• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

tackling the big issues.... why do poor people have more kids??

muzby

muzby

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 12, 2001
Messages
5,517
right.. i'm putting my disclaimer at the top of this one, cause i know that someone, somewhere is going to take offence to something that i never meant to be offensive... so i'd just like to say that i respect peoples rights to have children, and i understand that there are some of us who aren't quite as well off as others.. quite often its not their fault either...


right, now that i have got that out of the way..

why is it that it seems to be that poor people have a lot of kids?

you know the stereotypical scenario, poorer family, lots of kids.. you see them in poorer suburbs, around shopping centres, hey, even when you were at school, there were always a big group of kids from the one, poor, family... (for an absract look, think cletus and brandene from the simpsons..)

especially in a number of country towns, there are a lot of younger people having babies, at a point where they are not financially stable enough to support them...

so, is it that having kids makes you poor? we all know that it costs a LOT to feed, raise and educate a child.. so is this the factor?

or is it that people will have kids to provide themselves with a greater sense of worth on this planet.. (afterall, a number of religions believe that reproducing is the whole reason that we are here)..

i think that having a child is a blessing, and that people are free to make their own decisions on the matter...

so what are everyone else's thoughts?
 
Mary Poppins said:
two words

baby bonus.

:\
Click to expand...

i never even thought of that... now come to think of it, that could be a contributing factor..

i knew a couple of girls from school who had a bub simply to get a few grand...

but that scenario is sad... you shouldnt raise something to make money off it... (unless its dope..)
 
Mary Poppins is pretty close to hitting the nail on the head I think.

Also, there is often a sense that you don't NEED as many material things in less well families. You get by with what you've got.

Whereas a lot of better off families see a lot of things as 'essential' -- things they want to be able to provide for their kids. They wait until they're positive they'll be able to give them all those things. In my opinion, they actually wait too long, sometimes.
 
muzby said:

but that scenario is sad... you shouldnt raise something to make money off it... (unless its dope..)
Click to expand...


You just offended the farmers!!!:X:X:X Give em a break will you!
 
Baby bonus? Lmao do you guys actually know how much it costs to raise a kid?
Well I am starting to find out, weeee a whole 3 grand baby bonus, that'll pay for a pram, a crib and nappies for about 4 maybe 5 months maximum.
Maybe being in the socio economic situation they are in sex is one of the few pleasures they have?

This question is about a silly as "Why do asians always live in the same suburb" or "Why are all black people drunks" lol

Typical middle class* ignorance :)


*disclaimer, I am middle class, just not ignorant
 
it all comes down to education in my opinion. i dont know, that or some ppl are just plan careless??

though in some cultures its normal to have lots of kids, i know from where im from (Africa), its in african culture to have lots of kids. the theory being, that when u are old and grey, you will have someone to look after you.
 
I can't believe that some people think that the baby bonus would be a contributing factor to keeping a child... Ok, so maybe a VERY small minority of people are suckers for the baby bonus but it's not much $$$ in terms of raising a child... really... if anyone I knew had a child and mentioned that reason, I'd question their basic mathematical skills. I think you'll also find that people who have kids for the bonus are often a bit mentally unwell!

Obviously people who think this spend way to much time sitting infront of a telly watching the news, rather than getting out and seeing the real world. I've met and associated with many single mothers on government payments - every single one of them within 2 years has either gone back to studying or part/full time work.

I agree with rm1x - middle class ignorance. I see and hear it all the time - often I'm the victim of it. I also live a middle class life.
 
"Have you lived the experience?
Have you witness the plague?
People making babies sometimes just to escape"

- Bad Religion
 
kandyraverchick said:
I can't believe that some people think that the baby bonus would be a contributing factor to keeping a child... Ok, so maybe a VERY small minority of people are suckers for the baby bonus but it's not much $$$ in terms of raising a child... really... if anyone I knew had a child and mentioned that reason, I'd question their basic mathematical skills. I think you'll also find that people who have kids for the bonus are often a bit mentally unwell!

Obviously people who think this spend way to much time sitting infront of a telly watching the news, rather than getting out and seeing the real world. I've met and associated with many single mothers on government payments - every single one of them within 2 years has either gone back to studying or part/full time work.

I agree with rm1x - middle class ignorance. I see and hear it all the time - often I'm the victim of it. I also live a middle class life.
Click to expand...

Well, I had a friend in Norway, and a cousin in Norway, who had babies off guys because they KNEW they would be set for life. Because of the way the single mum status is there, they basically never HAVE to work. It's not that they don't love the kids they have now, but it was definitely a huge contributing factor (by own admission). Now, 12 years on, my cousin is bored staying home, so, yes, has gone back to study. The other one is quite happy to get the check from Dad every month.
 
I think it comes down to your definition of poor doesnt it.


Personally I suspect that people with large families are in fact very rich...........rich in terms of the ammount of l;ove there is and caring and the things that people should be judged on.........not financial circumstances.

In my opinion financial circumstances have nothing to do with how rich a person is.
 
why do poor people have more kids?
Cos rich people don't want alot of kids fighting over the millions of dollars and assets when they die.

Fuck i don't know.

