pre-wired for kids (biologically through evolution we’ve been made to have that as our #1 goal in life). As for when you should have kids I agree you shouldn’t do it unless you have the means to support them without any help from the government.
#8 I would definitely do if I wasn’t such an NBA and NFL fan.
Well said.
Joe said “If you’re not in a place to facilitate their happiness as well as your
own, then maybe make a plan to get there or even reconsider.”
I think this is the salient point of Joe’s article. Maybe having children is important and satisfying, but if you honestly do not believe that you are capable of providing them with the life they deserve (raising them right – as you said) then why do it? Your assertion that that children are your legacy may be true, but many of us would prefer to leave our mark in other ways.
LOL, Joe had to have known that leading off with the kids was going to get it going early today. Will the comment count rival the $40 Allen Edmonds post? Stay tuned!
Your top three are more penny-wise, whereas Joe’s, I think, are more pound-wise. Tobacco is certainly a waste of money, but what’s the point in making money if you aren’t going to be spending it on food and booze? Children, Cars, and College are certainly a bigger sink on your money than any of these. If you skipped those three (or went to a cheap/free school), you could probably eat every meal out and drink nothing but Dom for the rest of your life.
My (expensive, disastrously sleep-robbing, and constantly needy) daughter is just about 15 months old. I’m not sure how you’re defining “lifestyle,” but I feel like becoming a parent has ennobled my style. Upon the birth of my daughter, I felt for the first time welcomed into the adult world, and this feeling inspired a regal confidence that allowed me to dress at once more conservative and rumpled, even as I felt more human and stylish. I actually wrote about this on my blog: http://thenewsavagery.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-good-drunken-sleep-on-beach-mens.html. In any case, I’m guilty of 1-6, but these are things that make life, well, life.
How exactly? He says ‘if done right can…’ I maintain that ‘non pricey’ (linking back to the articly above) education can achieve the same result. It is the degree that matters more than where it is from. And it a degree is basically a prereq for everything these days. It is unfortunate, but you need college. What you don’t need is an elite institution or graduate level education. We have just been convinced that we do.
@disqus_LgV2rBdO40:disqus
The human experience is whatever a person decides to make it. The human experience is possibility. People can and should live their lives maximizing their own happiness. I am glad that children maximize yours, but that is not the case for those people that embrace a broader human experience than getting married and having kids. Life is meant to be lived. Kids can wait.
I think the key word in Joe’s articles is “defaults.” Of course none of these things are inherently always a bad choice. None of them hurt or disrespect other people and any of them can be highly rewarding to someone who values them. I think the point is that we grow up in a society thinking that these things are benchmarks for when we have finally “made it.” (wherever “it” is…) So, many people just automatically opt for them before they truly consider all the impacts and alternatives. I’m sure we all can relate to and refute different items on that list. The point is to think for yourself and only partake of the ones that you will personally value over the long term.
While I agree that you don’t need an elite institution (both my undergraduate and graduate degrees were from state schools), I think the fact remains, unfortunately, that the REALITY of the situation is that people who do it right (e.g. major in an in-demand concentration, go to an Ivy League school) will have greatly-improved earning potential.
In a perfect world we would have a trade school/university/graduate/professional educational system that reflects the demands of the job market. As it stands, however, we are in the middle of education inflation that requires everyone to have at least a bachelors just to get their foot in the door. It reminds me of high school when everyone was just starting to figure out the impact that AP classes can have on GPA/competitiveness, then EVERYBODY was taking AP classes, diluting the impact.
So if I don’t have 2, 5, or 6, I’m not really experiencing life?
I agree if everyone does it, it lose its value. But that doesn’t change the fact that Ivy leaguers are unemployed too. Look at the job market in law and finance right now. Lots of lay offs for people with lots of student loans. Even from the upper crust institutions.
In terms of the implied argument that not having kids is selfish, there are a few things to consider. The first is that if, for whatever reason, you are unable to provide a stable environment to raise a child, having one anyway is arguably MUCH more selfish than not having a child in the first place. Joe is absolutely right about being able to facilitate your child’s happiness. If you can’t do it, you shouldn’t have them to begin with. Secondly, if having children is what it takes for you to put the needs of others above your own, I’d say that you were an incredibly selfish person to begin with.
if i self appoint myself as a devil’s advocate: you know, for someone who didn’t mean to be “in a derisive way”, you couldn’t help with cheap shots, could you now? What’s with “”it’s all about MEEEE world” or “being old and sitting your house alone”, etc??
I get that you strongly feel this way and no doubt there are many who share that sentiment, but c’mon. This is not a fact, that is, you get more meaning in life if you have a kid, that you’re arguing here. For many, this is certainly the case, but definitely not all. While I respect your opinion on the matter and you sound like being sincere, you’re kinda looking down on the folks who “chose” not to have kids here. Not to mention you obviously have some bias against them.
I was at a friend of a friend’s BBQ recently and ran into a couple that had 11, ELEVEN, children between the two of them (several from previous relationships) and one other women that had 6. None, NONE of these parents had the financial ability to support their broods. I’m pretty sure Planned Parenthood offers free condoms and other forms of birth control.
Kids cost money. A lot of money. People need to think about that before they start squirting them out just because they’re cute.
What about a general “Keeping up with the Joneses”?
The one thing that all of these have in common is that they’re things that give some people a great deal of joy, and not others.
The important thing is to resist social pressure to do what “everyone does” and instead, spending your money where it makes you happy. That COULD be nicer clothes than you need, or it COULD BE that new car every few years, or it COULD BE nice dinners out. A couple of my newlywed friends don’t have money to go out to eat, really, but save dollars (literally – there’s a jar in their apartment) and splurge on Michelin-starred restaurants a couple times a year. A great use of money? Maybe not exactly, but they really enjoy it and it makes them both happy.
You have needs, and wants, and a pile of money. Take care of your needs, spend extra to get some of your wants (a slightly nicer car?), just make sure where you’re spending lines up with what your values are.
I concur. The meaning of life is what you make, on your own.
This list explains exactly how I live my life at the moment. No kids, no wife, no tux, no new car, no big house, state (cheap) college, and walking distance to my work and other great extra things (coffee shops, bars, entertainment). No cable, no big mobile phone and great vacations so far. I can just say I’m loving it! (Not that it wont change, it still can, but for now, it’s awesome.)
Completely agree.
#8 can get more expensive than just having cable as far as sports go (unless you head to the bar and not drink)…there are better options like the mlb app, over the air broadcasts, go to a friends house
I’m referring to the expenses of being alive. I don’t actually have a “new car” or a “big house,” although I do have a disgusting mobile plan, and I do have approximations of the first two, and their expense, to me, seems to just be a part of the experience of living life. I’m sure you have your own approximations. Sorry, wasn’t trying to imply that I’m driving a new car to my fat house, and that’s life. Just trying to make a point that I don’t see these things as “lifestyle killing.” For most of us, they’re just part of life.
So skipping kids does not “necessarily mean you’re selfish” but it will allow you to eat out and drink nothing but Dom. No, that’s not selfish at all.
More pointedly, owning a car, period.
AAA says the average cost of owning a car in America is 9100/yr. Just ride your bike. You’ll save thousands and be fitter.
