What about if you become poor after having children, say one parent dies and you can’t work, leaving you really broke.
Are the right saying the kids should be taken into care from poor parents
Poor people to blame for own poverty says absolute ghoul.
Yeah, everyone can predict when they have a child what financial crisis are going to happen. You can predict when the next tory comes to power and causes your mortgage to double.
He’s not entirely wrong though is he? I get that people’s circumstances change but there are plenty of cases of poor judgement on the part of parents.
To be fair if you’re struggling to support yourself having a child is probably not a wise move.
25p
If you can’t afford that then I dread to think of the living conditions those kids are in.
If you can’t adequately support children you shouldn’t have them
I don’t know what else this man said, but on the face of it I would agree that if you genuinely cannot afford to buy a toothbrush then you are completely fucked and definitely cannot afford to have children.
Probably get hate but I don’t care
If your poor when you have a kid that’s on you
If you become poor due to death divorce job loss or injury then thats not on you
Yesterday I saw a post about a women complaining how small her flat was and how she some of her 4 kids had to share rooms however she moved in the flat in 2013 before her oldest was born she then had 3 more kids living there
That’s on her
Some people need to take the bare minimum responsibility and that is don’t get pregnant if you can’t afford it and this goes for both genders
Accidents happen but this is the UK you can get an abortion
You can bark as much as you want, he has a point. A toothbrush for kids can be bought for pennies (literally) and toothepaste is cheap too.
While there will be the odd extreme case, everyone can afford a toothbrush.
Having said that, it’s not just that, it’s a combination of things. You don’t get tooth decay after 3 weeks of not brushing, it takes many months/years.
Also “why aren’t British people having more children?”
Might have occurred to him that the parents could afford toothbrushes back when they made the decision to have children… and for some inexplicable reason have recently suddenly gotten a lot poorer…
Don’t have an issue with the man’s opinion tbh. He’s entitled tp it and I guess reddit is entitled to cry about it. Such is life.
My boy gets a new one every term from school. Comes with toothpaste too and a wee slip with information on it.
I’ve never thought about it but don’t all primary schools do similar ?
So in order to have kids you must be able to see the future and guarantee that no hardship will ever befall you or your loved ones, no accidents, illness, redundancy, business going under or shitty governments screwing you over by making life unaffordable. I guess breeding is only for the 1% then…
It’s funny how every single time you hear of someone saying variations on *”people who can’t afford X shouldn’t have children”*, there’s never any evidence they understand that people who once had money can find themselves without money, and not necessarily through their own fault.
I remember an interview he did with a woman working at a charity explaining that single parents with low paid full time work were struggling to afford rent. His solution was to ‘get two jobs’.
To be fair, if you cant afford to raise your children properly or even provide them with a toothbrush then you probably shouldnt be having kids.
Putting a financial barrier on the miracle that is life is kinda dystopian.
“this [childs] life does not belong here because it’s parents are poor” is kinda gross.
What if they weren’t poor when the had children, will this turd filled skin sack adopt them?
Old rich man shouldn’t comment on what they haven’t a clue about.
What of the people who weren’t too poor the year before? Or… the year before that? It’s a case of people’s income not meeting inflation.
Heck, I bet in 2-3 years time the same people will be moaning about replacement rates.
That little bit of “let them eat cake” selfishness starts to fail at the national level when so many people are so poor they can’t afford children and then your nation starts failing at even replacement-level breeding and then your country’s healthcare/pension/social security systems begin to collapse because too many oldsters are drawing from the system that too few youngsters are paying into.
Of course, by the time this problem becomes apparent, it’s far too late to do anything about it.
National economies aren’t really designed to robustly survive generational population collapse.
At some point, civilization requires giving enough money and resources to enough breeding age people to ensure they actually breed so the population doesn’t implode.
Everyone with kids can afford a toothbrush, it’s just a question of priorities and education.
Harsh truth but absolutely correct. You can take it further than just a toothbrush. If you can barely look after yourselves as a couple, financially speaking, what the hell are you doing bringing a child into the world? It’s selfish and irresponsible.
Technically a “parent” already has a child, so it should read “parents who ‘cannot afford toothbrushes’ should not have **had** children”.
**Have** would indicate their current children must be taken away (as they’d lose current possession of that child), which i’m sure is not what Ferarri means. Nick isn’t suggesting we take children away from poor people… **Have had**, would mean they shouldn’t have been given birth in the first place, which might be what the headline is trying to say.
The other way to say/write it would be “would-be parents…” and leave the rest as it is.
It’s not clear (as 2 mistakes – the incorrect noun at the beginning and the incorrect verb at the end) whether it’s saying retrospectively parents shouldn’t have had kids, or if people thinking about being parents shouldn’t have kids.
