Why do white Europeans have so few kids?

Post Reply New Topic

The argument still doesn't make sense; there isn't a buy-one-get-one-free clause in parenting, at least to my knowledge. More children raised by lower income parents equates to more children raised in that setting, not financial benefit - unless you're talking about the application of welfare, which is something altogether different in my mind.


M.

I spent $0.50 on an apple today.
The cost of an apple is $0.50.

Aren't the two the same meaning?

And if I have 5 kids, I have to buy 5 apples... $2.50. Mathematically, your argument does not stand up as offered; is there another way you can make your case that might be more apparent? Because the only savings I find would be on hand-me-down clothes and possibly some furniture - everything else is a cumulative cost, not divided.


M.

I'm sure the parents of an only child would spend a lot more on that kid than the amount spent on each individual kid in a large family. Think about it....why would both parents need to work if they only need to spend a little bit on that one kid. Also, a lot of poor families with lots of kids, only the father works...of course thats until the oldest kids are old enough to find jobs. Besides, if you are an only child, your parents are more likely to spend money on things that are not "necessary" like extracurricular activities.

So this is all based on your assumptions, not actual numbers, research or fact. This sort of argument against groups immigrating has been around for centuries; it is an easy excuse for war, for those who would choose to seek it. At least in my opinion.


M.

It was ruveyn who brought this whole spending issue onto this thread. I originally mentioned birth rates which the facts I have seen in countless sources. But I'm confused...what does the amount of money parents spend on their kids have anything to do with war?

Forgive me, didn't use the clutch; I was referring to the issue of immigration and birth rates, the latter being used a justification for discrimination and violence against those in the former situation.


M.

Well, that would be a really stupid justification. Either accept the reality or have more kids of your own...

The immigrants are needed anyways because young workers are needed to support an aging population.

Maybe not for you..actually given things like deaths, immigrations, not producing, a population needs something like 2.3 kids to be stable

That sentence is not strictly true. Currently in the UK, for example, we have millions of the indigenous population unemployed. Despite that you can go to many facilities and see foreigners employed almost exclusively. Although those foreigners pay tax, the state also provides their kids with schooling, and free health care. Many also send money out of the country to dependents abroad. The foreigners are taking the work of British people, and there is huge resentment growing over the situation; a situation that is completely unnecessary.

When extra labour is required, there are a number of measures that could be taken that don't involve mass immigration,and those would include reversing the trend of increasing the length of childhood that has pushed the age for compulsory education even higher. It serves no useful purpose educating 18 year olds in , for example, media studies at the tax-payers expense. Also, when migrant labour is required they should be given work permits valid for a specific time period, and when that period is over they should leave or be deported.

As for why many British people don't have kids, there are numerous reasons. For example, if you can't afford private education would you want to have to send your offspring to a state shool full of Muslims? In addition, if you're a male as soon as you father kids you basically hand over control of your life and property to the state and your partner; that's particularly so if you're married. If you value your possessions, freedom and sanity no male in their right mind would have children in Britain today. The exception, of course, are those on state benefits for whom reproduction provides even more in additional state aid.

The country is doomed; for sure. Blame Blair and Brown's brand of socialism.

That AND in many 1st World nations, there is an extensive welfare system. Lots of poor people with massive families are getting all kinds of taxpayer-funded aid to support their spawn. People shameless enough to exploit the system will have lots of kids.

More responsible people limit their families to what they can support without assistance.

In any case, I'm pretty sure the Muslim imperative is to take over nations by attrition. Overpopulation means they have larger numbers. Larger numbers means more voting clout in future generations. In time, you out-breed your opponents.

Because only white people are autistic! Hence social skills difficulties means less relationships and less children!

(And yes, I'm parodying views I've seen expressed on this forum)

And whats wrong with that? Do I sense some bigotry here?

Just common sense, something I realise is missing in your country where ones freedom to express ones opinions is even more restricted than ours here. Most British people want their kids educated in a secular, or perhaps moderate-Christian environment where the other kids speak English.

how?

This is strange. Why is asking questions about the demographic and cultural future of white people ok if a Chinese person does it, but "racist" if a white person does it?
Why do you get such a self-righteous kick out of using this word "racist"? (four times in your first post, along with one "Islamophobia" and one "fascist")
How is it "racist" or "supremacist" to want to preserve one's own people and their culture in the land of one's ancestors?

You probably don't know. All you know is that chastising your fellow whites for their "racism" is the sign of a good Marxist.
People have been saying the same thing about you Marxists for decades, and it still holds. You look at the inequality and materialism of our society, and instead of just rejecting the political system that spawns it, you reject everything else as well - nature, kinship, your own cultural heritage, the whole lot. Then you end up cheerleading for groups that are culturally alien and hostile to your own just because your Marxist literature tells you they are "oppressed".