And before you say, “I live x and I can’t ride my bike”–move out of the suburbs. And don’t complain about the weather, I live in Minnesota and ride year-round.
Not sure if serious…
Not everyone wants that out of life
So, what’s wrong with looking down on someone for the choices they make? We have no power to make anyone do anything and we are not allowed to violate anyone’s rights, but we are not required to support/condone/accept anyone’s choices.
That was said to illustrate the enormity of the cost of those three things, particularly kids and college. It is not a commentary on having kids, just the cost one must incur to support them. I fail to see how not having kids is a selfish thing. Is it selfish to not get married? Are priests all selfish? It would be selfish if you were doing all those things at the expense of supporting your children. Of course that’s true, but it also isn’t what I or Joe said, so…what’s your point?
The job market doesn’t allow a lot of flexibility at the moment. I live in a big city but could only find a job in the suburbs!
I just wonder how many people arguing in favor of #1 actually have kids. My guess is the majority do not, and therefore cannot and will not understand how life changing children are. The financial cost to facilitate a child’s happiness is astonishingly low. And it’s amazing how shallow and empty you find certain things that used to bring you happiness before you had kids after you feel the pure unadulterated joy of sharing happiness with your children.
With regards to what kids deserve, who says they deserve anything at all? The Millennial Generation seems to be incapable of understanding that the only things you deserve in life are what you earn for yourself. As such, your children only deserve to have their basic needs met and everything else is gravy. It doesn’t take money to raise kids right, it takes parents who aren’t self absorbed and preoccupied.
Unless you’re incredibly philanthropic, and you leave your mark by caring for as many less fortunate people as you possibly can, your mark will be insignificant compared to a parent’s. I can’t think of anything more honorable and wonderful than an altruistic person who forgoes having children because there are so many less fortunate people in the world who deserve compassion and love. But to think for a moment that you will leave your mark without touching people, you’re sadly mistaken. “People will forget what you said. People will forget what you did. But people will never forget how you made them feel.” Feelings are not predominately derived from things that are expensive.
Alcohol and eating out bring me happiness though.
Oh, right. Sorry, I misunderstood. I agree with you that pretty much everyone has to have basic costs for shelter, transportation, etc. I thought you meant that new expensive versions of those, like described in 1-6, were the only option and an unavoidable fact of life.
Ugh, suburbs. The worst.
Yeah, I hear you. I live in a big city and I still end up riding 20 miles roundtrip every day to work. I’m fortunate though in that my work has a shower for when I get there and I can ride 9.5 of the 10 miles one way on bike paths.
Higher Ed is seen by many as the next bubble to burst. 1) it’s an intangible commodity 2) purchased mainly by “cheap” debt and 3) has a questionable return.
From http://www.merriam-webster.com:
self*ish:
1: concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one’s own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others
2: arising from concern with one’s own welfare or advantage in disregard of others
I think the key point here is “without regard for others” or “in disregard of others.”
So unless you’re arguing that everyone has an obligation to spawn, and not doing so is somehow depriving society or some number of theoretical offspring, eating out and drinking Dom are simply catering to yourself without impact to others.
No, that’s NOT selfish at all.
Amen brother… A bunch of my friends are going thru divorces and the 1# regret is the chunk of change blown on the wedding..
If you are having children to solve your own problems (selfishness, irresponsibility, lack of satisfaction, failure to otherwise make a lasting impact or “legacy”) then you are having children for the wrong reasons.
Sorry buddy, not everyone likes, wants or feels pressured to follow the outdated stereotype of “2.5 kids, a mini-van, suburbs and saturday night dinner at Olive Garden”
Re: #3 I think that’s Joe’s point; too many people are NOT “doing it right”. That’s how I ended up with a $20k-ish Bs in Astronomy that has no direct bearing on what I do day to day. I think his point was to take the time to discover what you’d be willing to do for 35 years;if pursuing that means post-secondary then go for it then. Don’t enrol as some latter-day rite if passage.
I don’t know the Jones and don’t care what they do..LOL
To give a little more perspective on both sides of this argument, take a look at this…
http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/05/28/half-of-college-grads-are-working-jobs-that-dont-require-a-degree/
And this…
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/04/02/college-grads-earn-nearly-three-times-more-than-high-school-dropouts/
Holding a degree predicts you’ll be better off in the long run, though getting one from an upper crust institution isn’t necessary by any means. Employers are much more interested in what you can do opposed to where you got your degree. But employers also know that a degree from an elite institution means you can do quite a bit. Only very few Ivy leaguers are unemployed compared to degree holders from other institutions, and only very few degree holders are unemployed period. The unemployment rate for College graduates is still below the lowest average national unemployment rate in decades.
I’ll also add that just as much as a College degree has become the price of admission in many fields, an advanced degree has become the price of admission for advancement in many organizations.
I’m not advocating that someone go get a degree, in fact, I’d like to see a broader selection of education paths available including apprenticeships, respectable technical education, and other higher educations options. I think reforming many of our degree structures would help as well (does Law School really require 3 years of training AFTER a bachelors when an engineering degree can be done during a bachelors? and so forth).
“As such, your children only deserve to have their basic needs met and everything else is gravy.”
This strikes me as a relic from an era when kids were less a “lifestyle choice” and more like “unpaid farm labor.”
This. Thanks a lot for the unrealistically high expectations, Society/Disney…
First of all, nobody is “squirting them out just because they’re cute.” Your derisive tone is exactly the kind of condescension that hami was addressing, and it’s part of what is causing the problems described in this WSJ article: (Bumper sticker version: “The nation’s falling fertility rate is the root cause of many of our problems. And it’s only getting worse.”)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323375204578270053387770718.html
The connection between population growth and the solvency of government is almost certainly why so many subsidies are available to people who have more children than their incomes can comfortably support. I’ve even heard it said that having children is akin to a civic duty, though I wouldn’t go that far. I do think, though, that the importance and value of raising children is severely underappreciated by American society, and that this will have immense and lasting negative effects on society as a whole (both fiscally and psychologically).
Smoking crack brings people happiness, too.
Don’t know your ethnicity, but in a lot of cultures, it goes both ways. As the bride and groom, you have to spend a lot of money on the wedding and party, but as the guest, you have to also give financially significant gifts, often in the form of cash. So the more people you have to invite, the higher your costs, but the higher the return as well. The final outlay isn’t always the same as the upfront cost. Sometimes, I hear you even make money…
Could you say anything else though? How many people are honest enough with themselves to say “I spent 18+ years and hundreds of thousands of dollars on this little project, and man, did I ever waste my time and money. I wish I had bought the shoes.”
That’s not to say that everyone will be unhappy having children, but I don’t think humans, in general, are wired to accept that something so time-consuming and expensive was a mistake. Not to mention the psychological blow of letting your kids know you wish you’d never conceived them.
Studies seem to show that on average, people with kids are less happy than people without. And people with kids aren’t really as happy as they claim to be. But of course, that’s just an average.