Though i did know a couple of families on my old street that had over 5 kids each (one family had 8 8o ) and they did it so they could leech more money off the government every time they had another baby. They sat on the pension/dole all their adult hood life, would go down the TAB everyday, come home and bred some more.
 
MazDan said:
I think it comes down to your definition of poor doesnt it.


Personally I suspect that people with large families are in fact very rich...........rich in terms of the ammount of l;ove there is and caring and the things that people should be judged on.........not financial circumstances.

In my opinion financial circumstances have nothing to do with how rich a person is.
Click to expand...

Thats such a cop out and you know it.

Thanks Moonbeam, but the 60s ended a long time ago. Have a mocha-latte with soy and wake to the future. The flaws in hippy sentiments became known in the 70s. This is why the hippies were hunted for sport until they were enventually wiped by punk-rockers in the early 80s.

If you come in here and say "Money cant buy you happiness" then you obviously dont know where to shop.

Money is the number one reason why families argue. This is a statistically proven fact.

Love doesnt pay the bills nor does it provide food and a roof to live under.

You cant survive on alot of love, but you can survive on alot of money.
 
^i agree

Marilyn Monroe's character in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes defends her gold-digging ways to her fiancee's dad by saying that if they have to spend all their time worrying about money, they won't have any time for being in love.

:p
 
i think, and we are talking about poor families with lots of kids, not single mothers etc or rich families with lots of kids, that it may have something to do with mothers needing to feel important, having a reason to exist. not that being poor always equates to having a lack of intelligence, because obviously this is not the case, but perhaps a lack of ambition to pursue other things in life.

i do remember a story on some "news" program once, maybe 60 minutes, and it was about couples choosing to not have kids vs couples with lots of kids. i had to laugh because the family with lots of kids said that the couple with no ambition to bring children into this fucked up world, amongst other reasons, were "just being selfish". two minutes later the same family with lots of kids, referring to the couples who don't want kids said, "who is going to look after them when they get old". i'd love to be one of those eight siblings or whatever number this family had. "geez thanks mum, you had me so you don't have to go into a nursing home".

sure there are some ppl who have kids to take advantage of welfare benefits but i think the numbers are hugely exaggerated by the media to make us "aussie battlers" tune in.

like lostpunk said, i really think it is a way to escape, to have a purpose.
 
^ That's what I was going to say.

I think it has a lot to do with filling voids that exist in other areas of their lives, maybe giving them something to do.

If they're having lots of kids, then they'll learn the first or second time how gosh darn expensive they are, and that the money from the government isn't going to cover even half of their living expenses. So I'm certain that's only true for a very small number of families.

Feeling like someone needs you when you're not as "successful" as maybe you thought you'd be would be a huge drawcard, I'd imagine.
 
...and it isn't just poor families who have lots of children. I would have, as a child, looked like one of the kids from a large, poor family (5 kids + 3-4 hangers on at all times)- but in reality my dad earned about 90K a year before tax and my mum probably earnt 15-20K for babysitting- so while we weren't rich (once you factor in the costs of feeding/housing us all, we certainly weren't poor.

My mother was one of 14, and her family wasn't poor either.
 
strumpet said:
Well, I had a friend in Norway, and a cousin in Norway, who had babies off guys because they KNEW they would be set for life. Because of the way the single mum status is there, they basically never HAVE to work. It's not that they don't love the kids they have now, but it was definitely a huge contributing factor (by own admission). Now, 12 years on, my cousin is bored staying home, so, yes, has gone back to study. The other one is quite happy to get the check from Dad every month.
Click to expand...

If you call living just above the poverty line within Australia being set for life - then fine... to each their own!

However the majority of people recieving governmant benefits will do something more with their life after the birth of the child. Most parents like to set a good example for their children - yes, that means bettering their future... :)

There is absolutely no reason for an underclass parent to not return to work once the child reaches school age - furthermore, I know what you're saying is a rarer circumstance... despite how many clueless's will tell me differently. It's great hearing peoples opinions on matters such as this but at least do yourselves the favour of educating yourselves of the reasons WHY?

Let's list the obvious ones (aka common logical reasons):
* They genuinely love children (shit sherlock - you're joking right? 8o)
* Lack of education
* Birth control costing money... money they DON'T have... (remember: lack of education is also commonly involved - ever heard of 'pull and pray'?).
* Family therapy not being easily accesible (a standatd routine throughout Australia after the birth of a child - easy enough if you can afford transport costs or better still, if you live NEAR transport). Generally you're hospital should follow up on this, they take on the responsibility of supplying birth control and making sure the families are getting along alright...

Or then we have the materialistic ones:
* omg, omg, $3000 for having baby!
* Free government benifits. Oh YAY - What a dream life..
* The father pretty rich - I wouldn't mind some of his dosh!

Think about it - what do you honestly think the most common reasons are?
You don't think a large proportion of pensioner parents would *really* feel that money is a better reason to give birth to a child than the fact they *want* to have a child for no other reason than love, surely? Please someone tell me that as intelligent people we know better than to *assume* and suspect this, regarding reasons for child bearing from a large proportion of people from a lower socio economic background.

That is all! :)
 
Last edited:
silvia saint- I think the needing to feel important is why my (well enough off) mother had 5 children. She wanted 8, but fate conspired against her :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top