Then again he might just be saying current parents who cannot afford a toothbrush should not have anymore children. But again, the headline doesn’t make it clear.
Reading the headline as it is, it seems to be suggesting parents have their children taken away from them.
Did this really need to be posted? Can’t this be summed up as “person we shouldn’t give any attention to is a piece of shit and should be ignored”?
It’s £1 for a toothbrush. If you can’t afford a toothbrush for your child than YOU need to take a hard look at yourself and seriously consider whether you should have more kids. I am all for people living in poverty but there needs to be some accountability on the parents part.
Governments that leave people in a situation where they cannot afford toothbrushes should not be in government.
If you fall on hard times after having kids, that is an entirely different thing than still choosing to have kids despite not being able to support the fundemental needs of the family you’re trying to create. The first is an unfortunate event that anyone could find themselves in, the second is a literal choice that you made to go against logic and bring someone into your life when you can’t give them what they need and expect others to provide it for you.
I actually heard this discussion on the radio. The presenter wanted to have an argument but he does have point when he mentions toothbrushes can cost as little as 25p.
I would dread to think what condition children are living in if parents can’t afford 25p every 6 months.
I think it comes down to pure neglect and selfishness that your children’s teeth need to be extracted from decay.
And he’s right… children cost a lot more than toothbrushes.
But what if parents could afford children 10 years ago when they decided to try, and are now stuck with a 9yo kid when they can’t afford toothbrushes.
It’s almost like wealthy conservative voters can’t foresee themselves ever having nothing and have no ability to empathise. Either that or they’re just scared that one day it could be them and they live in constant denial.
On one hand, fuck this guy. On the other hand, if you can’t afford to have kids. Don’t have kids.
A girl I used to know has three kids now (each with a different dad) She posts on facebook every day about how some of the dads are useless, how hard her life is, and how is she meant to be able to afford food for her kids.
If I can’t afford to have a dog, I don’t get a dog.
Don’t worry nick, birth rates are plummeting in the UK because people can’t afford children so that problem will soon sort itself. But I suppose you’ll then be complaining that people are selfish for not wanting to re populate.
As always, the usual suspects are out in force in the comments perpetuating the ‘luxury life on benefits’ bullshit.
35 comments
What about if you become poor after having children, say one parent dies and you can’t work, leaving you really broke.
Are the right saying the kids should be taken into care from poor parents
Poor people to blame for own poverty says absolute ghoul.
Yeah, everyone can predict when they have a child what financial crisis are going to happen. You can predict when the next tory comes to power and causes your mortgage to double.
He’s not entirely wrong though is he? I get that people’s circumstances change but there are plenty of cases of poor judgement on the part of parents.
To be fair if you’re struggling to support yourself having a child is probably not a wise move.
25p
If you can’t afford that then I dread to think of the living conditions those kids are in.
If you can’t adequately support children you shouldn’t have them
I don’t know what else this man said, but on the face of it I would agree that if you genuinely cannot afford to buy a toothbrush then you are completely fucked and definitely cannot afford to have children.
Probably get hate but I don’t care
If your poor when you have a kid that’s on you
If you become poor due to death divorce job loss or injury then thats not on you
Yesterday I saw a post about a women complaining how small her flat was and how she some of her 4 kids had to share rooms however she moved in the flat in 2013 before her oldest was born she then had 3 more kids living there
That’s on her
Some people need to take the bare minimum responsibility and that is don’t get pregnant if you can’t afford it and this goes for both genders
Accidents happen but this is the UK you can get an abortion
You can bark as much as you want, he has a point. A toothbrush for kids can be bought for pennies (literally) and toothepaste is cheap too.
While there will be the odd extreme case, everyone can afford a toothbrush.
Having said that, it’s not just that, it’s a combination of things. You don’t get tooth decay after 3 weeks of not brushing, it takes many months/years.
Also “why aren’t British people having more children?”
Might have occurred to him that the parents could afford toothbrushes back when they made the decision to have children… and for some inexplicable reason have recently suddenly gotten a lot poorer…
Don’t have an issue with the man’s opinion tbh. He’s entitled tp it and I guess reddit is entitled to cry about it. Such is life.
My boy gets a new one every term from school. Comes with toothpaste too and a wee slip with information on it.
I’ve never thought about it but don’t all primary schools do similar ?
So in order to have kids you must be able to see the future and guarantee that no hardship will ever befall you or your loved ones, no accidents, illness, redundancy, business going under or shitty governments screwing you over by making life unaffordable. I guess breeding is only for the 1% then…
It’s funny how every single time you hear of someone saying variations on *”people who can’t afford X shouldn’t have children”*, there’s never any evidence they understand that people who once had money can find themselves without money, and not necessarily through their own fault.