I agree here. As a 22 year old who isn’t married and has no children, for me its more about perspective and motives. If you want to have a kid bc you think it’ll be fun, or give you some sort of purpose, I think thats wrong. But if you don’t want them bc you think they cost too much, they’re too much of a hassle, and you want to just be free and live your life, then thats wrong too. But I think we can be selfish in wanting children as hami1car stated above, bc children is something that takes you to a whole different level of joy and satisfaction that good clothes, and exotic trips simply can’t.
So for me its more- sacrifice the simple pleasures, fight for the greater joy.
That’s a completely inane comparison. Casual drinking has actually showed to increase life expectancy and isn’t a monetary burden for me. Neither is eating out once or twice a week.
My point is that you shouldn’t forgo things that bring joy to your life in the name of saving every last penny. There’s being financially responsible(I have savings and a retirement account) and then there is living the best years of your life without the things you love for the sake of frugality. You won’t be thinking of savings on your death bed. I will however be thinking of all the great things I enjoyed in life.
“Hi Mom! Hi Dad! So nice to see you . . . heeeeeeyyyyy, is the game on? What a coincidence!”
So wait, everyone should follow your advice in your first comment, even though it’s only fortunate circumstances that allow you the satisfaction of riding your bike to work? You might want to re-evaluate how harshly you judge those who choose to own cars.
#2 is especially true if what you really want is a luxury car. Because the target market for luxury cars has the income to splurge on new, that means the cost of a used one drops significantly. You can often find deals like a used Lexus with >100k miles for the same price as its Corolla equivalent.
What I was responding to was that with the savings one could eat out and drink dom every night.There is no consideration that the extra money one would save might be used towards a higher purpose than drinking expensive alchohol or as Merriam puts it, no “regard for others”, You supplied the definition but I believe it serves my point. I am not saying that anyone has any obligation to help others but you can’t say that choosing to spend resources on extravagances like extremely pricey alchohol is “not selfish at all”. It certainly isn’t selfless.
#1 is controversial so I am wading into dangerous waters here, but here goes.
Most people who have children, have them for the wrong reasons. They do it to fix themselves or their relationships or simply because it’s expected of them and they don’t know what else to do.
Some people say not having a child is selfish. Maybe that’s right, but having children is also selfish, if you can’t precisely articulate why you are doing so in a way that doesn’t boil down to serving your own ego and interests.
Common reasons cited for having children:
It forces you to grow up. Wait, so the reason you are taking control of the life of a miniature human being with its own needs and rights and future is BECAUSE you are immature and irresponsible?! Shouldn’t you work on that, I don’t know, BEFORE you have kids?
It is the legacy you leave to the world. This is true, but there are plenty of other ways to leave a legacy. Being a good person; being awesome at your job; being a community participant and leader; being an organ donor; being a volunteer. If by “legacy” you mean “my awesome genes/worldview get passed on” then, well, yes I suppose that’s true, but how is that not selfish and ego-oriented to assume the world benefits from more of your genes/worldview?
You have the opportunity to pass on your wisdom. Don’t you already have the opportunity to do this, um, every day? The main difference is that a small child is much easier to indoctrinate, so if your wisdom isn’t self-evidently wise, you’ll have a much easier time passing it onto a tiny human who depends on your for food, shelter, and emotional stability. The ability to mold a tiny, helpless human being to share your values is, once again, more selfish and ego-oriented than not.
It will bring you closer to your (girlfriend, wife, spouse, partner, etc.). This one shouldn’t even need explanation. But it does highlight what I think is an important underlying factor for some of the other reasons. Pressure can bring out the best in people, but it can also bring out the worst. If you are irresponsible or immature or feeling unsatisfied with life or that you haven’t contributed anything meaningful to the world, what makes you think having a child will solve, rather than simply exacerbate, those problems? Having children certainly doesn’t fix relationships that are already rocky to begin with.
Having a child is one of the most major decisions a person will make in their life. You are literally creating another human being who will be subject to your care, flaws and all, for the 18 or so most developmentally important years of their life. Working as a public defender, I have encountered more than my fair share of people who are royally effed up today because they were raised by people who were selfish and immature, and people who are effing up their own children because they had them for selfish reasons or no reason at all.
It was a theologian I read, Stanley Hauerwas, who wrote that if you cannot articulate valid reasons to have a child – reasons that don’t include fixing your own problems or “just because” – you should probably not have them. At least not yet.
As a bit of a post-script, there is also the matter of people who seem to believe that childless people do not have a valid opinion when it comes to decisions of whether to have children or not. I would argue the exact opposite is true. People who have children are generally deeply emotionally invested in those children, as well as their own identity as parents. They generally cannot view the issue in a way that is not extremely biased toward their own position that parenthood is extremely meaningful and children are life-changing and everyone should make the same life decisions that they have made, etc. They are unable to fairly look at the potential selfishness of parenthood and child-rearing because acknowledging those would be a major affront to their identity and their life choices.
Yes, I would say that it is “selfish” to not get married and to not have kids. Men are created to protect and provide for others. Not having “others” leaves you protecting and providing for only yourself which is by definition selfish.
Priests are called to be the “Fathers” of and serve their congregation so no, it is not selfish for them not to be married (although I don’t really agree with celibacy in the priesthood as I am not Catholic),
I am not saying that every unmarried, childless man on this forum is selfish but a man that goes his whole life being responsible for no one but himself is selfish. He has wasted his purpose and resources on serving his own desires. That is just what I believe. It is the intrinsic nature of a man to provide for others.
Your mention of Dom and dinners out (though meant to just be an example of the quantity saved) kind of highlighted the one part of the original post I thought to be kind of sick. I don’t think anyone could look around at the state of “men” in our society and be proud. Mostly what I see are overgrown boys with no respect for themselves as men (they also probably are not reading this website). I don’t think it is a coincidence that this rise of overgrown children has been accompanied by the lowest birthrate in American history and the highest rate of fatherless children in American history.
Donald Trump doesn’t really have to worry about his expenses either, so this discussion isn’t aimed at him (or you, apparently).
I’ve known far too many people who were not financially stable who were out there racking up hundred dollar bar tabs on a regular basis, smoking a carton a week and buying sacks of weed, pretending like it was “necessary”. And, it isn’t.
That’s not really addressing Chris’s point. He was simply criticizing the fact that people who don’t have the means to support large numbers of children are having them anyway. I don’t think he sounded condescending at all…especially in light of what Hami said, which is one of the most condescending and sanctimonious comments I’ve seen on this site.
I disagree that my purpose as a man is to provide for a wife and kids. As a species we are not in such danger that we need to push everyone to do that so I’m not sure where this purpose is being assigned from. A man who lives by himself still pays taxes and serves society. Every human can assign themselves their own purpose.
I agree with your last paragraph, I said something similar below. Most people can’t look at something that cost 18 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars and admit it was a horrible mistake. This is why so many people claim their children made them happy, when research seems to indicate that is not the case.
In fact, most people with kids don’t want that, and successfully avoid it.
This article is about “Lifestyle killing expenses”. Knocking out alcohol and eating out seems like a pretty big hit to most people’s preferred lifestyle. If this was an article about saving money if you are in dire straights you’d have a point.
