In life, it turns out to be the other way around. The poor breed like cockroachesrabbits, while the rich have 1-2 children. As a result, it turns out that the poor strata of the population only multiply, while the rich gradually die out. A similar picture is at the country level. The birth rate in poor countries is very high, and the population is also growing.

So, for some reason, all these people forgot to ask your opinion.

From an economic point of view, in the modern world it is not profitable to have children (we should not forget that children are not at all guided by the financial component). Because children require "investment" of resources in them and these investments will almost never return to you. That is, you could, roughly speaking, go on vacation to the Maldives instead of paying for your son's education in college.

Up to 20 years (a conventional figure) children need to be provided for and resources invested in them, so that later, they will move to live and work separately, but at the same time, the resources "invested" in them will not return to you (they will pass on to the next generations). If you evaluate from a selfish point of view, then this is extremely unprofitable.

If we are talking about the economic component (abstracting from the rest), then my opinion is the following.

In life, it turns out to be the other way around. The poor breed like cockroaches, while the rich have 1-2 children. As a result, it turns out that the poor strata of the population only multiply, while the rich gradually die out. A similar picture is at the country level. The birth rate in poor countries is very high, and the population is also growing.

So, for some reason, all these people forgot to ask your opinion.

From an economic point of view, in the modern world it is not profitable to have children (we should not forget that children are not at all guided by the financial component). Because children require "investment" of resources in them and these investments will almost never return to you. That is, you could, roughly speaking, go on vacation to the Maldives instead of paying for your son's education in college.

Up to 20 years (a conventional figure) children need to be provided for and resources invested in them, so that later, they will move to live and work separately, but at the same time, the resources "invested" in them will not return to you (they will pass on to the next generations). If you evaluate from a selfish point of view, then this is extremely unprofitable.

If we are talking about the economic component (abstracting from the rest), then my opinion is the following.