Quake3World

tnf wrote:But kudos for having only one child. At least you aren't contributing to the burgeoning population.

Nightshade wrote:

Nightshade wrote:*hands Gramps novocaine*

For that exposed nerve that PooFNSTFU just hit.

tnf wrote: You miss the point about your son needing for anything. That isn't my point. I was merely pointing out that, for example, we may be looking at wars over water in our children's lifetimes. We may be looking at all sorts of really bad shit. When you look at the potential worst-case scenarios (and I know that these aren't guaranteed to happen), the world doesn't look like it will be an extremely enjoyable place to live in 50 or 60 years. Or maybe less. I know its probably overly pessimistic, but its a thought that enters the mind nonetheless. We'll have kids, and I will worry about what they may face at some point due to the state the world may find itself in - that has nothing to do with my being unwilling to deal with the typical risks we all face every day of our life. Because humanity has a great record of dealing with things before they become a huge problem.
Its not about having the material wealth to never want for anything.

But kudos for having only one child. At least you aren't contributing to the burgeoning population.

YourGrandpa wrote:If you're still factoring the state of the world into this decision, you're not ready.

YourGrandpa wrote:There is really no valid reason for anyone to have more than one child.

YourGrandpa wrote:There is really no valid reason for anyone to have more than one child.

R00k wrote:He really can't help throwing out his "conventional wisdom" dissertations, after he's spent so much time in life deciding on which issues he's going to refuse to ever change his mind.

YourGrandpa wrote:Anyone care to explain or give a valid reason as to why someone needs more than one child?

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:

YourGrandpa wrote:Anyone care to explain or give a valid reason as to why someone needs more than one child?

What the hell is a valid reason to you in this case?

You can have countless reasons to have more than one child. How about expanding your gene-line?
Ow wait, maybe you LIKE to have more than one child? (is that not valid? if not, why not?)
Or you come from a family of more than one child and you know better to deal with that than dealing with only one child?
It's reasonable to think that if your child grows up with brothers/sisters the child will be more socially adept.
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.etc.

YourGrandpa wrote:Adding more people to the population of this planet for self serving reasons is pretty stupid.

YourGrandpa wrote:All of these are reasons why someone would want more than one child. None of them are reasons why you NEED more than one. Adding more people to the population of this planet for self serving reasons is pretty stupid. This type of behavior is exactly why animal lovers encourage people to spay/neuter their pets, because there really isn’t a good reason to keep breeding when you can adopt.

YourGrandpa wrote:Anyone care to explain or give a valid reason as to why someone needs more than one child?

Grudge wrote:

YourGrandpa wrote:Adding more people to the population of this planet for self serving reasons is pretty stupid.

Do you mean stupid in the same way as driving a fucking Hummer for self serving reasons?

seremtan wrote:somewhere down the way you swerved your humvee into the back-road to Idiotville, stopped for gas and got kool aid instead, and any minute now will be winding down your window to ask directions to your high school reunion at Greater Retardia

firstly, the REPLACEMENT RATE is 2.1 children per adult female. one child means you are not actually adding anyone to the population, since while cruella de sargepa was squeezing out sargepa junior, a bunch of people died, and your little sproglet didn't make up for that. also, if other people are only having one child, then who the fuck are you going to adopt? twiki? C-fucking-3PO? and lastly, you aren't seriously comparing people to household pets are you?

Fender wrote:Because they develop better interpersonal skills at an earlier age with the constant interaction.

Fender wrote:Because you'll have multiple kids that can help take care of you in your old age.

YourGrandpa wrote:1. My wife drives on an interstate highway to work every day and safety is a major concern. So cramming her into a sub-compact vehicle isn't an option.
2. This is our primary transportaion. This takes my family and I everywhere we go. So again, safety is a major concern.
3. The H3 has a 5 cly. engine that gets 22 to 24 mpg. Meaning it gets better gas milage than most trucks and SUVs.

Grudge wrote: 1. Who said anything about a subcompact? How about an ordinary, regular car? Trucks are for freighting goods, not driving around people in. That's why we have, you know, cars.

2. What? Why did you have to repeat point 1?

3. Well, your government says otherwise: 14-18 mpg here http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/24657.shtml, which with 12.20 tons of CO2 released/year is about 1,5x a regular car like, say a BMW 3-series or a Volvo S60, which incidentially are some of the safest cars in existence.