That’s kind of an un-falsifiable argument though. I’m just pretending to be happy to justify the time and resources I spend on my kids? You can hold that position no matter what counter-evidence there is, because it’s actually pretty impossible to quantify happiness (which is the problem with those studies, too).
Which is not to say that there aren’t a lot of unhappy parents out there, or that there aren’t a lot of parents who oughtn’t be parents. But in general, I think it’s pretty dicey to tell someone “No, you’re not actually happy with your life.”
I agree to an extent, but we’re civilized people, we overcome our biological wiring all the time. And thank god, because if we didn’t some pack alpha would have killed me long ago.
Most people have no savings and/or record levels of debt. Since most people have children, how is that not a hit to people’s preferred lifestyle?
This article is REALLY about picking one lifestyle over another.
Simply want vs. need. Kids need food, clothing, shelter, and love. Kids want expensive luxury items like iPads, iPhones, and Beats by Dr. Dre. Will denying them some of their wants turn them into inferior human beings? Should people wait to have children until they can cater to their children’s every whim and make sure they never feel disappointment, loss, sadness, desire, jealousy, or angst?
Setting aside the fact that this comment is so mired in outdated gender stereotypes that it almost leaves me speechless….
Assuming you are right, that men are somehow created to protect and provide, that still raises the question of why getting married and having children are the only valid ways for men to be protectors or providers. There are plenty of things you can do in your life that will provide protection and care for others. The idea that marriage and children are the only possible routes to fulfilling this kind of life purpose is breathtakingly unimaginative.
I think it exactly addresses his point. Even if you can’t financially afford children, the government will help you support them because a strong birth rate is important to the nation’s health. In sum, finances need not be a major impediment. Plenty of well-adjusted, productive, and happy people have been raised with government assistance. It’s a different question whether a person/couple can emotionally support all of those children. (e.g., I know a family with 12 kids, and the parents ran out of energy to raise them properly after the first four, resulting in tragedy.)
I’m confused by your strong negative reaction to Hami’s comment, but that could be because it all rings so true to my experience. I find that my kids frequently rescue me from my tendencies toward consumerism and selfishness by reminding me that there are more beautiful and important things in life than possessions/travel/entertainment. Maybe I’m reading too much into Hami’s comment, but parenting provides a lot of opportunities for self-chastisement, and I think that’s at least part of what he meant in his comment.
Numbers 1, 2, and 4 need clearer “If you don’t want it/them” provisos. There are people who get a lot of fulfillment from those things (my wife and I had a traditional wedding, and it was one of the most fun days of our lives), and that’s fine. Yeah, they require trade offs, but it’s not like the things you’re giving up are necessarily superior.
Number 3, 6, and 7 are true, but not always something people can control. Higher ed in particular is a scam, but it’s most of us are forced into.
#5 and #8 kind of again go back to “if you want it or not”. Some people like staying home, and going to a sports bar, in particular, isn’t always as fun or as practical as you think, especially if you follow a team or sport very closely.
I didn’t say it was the only way or the only valid way. It is the most common by far but certainly not exclusive.
I think you’re projecting your values a bit here.
My point is that people should not completely eschew the things that make them happy. It’s reasonable to balance austerity with indulgence.
I believe God assigns that purpose. I am sure that won’t improve my feedback! I don’t believe as created beings we have unlimited power to assign our own purposes nor do I think we are mindless robots. I wasn’t exclusive to wife and kids that is just by far the most common dynamic in which men exercise that purpose.
Replacing fathers with taxes and government hasn’t worked out very well.
Not required to but most people do accept other’s choices as long as they are not harming anyone. It’s arrogant and presumptuous to both put your beliefs above theirs and to assume that you fully understand their point of view enough to judge it.
Ah ok. I don’t believe there’s any kind of god so I suppose there’s no argument to have here.
Nope. I’d do it even if I didn’t have fortunate circumstances.
I still own a car. It’s just the worst financial decision I’ve made.
I also believe in God, and I also believe in human purpose, but if God did not delight in each of us with our own individual purposes and our own identities to fulfill, God would have been perfectly content with two human beings instead of billions. Parenthood may be a legitimate calling for some, but too many people go into parenthood by default rather than as a purposeful vocation. It’s having children without purpose or preparation that leads to broken families, not thoughtful and purposeful abstention from child-bearing.
I guess I run with a different type of parent crowd than those you say commonly cite such terrible reasons for having kids. No doubt there are many unfit parents in the world and that is truly tragic.
Personally, I believe every childless person has a valid opinion for NOT taking on the responsibility of parenthood. But, I strongly believe they can’t reasonably say they know what they are missing. Everyone’s experience as a parent is different, however, I think a common opinion is that it changes you in ways you never possibly imagined.
Not everyone is fit to be a parent, and I find it admirable that certain people are honest enough with themselves to admit they aren’t cut out for it. The world is a better place for those kind of people.
Kids are listed as the #1 “unnecessary, lifestyle-killing expense”. Perhaps I just take exception to calling them “lifestyle-killing”. They are absolutely an unnecessary expense, but imho a lifestyle-enriching one.
I would say that increases our opportunity for argument but I will spare you. I will only say this, never in history has matter been eternal nor has matter created itself yet here we are. At some point there was nothingness and then there was something. Something outside the natural happened (or supernatural if you prefer).
All gifts were cash for sure but even if you have 200 guests giving 200 bucks a piece you are coming up at 40k. That scenario is highly unlikely seeing as couples and families give one gift so a 200 person event, would likely have 100-125 gifters.
I know my brother’s wedding he received about 12.5k total on about 200 person wedding, but my parents didn’t expect it in return for the wedding cost, it was for him and his wife.
Making money seems like farce, I don’t think that ever happens unless you invite a ton of people and have a picnic.
I think you are self referencing. This article obviously doesn’t apply to you, yet you use the conditions of your own situation to advise those who it does apply.
If one is having financial issues, eliminating vice and indulgence should come before anything else. Not enough people are being taught that these days
I didn’t mean that as a condescension or anything. I just think that got to the bottom of the “purpose” argument.
We know so little about the creation of the universe and how things work. My inclination is to believe that there is a scientific explanation for all of it we just aren’t advanced enough to figure it out. In my experience mysteries are more often explained by ignorance than the mystical.
Well said. Given the aforementioned birth rate I would argue that too many are taking the practical or material considerations over child bearing to our future detriment. An aging society is a dying society. Just ask Russia where they are now paying people to have children.
You’re still talking past the point he made. There’s a huge difference between having two or three kids, and have upwards of five or more when you’re not able to support them. That’s what he was criticizing.
As for Hami’s tone, it comes across as snobbish and condescending. He’s clearly made his choices in life, but comes across as talking down to those who make different choices.
I judge everything, so do most people. I have to judge what is a proper choice to make almost every minute, from what I should eat to what I should say. I have to evaluate what other people are doing and decide if I need to do similar. I have no power to make some one else do anything but I have to make the judgement for myself. And at the same time I can decide whether I approve of their actions. Not that it matters to them, since I cannot do anything about it.
If they are seeking my approval, they have to do thing that I approve of. I’m not going to offer false approval to stroke someone’s ego. As if being two faced and talking behind someone’s back is a better course of action.
So, yes, I judge, and don’t pretend you don’t.!
