Susie-Q&A
• Jul. 29, 2008 - Population Rising, But It's Not the Little Kids' Fault
Demographers are concerned, not that birth rates are rising, but that they are falling.
Apparently, current growth in population is tied to a great good: we are living longer. But many developed countries are below replacement rate in their birth rates, which poses a problem for aging populations in countries where cushy tax-funded government benefits line the retirement nest.
If the birth rate is not the cause of population growth, but rather longer life-span, how then are we to address the so-called "ticking time-bomb" of "looming overpopulation"? By shortening lives?
I've been chastised (online more often than in public) for having so many children, as if somehow our little family is directly culpable for Gaia-cide. It seems, though, I'm only a tiny drop in a vast demographic bucket. I'm taking up just a tiny amount of slack for those not having enough children.
I always laugh at these little factoids invariably thrown into such articles:
"The cost of raising a middle-class child has risen, according to U.S. government estimates, to more than $200,000, not including college tuition."
Yeah, if you buy $100 sneakers for each child, maybe, feed them on 100%-organic- free-range- grass-fed-purified-water-kissed everything, take them out for pizza every week, entertain them with a 50-inch flat-screen plasma HDTV, and drive them all over the map to get to activities.
No, I don't think it costs quite that much. Not unless college tuition is folded in. Sillies.
(Oops--Hat Tip to The Point for the link.) |
Post A
Comment! :: Send
to a Friend!
|
Comments
|
• Jul. 30, 2008 - Untitled Comment
I'd love to stay home with my baby, but she's going to childcare... I can't afford to stay home!
I didn't stay at that forum too long - I had nothing in common with those women. Thank goodness!