I remember an interview he did with a woman working at a charity explaining that single parents with low paid full time work were struggling to afford rent. His solution was to ‘get two jobs’.
To be fair, if you cant afford to raise your children properly or even provide them with a toothbrush then you probably shouldnt be having kids.
Putting a financial barrier on the miracle that is life is kinda dystopian.
“this [childs] life does not belong here because it’s parents are poor” is kinda gross.
What if they weren’t poor when the had children, will this turd filled skin sack adopt them?
Old rich man shouldn’t comment on what they haven’t a clue about.
What of the people who weren’t too poor the year before? Or… the year before that? It’s a case of people’s income not meeting inflation.
Heck, I bet in 2-3 years time the same people will be moaning about replacement rates.
That little bit of “let them eat cake” selfishness starts to fail at the national level when so many people are so poor they can’t afford children and then your nation starts failing at even replacement-level breeding and then your country’s healthcare/pension/social security systems begin to collapse because too many oldsters are drawing from the system that too few youngsters are paying into.
Of course, by the time this problem becomes apparent, it’s far too late to do anything about it.
National economies aren’t really designed to robustly survive generational population collapse.
At some point, civilization requires giving enough money and resources to enough breeding age people to ensure they actually breed so the population doesn’t implode.
Everyone with kids can afford a toothbrush, it’s just a question of priorities and education.
Harsh truth but absolutely correct. You can take it further than just a toothbrush. If you can barely look after yourselves as a couple, financially speaking, what the hell are you doing bringing a child into the world? It’s selfish and irresponsible.
Technically a “parent” already has a child, so it should read “parents who ‘cannot afford toothbrushes’ should not have **had** children”.
**Have** would indicate their current children must be taken away (as they’d lose current possession of that child), which i’m sure is not what Ferarri means. Nick isn’t suggesting we take children away from poor people… **Have had**, would mean they shouldn’t have been given birth in the first place, which might be what the headline is trying to say.
The other way to say/write it would be “would-be parents…” and leave the rest as it is.
It’s not clear (as 2 mistakes – the incorrect noun at the beginning and the incorrect verb at the end) whether it’s saying retrospectively parents shouldn’t have had kids, or if people thinking about being parents shouldn’t have kids.
Then again he might just be saying current parents who cannot afford a toothbrush should not have anymore children. But again, the headline doesn’t make it clear.
Reading the headline as it is, it seems to be suggesting parents have their children taken away from them.
Did this really need to be posted? Can’t this be summed up as “person we shouldn’t give any attention to is a piece of shit and should be ignored”?
It’s £1 for a toothbrush. If you can’t afford a toothbrush for your child than YOU need to take a hard look at yourself and seriously consider whether you should have more kids. I am all for people living in poverty but there needs to be some accountability on the parents part.
Governments that leave people in a situation where they cannot afford toothbrushes should not be in government.
If you fall on hard times after having kids, that is an entirely different thing than still choosing to have kids despite not being able to support the fundemental needs of the family you’re trying to create. The first is an unfortunate event that anyone could find themselves in, the second is a literal choice that you made to go against logic and bring someone into your life when you can’t give them what they need and expect others to provide it for you.
I actually heard this discussion on the radio. The presenter wanted to have an argument but he does have point when he mentions toothbrushes can cost as little as 25p.
I would dread to think what condition children are living in if parents can’t afford 25p every 6 months.
I think it comes down to pure neglect and selfishness that your children’s teeth need to be extracted from decay.
And he’s right… children cost a lot more than toothbrushes.
But what if parents could afford children 10 years ago when they decided to try, and are now stuck with a 9yo kid when they can’t afford toothbrushes.
It’s almost like wealthy conservative voters can’t foresee themselves ever having nothing and have no ability to empathise. Either that or they’re just scared that one day it could be them and they live in constant denial.
On one hand, fuck this guy. On the other hand, if you can’t afford to have kids. Don’t have kids.
A girl I used to know has three kids now (each with a different dad) She posts on facebook every day about how some of the dads are useless, how hard her life is, and how is she meant to be able to afford food for her kids.
If I can’t afford to have a dog, I don’t get a dog.
Don’t worry nick, birth rates are plummeting in the UK because people can’t afford children so that problem will soon sort itself. But I suppose you’ll then be complaining that people are selfish for not wanting to re populate.
As always, the usual suspects are out in force in the comments perpetuating the ‘luxury life on benefits’ bullshit.