It’s similar to iPhone/Android and Xbox/PS3 fanboyism in a way. We are psychologically invested in convincing not just others, but ourselves that we have made the right decision.
I think you’ll agree that your claim that “most” people have kids for the wrong reasons is overstating the point, so I’ll just mention it once and move on.
I can’t agree with putting the burden on parents to explain why they had kids. I don’t have any idea why my wife and I decided to have kids, other than we felt like we should (not in the abstract, “it’s the thing to do” way, but in the *we* should sense). Yet even without a reason you or Hauerwas would approve of, our family is happy. I’ve even known families who accidentally had a child (their religious convictions made abortion a non-option for them), who are happy because they decided to make the necessary adjustments to their lifestyles and goals and accept the role they’d been handed. Not a whole lot matters on the decision-making end because so much depends on how you react once the kid arrives.
But that takes me back to your point about using kids to fix yourself or your relationship, which is definitely a part of the decision-making that does matter. I agree with you that these motivations are terrible because they’re just so laughably unrealistic. Anyone who thinks they’ll have time to work on their own growth or their relationship once kids enter the picture is either going to be bitterly disappointed or they’re going to severely neglect their kids. Setting up such impossible expectations is almost certain to make parenthood even more difficult than it already is and will almost certainly lead to worse outcomes.
It’s a logical fallacy to believe that God = mysticism =/= science. Hypothetically, assuming existence was created by omnipotent creator deity, the deity is inherently responsible for the laws that govern our natural world. Therefore, it is unreasonable to assume that the deity is excluded from those laws inherently. Certainly one who created the physical laws COULD flaunt them, but that doesn’t mean He/She/It HAS to flaunt them. The more we learn about the universe, the weirder things get. Take quantum mechanics, for example.
Basically, don’t use science as en excuse to write off God. Likewise, don’t use God to write off science.
The study I recall revolved around a “happiness journal,” where participants recorded how happy they were at the moment they were doing something. And taking care of the kids fell below eating, praying, sex, etc. Even housework made people happier than the kids.
I guess this entire list/post depends on what your end goals are for your life.
In regards to #1, there are several heated posts so far on the benefits/costs of children. There are also several assumptions being made from both sides of this particular debate on the merits of having/not having children. For me personally, having children is something that I look forward to at some later point in my life, but that is because it is in line with my goals for my life. My older brother, however, has no desire to have children. Does that make me a better person? No, he just has a different goal for his life.
Our goals are the litmus paper by which we must evaluate our life decisions and actions. The biggest danger/lifestyle killer in my mind is not having these set goals. That is the over-arching dilemma and problem that most of the items on this list address. Each item on this list can be rationalized or justified in some way based on its application in a certain person’s life. However, The goal behind this post, if I may make an assumption myself, is to show that statistically these endeavors are the most likely to cause financial burdens and should be avoided if not in line with one’s personal life goals.
No this article is not about poverty. It’s about maximizing the type of lifestyle which is discussed on this site – which includes moderate consumerism and drinking(see the “drink” button at the very top of the page).
Nowhere did I recommend spending money on vices over immediate needs. But that’s not what this article was about.
Yeah, I remember the study, it got passed around the internet a lot when it was published. And I dunno, I don’t completely want to crap all over it, but again, happiness is pretty hard to measure, but of course it’s going to be low when you’re changing diapers, cleaning up messes, helping with homework, punishing, etc. I just don’t know if unhappiness during those particular moments, while performing those particular tasks, translates into generalized unhappiness with having kids, or disproves the kind of fulfillment that hami1car talks about above.
11) Eating out too much. It can really add up.
You specifically said “looking down on someone”. It’s fine if you judge someones actions negatively but to look down on them as a person is another matter. I think your views(I just realized we are having a discussion further down the page as well) are absurd but I don’t think less of you as a person for it.
I’m not talking past it at all; you’re just not accepting what I’m saying. If a person/couple can emotionally support 16 children, then I say go for it even they can’t support them financially. Government funds are supposed to be used to help society, and increasing the birthrate helps society. Full stop.
Hami honestly believes that parenthood is a joy that everyone would accept if they could bring themselves to try it. That might be more than a little proselytizing, and it certainly claims to be right when other positions are wrong. To be honest, it reminds me of how vegans/vegetarians talk about their dietary choices, and I’m surprised to hear you hurling labels and insults at him for it (since you’re ordinarily a calm, reasonable voice around here). Have you never before discussed with a person ideas that they believed to be absolute truths but which you believed to be either untrue or at least not absolutely true?
“Look down on” as in “you are less of a human and deserve to die” no, as in “I do not approve of or condone, probably wouldn’t want to be around, and wouldn’t hold up as an example to follow” yes.
Food, shelter, clothing, love . . . that’s still a pretty Spartan existence. What about books, musical instruments, education, baseball gloves, computers, etc?
If you have to cut off your cable and cell phone to save money but still have money to go out, that is a problem.
I don’t think characterizing his remarks as condescending qualifies as hurling insults at him, but the vegan/vegetarian thing is an apt comparison. Making your own decisions for your own life is your own business, just as it should be. But when that causes you to behave in a condescending and judgmental way towards others who made different choices, then there is a problem. To me, that’s how he’s coming across. It’s as if he’s talking down his nose to people that made the decision to not have children.
I did not take it as such. No worries. Having a totally different foundation for our respective world views does sort of stop the original arguement in it’s tracks but does create another.
Im my mind relying on science alone to explain itself while at the same time contradicting itself requires more “faith” than a belief in God does. To prove something scientifically requires it to be observable and repeatable. It is also a basic natural law that matter cannot form in the absence of matter. Even the so-called God Particle requires a massive particle accelerator, a force with which to propel the two particles, an environment in which to propel them and a scientist to decide to propel them. However for there to be a strictly natural explanation for the universe something “supernatural” or extra-natural must have occured (the formation of matter in a vacuum). To further believe that this singular extra-natural event led to the formation of an inconceivably complicated and interdependant universe by pure random chance requires more faith than I am capable of!
To Dreadpiratehurley’s point I don’t discount or dismiss science. I believe the more we learn from science the more it points to God .
Anyway, kudoes to Joe for sparking a fun discussion. I do come here to find out more about how I should be dressing myself and where the next sale is but this kind of thoughtful discussion is a welcome “distraction”.
Those items you mention are relatively low cost in the grand scheme compared to necessities. If you think that I deprive my children because I’m a jerk who thinks they will only get what the need because it’s all they deserve, you’re sadly mistaken. My point, which you missed, is that the kids don’t DESERVE books, musical instruments, education, baseball gloves, computers, etc. just because they were born. And there are many kids who grow up without those luxuries. Having luxury items absolutely enhances and enriches a child’s life, no argument here. My kids have all of the things you mention because I find value in them, and I have the ability to afford them and more. But I think they would also turn out okay if I had to pick and choose what fit into our budget. Just because I’ve got money in the bank doesn’t mean I will cater to their every desire.
Not that I have any inkling otherwise, but even the rule that matter cannot be created is just based on our current scientific knowledge. What we know is a drop in the bucket when considering the vastness of existence. Also as an aside, the particle accelerator is used to see the “god particle”, not create it.
