For those who think Mums "have it all", what would happen if women stopped having children?
Lets take this to its logical conclusion.
Suppose for an instant that en mass, women decided they’d had enough and no more children will be born.
How long is it going to take before the economy folds?
As we all approach retirement age, who will look after us?
It’s very easy to sit and smugly think children should be supported by their parents, but it’s a less comfortable thought that our economic security depends on the next generation.
Whatever concepts of wealth we might have, the reality is pretty much that the world consumes today what was produced yesterday, and as we age and become less productive, or require carers, we come to depend on the next generation to provide that for us.
So perhaps, if we are sensible we might come to realise that supporting parents, especially those who most need it, which is usually young couples and lone parents, who are typically mothers, we are indirectly investing in our own future well being.
For those who think Mums "have it all", what would happen if women stopped having children?
Related posts:
- Is encouragement of women who want to become single mothers by choice contributing to social problems? Denise Sloan decided she wanted to have kids, even though...
- Source needed to support statement: Women r mostly TA’s coz they r lone parents & wrk at their childs schoo? Really don’t mean to sound chauvinistic. It’s a statement I...
- can i claim income support? (UK)? My husband works 20 hrs and i work 12 hrs,...
- SHORT questionnaire for afro-carribean and asian WOMEN? BE HONEST PLEASE… its for coursework age range: Ethnicity: afro...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Tagged with: approach retirement • economic security • economy • having children • logical conclusion • lone parents • next generation • retirement age • Sit • young couples
Filed under: single parent support
Perhaps I’m coming in on the middle of something, but I don’t think there is anything "smug" about believing that children should be supported by their parents. Parents – mothers and fathers – have a responsibility toward the children they create. However, there will always be folks whose circumstances are such that they will need support. For me, this isn’t so much about the parents as it is about the children. Whys should a child be punished for being born into poverty or having an irresponsible parent or a parent who struggles to provide for their basic needs. If supporting such children and families constitutes a welfare state, so be it.
As far as having no children coming up, watch the movie Children of Men. Economics would not be the main concern – we would just all eat each other to survive. However the absence of hope and joy and a belief in the future would be devastating. And as for the issue of the next generation supporting the previous, we are already seeing how declining birth rates play out on that issue. At least in the "west" pension plans are in danger and the huge block of oldsters now placing demands on health care systems is an enormous problem. In twenty years get ready for drive through euthanasia.
They be hunted down an shot for a bounty. No kidding we just start cloning we can clone a cheep we can clone a human.
The welfare state is predicated on the understanding that we pay taxes to educate kids who later pay taxes to keep us in Milo and fluffy slippers.
Skip a generation and someone’s going to be missing out …
In fact, we’re finding out right now what happens when people don’t pony up with the babies. We have to import nurses, just for starters.
Just keep on making it hard for women to have kids and see where that ends up.
Hope you’ve got your health insurance paid up for a nice private room, they’ll be the only ones with staff in a few years.
Cheers
In my family we take care of our own kids and old people. I think that works better than expecting the government to do it.
I am a young mum but a lot of young parents arent like me and my husband here in England. We get working tax credits and claim childcare but we don’t claim any other benefits. We are the only young parents I know that don’t and we are the only 2 I know that are married.
My town had the highest teen pregnancy rate in the UK and a program was even made about it on BBC about a girl that had a baby at 14.
I go to university in and I also work part time (only 8 hours at the moment but was and will be working 20 hours). I did full time work in the Air Force to get our flat from when I was 18-21. My husband is working in a warehouse at the moment and its not really good money. We dont believe in just claiming all our money though and not doing anything and a lot of young parents in UK do.
I know loads of people younger than me and my age with kids and they live in a free house. We have lovely houses here for as I live in Torquay in Devon. Its beautiful and the standard of housing you can get on housing benefit is fantastic. I dont think its fair how parents my age can live in houses like this when we only live in a 2 bed flat cause we refuse to claim.
I agree with tax credits scheme as it is for parents who are trying to help themselves but I dont agree with benefits being given to people who do nothing. Many single mums round here take drugs, get drunk, get with loads of different men living in luxury with the best make clothes. I dont agree with it and dont want to be associated with living like that. The kids of these types of families dont make a contribution to society they are much more likely to be kids who are eternally on benefits and it is a continuing cycle.
I would rather live in our little flat and know we have earnt it rather than just getting it for free. The benefit system is meant to be those who genuinely need it and a lot of people dont. They should be working adn with the government funding childcare through tax credits they should make these people work. I do it and I dont see why anyone else cant.
I work and dont want to be a young housewife because around here it is associated with being on benefits and living off the state. I would rather sacrifice 20 hours a week with my daughter and teach her morals about working and not being a burden to society.
Well that’s a silly philosophy punishing themselves to punish others.
What would happen if all men decided to stop contributing sperm and sperm banks were destroyed
THE SAME THING PEOPLE WOULD DIE OUT >.>
if the planet was alive i bet it would be dancing for joy
I think there is a depopulation agenda in place and see reproductive licences being introduced in the future.
I was asking this question some months ago. Govenrments are already offering baby bribes so its already a problem.
A couple that produce one child that has spent its formative years in childcare is not going to be too much help in the later years. That child is going to look to the state as its parents and the state will shape that child. Its biological parents will be mearly walk on characters in its life.
Logical progression? euthanasia and crippling taxes to pay for state run homes.
Just a foot note, full participation in taxation as opposed to half would reduce the need to replace by half, wouldnt it??.
The poor ,and uneducated will never stop , they will continue to breed indiscriminately as they always have.
If ‘mums’ stopped reproducing it would simply mean more resources available to those already here.
Parents and/or childless adults can always depend on themselves , friends, relatives , professionals and in some cases social services to get by.
Worst case , some perish , it’s going to happen anyway , just a matter of when.
There is no inherent need to pop out one human Xerox copy after another and try to promote it as some kind of favor or service to humanity.
There are plenty ( too many) people on the planet already a break wouldn’t do any harm.
Men will rent a womb.