patrick.net

Yes, children are for most a financial burden and from that standpoint a poor investment. They also crimp and determine much of your social life for years. They bring every cold and flu home and spread it to you and their siblings. the list of negatives goes on and on.

In the end they can change you by bringing you out of your world of vanity and self love to something different in your relationship with another person. This relationship must be experienced to be understood it goes beyond the love one might experience with a lover, it is of a different level. So if you are satisfied with your life and don't want to change don't have children

However, children also provide something else that has virtually no downside, cannot be acquired without them, and are truly wonderful. The payback for the burden imposed by raising children...grandchildren.

rdm says

The payback for the burden imposed by raising children...grandchildren.

When I get mine, I will spoil the shit outta them and send 'em home to mommy & daddy. Can't wait.

The adult relationship I have with my kids is pretty awesome, too.

New Renter says

4) public service announcements showing men losing their shirts to child support.

Awesome! I think you could do a lot with this one. I would include testimonials.

Kids are an economic externalize, since we need them for the correct function of all society. Let's internalize it and make it rational. Higher tax rate after retirement for those without kids.

Dr Strangelove says

am mystified we live in a country where you have to buy a "license" to go catch a fish, but any completely lazy, clueless moron--not fit to raise a hamster let alone a child--can make a baby at will.

I was pretty shocked about that too when the hospital just handed over our first child a day after the birth and said bye.

The only thing they checked on was that we had an infant car seat.

Next time make sure you check there return policy too.

elliemae says

Well, I think you get the point. Kids are awesome.

Yes!

The child-haters in this thread, will be bitter old Ebenezers chasing kids off their lawn. Their lack of contribution to the gene pool will be mourned by nobody.

Vicente says

elliemae says

Well, I think you get the point. Kids are awesome.

Yes!

The child-haters in this thread, will be bitter old Ebenezers chasing kids off their lawn. Their lack of contribution to the gene pool will be mourned by nobody.

I think our problem is that too many contribute to gene pool, even those who shouldn't. And later their spawn goes off shooting up normal kids in NewTown, CT.

More from the HAR! files.

An Arizona couple seeking a divorce hit an unusual snag that could prevent the marriage from legally being dissolved.

A judge is questioning whether a same-sex marriage ban bars him from ending the union — or even recognizing its validity — because the husband was born a woman and underwent a sex change but retained female reproductive organs and gave birth to three children.

Thomas and Nancy Beatie are eager to end their nine-year marriage. But their divorce plans stalled when Maricopa County Family Court Judge Douglas Gerlach said in late June that he was unable to find any legal authority defining a man as someone who can give birth. Gerlach has questioned whether the union was a same-sex marriage.

The judge is expected to issue a decision in early February.

CaptainShuddup says

Those Idiots you speak of, are the State of Kentucky. I know it's FOX and
all, but you should still read it.

Perhaps-but Kentucky is not a hotbed of liberalism and neither is Kansas. Here in Kansas, they were suing a 19 year army veteran for child support. The poor guy was married back in 1995 and wifeee cheated on him and had a baby with another man. He divorced, proved by DNA that child was not his and married again and had 3 kids. Never had a relationship with that kid. But the first wife went on welfare and kansas is suing him for child support -because of "presumed" fatherhood. That is the law and I believe it is the same in FL too?? They were reforming the law in kansas, and I think this sperm donor law needs to be reformed too.

Now in the liberal CA, it ain't so-if it ain't your baby and you prove it-you don't pay. While you might be happy about gay or staright or Obummer-it simply is not right.

http://cjonline.com/stories/012109/sta_379727641.shtml

If Social Security gets axed or privatized, it changes the whole equation about kids being an investment...

lostand confused says

Now in the liberal CA, it ain't so-if it ain't your baby and you prove it-you don't pay.

is Cali the only state where presumption of paternity is not law?

An article on Parenting and Happiness:
http://nymag.com/news/features/67024/

instead of "investing" $250K in a child, put that money in a mutual fund, and use the interest to pay someone to come to your house once/twice a week to talk to you when you are older. you would get more bang for your buck. he/she may even clean the house for you.

that and "investing" in a marriage is like buying a stock whose company has a 50% chance of going bankrupted.

My investment in my daughter has paid dividends.
Maybe you are investing your sperm/egg with the wrong investment vehicle.