I don’t think we or any form of life will ever understand everything but I do think there is a scientific explanation for everything.
Obviously. The article isn’t about that and therefor I wasn’t talking about it.
I would think the #1 regret would be the wasted years. Money I can earn back. Time I can’t get back.
Ciggarettes?
The only thing that’s necessary is that we die. Everything else is optional to some degree.
FWIW, my fat mobile plan is part of my lifestyle. I don’t like paying as much as I do, but it’s something I’m willing to live with to get what I get.
#1 – Women. I blew 50 bucks on drinks one time, counted the number of hours I worked to pay for it, then learned to seek out girls who want to pay their own way.
Well, hami thinks other people will be happier if they take his advice. It’s hard to fault him for offering what he believes is wisdom. I wouldn’t say his comment counts as “behaving in a condescending and judgmental way,” though, since I’m more of a sticks-and-stones kind of guy. He could’ve been more sensitive, but he seems to have meant well.
Let’s not forget that you didn’t just call his remarks condescending. You added “snobbish” and “sanctimonious,” which would have been superfluous, except that such words also serve to denigrate hami’s character in a way that “condescending” doesn’t. If words can hurt, yours were as harmful as hami’s, though I’m sure you also meant well.
“even the rule that matter cannot be created is just based on our current scientific knowledge”- We are both talking about something that goes beyond what we currently consider natural law. I call that God, you call it something else. It is fascinating and something I wish I could understand more. Unfortunately I have to earn money so I can SUPPORT MY WIFE AND KIDS. See how I brought it back?
It’s been fun discussing this. I’m sure neither one of us will be worse off for thinking about it. I’ll consider it more while sipping some really expensive scotch (made possible by purchasing a used car).
I am still a firm believer in higher education. The problem is that we are all taught to do exactly what we want for a career and the college experience follows this belief. I know multiple people with anthropology degrees. None of them are anthropologists. Same with most other social sciences and art degrees. The job market doesn’t need very many and their are already tons of people who want the positions that exist. We take bright eyed, bushy tailed 18-year-olds and tell them to ignore debt and be astronauts. 4 years later, the world needs accountants, engineers, and tech skills while we have a nation of debt-crippled philosophers and masters of pottery.
It is endlessly interesting and humbling.
If you would make the switch to used scotch then you’d really be saving!
I think what he meant was that people should be careful when thinking they can have children AND keep their current spending habits. Someone trying to have kids should keep in mind they are a very big expense before doing it, and be prepared accordingly
Well… you can’t spout your moral beliefs as truth. I get what you are saying, but your deliver makes a person want to disagree with you. I will happily cut cable to be able to have a few more beers a month. I love beer. It is something that I really enjoy in life. More than TV. I will not cut my cell phone for beer. Cell > beer > TV. Priorities. What some aspects of culture view as “vice” is not inherently bad when enjoyed responsibly.
This comment is a good example of how a non-parent can’t reasonably evaluate the merits and drawbacks of having kids. Looking at it in terms of money and happiness is absurd. The financial cost is nothing compared to the other costs involved. And the whole concept of personal happiness more or less goes out the window when you have kids, you don’t really have time to even think or care about that (when you have young kids at least).
Thankfully, my betrothed isn’t asking for the the super deluxe package. “Why spend $10k on a wedding when we can spend that on a new bathroom?”
Would she have said that in her mid-20s? I don’t know, but I’m grateful I’ve got her now.
What is being sought is my unconditional approval, and I will not give it. I understand that bugs some people, and I’m ok with that.
Evidently, it is VERY important to some people what other people think. You don’t need a gold star from me (or anyone else) to go drink. Isn’t freedom great!
BTW, don’t think for one second that a smiling face or sweet talk means someone approves of your behavior in this world, they ALL judge you they just aren’t honest about it.
You haven’t met my sister-in-law. Granted, I love my nephews, but she sits on her ass all day buying knick-knacks on ebay and when she gets bored she starts thinking about how cute babies are and starts wanting to have another. Meanwhile, my brother is drowning in debt and keeps having his hours cut while the firm he is employed keeps losing business because of shoddy management.
A strong birth rate used to be important. Used to be. A lot of the financial incentives are still in place because of, well, typical government. The ship of state is mighty hard to turn.
Day care while you’re at work or losing a salary to provide home care. My coworker spends $1,600 a month on day care. School trips, college fund, toys, games, preventive health care (let alone any kind of additional health care), cars/insurance, etc.
But in return you get to raise a child, but it’s not “astonishingly low.”
I think the bulk of this list is about keeping up with the Joneses. These are pretty hefty expenditures that most people do only to maintain the status quo (Mark & Shelly just a got a new house on Maple Drive, it’s huge! Sure, Mark has to drive an extra 30 minutes to work now, but they have so much room now!)
Rather than fitness to be a parent think about it as readiness. Calling it lifestyle-killing might be a hair dramatic but it might fit pretty well to a couple who haven’t come to terms in advance with not just the financial changes but the sacrifice in free time and so on.
I think that may be the direction Joe is speaking in when he mentioned having a plan in the original article; the difference between having a plan and knowing not only where your life is going but that you can support it going there vs. having it imposed by accident or social pressure.
(I’m saying this as a young professional where many of my co workers, friends, and classmates don’t seem to have planned to start families; I’d assert they are all trying to be ‘good parents’, but while some are doing just great, many seem uncomfortable because they weren’t ready, and some are having a really tough time supporting themselves.)
Yep. Social convention is boring AND expensive.
Or at least evaluate what something actually costs, re: automotive-centric transportation planning and who is footing the bill. A lot of US infrastructure was and continues to be built for the automobile and then people complain that they can’t ride their bikes.
You may not have meant it but that’s all really condescending.
When I’m 70 what I’m going to care about is all the places I’ve been, things I’ve learned, seen, and done, lives I’ve touched, fun I’ve had. I also fully plan on still being out there doing it at that age.
If you think that’s “little to show” since kids weren’t involved, I can’t really help you.
ChrisS, you’ll forgive me, I hope, for putting more stock in the WSJ and its data than in your unsupported generalizations.
You’re right; “nobody” was too strong a word. But I think your sis-in-law is the exception to the general rule that for most people, having kids is either an accident or a considered decision, not an “I want an Oompa Loompa now, Father!” moment.
“The goal behind this post, if I may make an assumption myself, is to show that statistically these endeavors are the most likely to cause financial burdens and should be avoided if not in line with one’s personal life goals”
I’d get behind that and probably say that they’re also avoidable. A person is not required to buy the biggest house, newest car, the fastest smartphone, have a pile of kids, etc. These are all huge expenses that can be avoided or delayed until they can be planned for. Sure if you’re sitting on a few million in income, buy a new car, but for someone at their first (or second) job, another used car is just fine.
same here, but my company pays for mine, so I really don’t consider it an expense.
If, for some reason, that were no longer the case then I would certainly think about getting a cheaper phone/plan.
As of 2:45 PM EDT, this thread has officially surpassed the $40 Allen Edmonds thread from last week. Great job, everybody! Keep up the good work, Joe!
I wouldn’t call that article an indepth research piece. It’s a politically driven opinion piece based on the assertion that a falling fertility rate is the root cause of all of the problems today. The guy is a bit of a hack and definitely motivated by his own opinions (and book to push).
Even if the fertility rate is dropping (slightly), population is still expanding exponentially and is forecast to continue to increase well into next century – provided the planet can continue to support that kind of population at today’s standard of living.
Skimming through the comments, this has turned into an argument about having children or not. So I guess it’s a lost cause here.
If you add “in excess” to this, you’d be making a more fair statement.
In the interest of complete transparency:
1) No kids, but hey if it happens, it happens and now I’m in a position to support children. 15 years ago, it was non-starter because I was broke and I wouldn’t be in the position that I’m in today.
2) I did buy a new truck. A used vehicle could have worked, but based on the amortization, interest rate, and work reimbursement the cost savings were negligible. And this was my first new vehicle ever.
3) State school on the GI Bill in a scientific field. Full-time Job in less than 4 weeks post-graduation. I toyed with law school and eventually decided against it (thankfully).
4) Not married yet, but if/when we do it will not be an expensive traditional affair. The Mrs. is on board with that idea.
5) 1,350 SF for the two of us.
6) Currently not a personal expense. Firm reimbursed and discounted.
7) 9 miles, 15-20 minutes based on traffic and construction.
8) Guilty. Although I have a mid-level package and I’m constantly debating as to whether to cut it. Went without cable for many years.
9) I rarely go on expensive vacations, let alone forced ones. Once every few years to England with the Mrs. to visit her family where we stay rent-free.
10) I’m debating this part. I need a tux once a year, but it’s not necessarily a requirement. I don’t know. Maybe in a few more years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/17/opinion/the-false-alarm-over-us-fertility.html?_r=0
Not even ” in excess” though that certainly could count, but to the point where one’s financial situation is affected.
A fifth of cheap booze is about $6, hardly breaking even the most meager of budgets. But a single shot of Johnny Walker blue is about $75 at a bar.
We are talking about budget busters, so obviously a $1 longneck isn’t really what is being discussed. I’m talking about people “going out”. Big bar tabs and fat restaurant bills (plus the things purchased on street corners) that is de rigueur with the twenty-somethings.
Just as politically motivated, but at least it’s more than just bare assertions. Well played, sir. *tips hat*
It’s totally fair to say that children kill your singles lifestyle, because they do. No reasonable person would claim that life remains perfectly static before and after having children. Now whether the new lifestyle of children and obligation is a superior one is up for debate and varies individual to individual. But there’s no doubt that your old lifestyle is dead.
I agree with you 100% about the reporting bias by parents. Similar parallels have been drawn with any expensive investment or even expensive medication — the more people put time, energy, money, etc. into something, the more likely they are going to say something positive even when there is no difference vs. a placebo.
I’ve had plenty of parents tell me they regret having children. Some put them up for adoption and/or abandoned them. Some of these regretted their decisions regarding adoption/abandonment, but they all regretted having children in the first place.
Some kept the kids but were such lousy parents that ended up introducing a new generation of resentful adults into this world.
Children automatically equal more responsibility, even if it’s just for the few minutes/hours it takes to sign the forms to put the kids up for adoption or to make the (extra) decision to bail on the family/relationship.
Children do not automatically equal any kind of happiness or fulfillment.
As a matter of fact, nothing = happiness. It’s something that comes from a combination of internal and external factors.
Agree 100%. It kills your pre-children lifestyle.
While that may be the case for some people, it’s not fair to say it applies to everyone (or even most). I would contend that everyone is different and there is a wide range of motives for most items on the list that has nothing to do with keeping up with the Joneses.
There are plenty of practical reasons to live in the suburbs that outweigh the price of gas. That’s why so many people live there.
LOL. Didn’t really stop to think that this would be written for consideration from a certain point of view, such as a single person. I absolutely agree that after marriage and children your singles lifestyle should be killed or else you’re failing as a husband and father. But killed has kind of negative connotation, dontcha think? Maybe right after you’re married there’s a bit of buyer’s remorse, or if you have kids before marriage, that’s probably a bigger shock. But if you get married then make the decision to have kids, saying your single lifestyle was killed is an exaggeration for dramatic effect.
I wouldn’t let it get you down. If they make you happy, then that may be enough to justify the cost. There are some things that everyone can agree are a waste, but others are subjective.
I’m afraid this post isn’t really selling me on the idea of having children.
I disagree with you though, I think non-parents can and should evaluate the merits and drawbacks of having children in whatever way they can. This isn’t a pair of shoes, you can’t return it if the fit is a little off. For me, the urge just isn’t there. I don’t see the joy I would get from a kid outweighing the joy I get from travel, sports, hanging out whenever and wherever I want, and buying Allen Edmonds shoes.
And it’s a good thing I’m trying to make that evaluation, before bringing a life into the world.
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said here (and I’m really not trying to be an argumentative ass and hope that’s not how I’ve come across), it’s just that the last two paragraphs of Hami’s remarks came across (to me) as condescending and that’s why I felt the need to say what I did. I see it as comparable to when a pious vegan chastises his non-vegan roommate, or any other example of one person treating someone in a negative way for making a different decision. Like this morning, I saw a guy on the Metro in a black suit and brown square-toed shoes. Judged the HELL out of him in my mind, but I’d never say anything to make him feel bad about it 😛
I’m certainly not calling you a “jerk” or saying you’re depriving your kids. I just think it’s an oddly adversarial way of looking at having kids.
I am very serious.
You’re right, people should evaluate a decision like this as best they can. It’s just really tough to quantify the work that goes into taking care of kids, the lack of sleep, etc. I certainly had no idea what I was getting myself into. And I have no regrets.
I do think that the financial cost is overrated; little kids don’t take up much space, you can get the stuff they need really cheap, and developed countries tend to have a lot of tax incentives or support for parents (in the U.S.: child tax credit, exemptions for dependents, 529 accounts, dependent care FSA, etc.) You can certainly buy a huge fancy house, big SUV, and lots of expensive gear for a kid, but it’s not necessary.
But regardless of financial cost, you are right, it is a totally different lifestyle than not having kids.
Hooray for the child the tax credit and dependent exemptions!!!
*picks self up off floor after hearing about the black suit and brown square-toe shoes*
No worries about seeming difficult; I know that’s not your style.
I’m trying to fight through my own biases to understand why it struck such a chord (cord? how do you spell that saying?), and it seems to me he not only presumed to know the final answer for everyone but also that the only reason people don’t have kids is hedonism/consumerism. Suppose the final paragraph weren’t there, and Hami had concluded with, “So when you’re making this huge decision, try to account for the natural tendency to exaggerate the costs, especially the financial ones, because the pros are better than you can fully understand beforehand.” Would that fix it?
I was guilty of a bloated cellphone plan! I used to pay $180 per month on iphone plans for my wife and me. I switched to StraighTalk, and now we pay $90 per month. We’ve been on StraightTalk for about 6 months and really haven’t noticed much of a difference in the service. Definitely worth the money we’re saving!
Disagree on #3. I used to think that, but then I went to a relatively unknown state university in Pennsylvania. The quality of the education was fine, but I’ve been fighting against the idea that non-Ivy-leaguers can’t contribute in my industry basically every day of my working life. If I had a do-over, I’d take on the big debt for a big name school.
It’s those last two paragraphs that really struck a nerve (#easyfix) with me. I get that he’s an advocate of having kids and that the experience has enriched his life, but he is assuming that the choice to have kids will be the same for everyone else (for the record, I want kids and am excited about it). But having kids is a (huge) choice, and not everyone has the same experience with it. I know people who are so utterly incapable of handling their own lives, that bringing a child into the situation would be completely unfair to that child. Advocating for one choice or the other in any situation is fine and I’m clearly not faulting him for that. To go back to the shoes/suit situation, I know that I would feel really bad if that guy on the Metro overheard me talking to someone about how brown, square-toed shoes with a black suit make a man look like an idiot, let alone saying anything in a judgmental way to the guy’s face. I hope that clarifies where I’m coming from…
It does, and thanks for taking the time to explain it a little more. I want to be sensitive toward other parents-to-be-or-not-to-be, and your comments have helped me understand better how to do that.
Huzzahs all around!
Won’t get any argument from me on #1. #2 I’d argue with slightly – there’s nothing wrong with enjoying an adult beverage or two in moderation. #3 I’m sort of with you on. Most people I work with buy lunch out every day. That’s $5 down the tubes every working day mostly for crap food that doesn’t taste that good. Pile a Starbuck’s coffee on top of that and you’re talking close to $2,000 per year, and you’re over $1,000 just on lunch alone. That’s practically a trip to Western Europe. Dinner is a different story – you’re usually going out with friends to places with actual good food. You’re nothing without friends, so I see that as a somewhat necessary expense.
So for #2, you’re implying that buying a practical new car like a Honda Accord for $20,000 is not as wise as buying – say – a used BMW 3 series for $15,000? Couldn’t be further from the truth. Buying a new reliable car and taking care of it is so much cheaper than buying some used luxury car that you can’t afford new and dealing with all the issues that someone else didn’t want.
I do agree that you shouldn’t “reach” when buying a car. If your budget should be $20,000 and you spend $35,000 you made a poor decision.
You forgot smoking. Definitely a habit that ends up (not even counting the possible health issues) costing way more than you might believe. Add in drinking at bars every weekend.
“Unless you’re incredibly philanthropic, and you leave your mark by caring for as many less fortunate people as you possibly can, your mark will be insignificant compared to a parent’s.”
I’m going to be a physician. I volunteer. I say this premise of yours is bullsh*t.
“I don’t think humans, in general, are wired to accept that something so time-consuming and expensive was a mistake.”
Well, humans are apes in suits. We can be wrong.
Isn’t that a bit… selfish?
“Basically, don’t use science as en excuse to write off God.”
Well, I’m not sure why not. Belief requires evidence, at least for me. I can take the stance that I don’t accept the proposition that a God exists without sufficient evidence. This is the crux of the scientific method, is it not?
It certainly is. However, you seem to only be applying a null hypothesis, and in this case, it isn’t entirely appropriate. If you stick to a strict null hypothesis, you shoot yourself in the foot. For example, according to the null hypothesis, black swans didn’t exist. And then we found some in Australia. Moreover, the swan hypothesis only examines observed macroscopic creatures without examining the swan’s DNA to see if a black swan is possible.
Science cannot prove the Abrahamic God, but nor can science disprove it. We have found no concrete evidence for God, but neither have we found concrete evidence against. In fact, according to the principles of Judeo-Christian religions, ‘proving’ God would defeat the purpose of a faith-based religion. As such, ‘proof’ of God is a paradoxical contradiction.
Moreover, science is merely a philosophy. As a philosophy, it has given us better tools for understanding the world we live in, but it is, fundamentally, a structured set of beliefs, much as any other philosophy. To fetishize science as we have done alienates all the other potential benefits that lie beyond the purview of science. The fact of the matter is that science doesn’t have all the answers, and to pretend that it does is ludicrous. The best science can do is say, “We’re working on it!” As if that wasn’t bad enough, ‘fact’ is ‘whatever a statistical majority (slightly over 50%) of scientists believe/accept at one time’. There are modes of thinking, spearheaded by Karl Popper, that hold that we can’t ever know if something is completely true. The way Popper believes, we should continually test gravity, all the time, never taking for granted that it is indeed true. He is not one insignificant crackpot, but an educated scientific philosopher with many people who agree with him.
Once again, don’t use science as an excuse to write off God. Likewise, don’t use God to write off science.
As mentioned in the disclaimer, it depends on what is most important to you. As for me, my wife is pregnant with our first child and we are ecstatic despite losing most of our disposable income as a result for the foreseeable future. I would add “eating out” to the list. This can easily add up to hundreds of dollars per month and can be curtailed by simply thinking about meals a week at a time and planning/shopping accordingly.
There is nothing important about having children. There is nothing important about having a legacy, it’s a weak self-delusion that gives your life meaning. The concept of legacy should seem silly to anyone able to walk upright. Moreover, children are not a legacy, they are people. Your life’s work (nothing, I’m guessing?) is your legacy, if anything.
Having children is the most selfish thing you can do. You are choosing to create another person as a copy of yourself on a planet that never asked for nor can support it. If 1,000,000 people’s DNA was chosen to go populate a distant planet, yours would not be among it. You are not remarkable, nor are your children. It’s nowhere written that the human race needs to go on forever (and it won’t) and your material certainly isn’t required.
The joy you feel for your selfish choice is NOT hard to grasp for us. On the whole, I would wager ours is the smarter cohort. We get it. We totally get it. I just think you are selfish and disgusting for bringing people into a world that beyond a gilded edge of the white privileged is mired in suffering and decay. You could spend your life trying to make it better, instead you make a little copy of yourself to love you forever and dote on you in your old age.
Get off your high horse. It’s not always about shoes and vacations, some of us just have a conscience.
Yes. This. I’m single, childless, but I hope to have kids someday.
I can’t justify bringing someone new into the world at this time. The economy, the creepy gov’t spying, soaring rates of obesity, etc. are just a few examples. I think I’m also an anti-natalist meaning I can understand an argument that it might be better if someone would never have existed in the first place.
I know I’m late to the party but is this statement “Having children is probably the most important and satisfying thing you’ll ever do in your life,” not just as condescending? Who is Hami that he can make such a statement when he knows absolutely nothing about the audience to which he states it? How does he know what is important or satisfying in my life?
The point is, he doesn’t. By his statement he implies that those without children are somehow lesser individuals than those who do have children. He is absolutely arrogant in his beliefs. Should I be just as arrogant and state that any person who chooses to have children is a fool?
In all reality I don’t begrudge anyone who has children (unless they can’t support them financially or emotionally). I simply choose not to have any of my own because I see the world going to a poorer state (all inclusive not just financially) and I choose not to bring a child into this world knowing (with a fair degree of certainty) that the world is going to get worse long before it gets better.
Increasing the birth rate helps society to a point. Full stop.
When it gets to the point when society supports an overwhelming number of those children because their parents aren’t willing or able to, an increasing birth rate is a detriment to society. Full stop.