Asset or liability?
We're talking about children here...
This is a follow up to yesterday’s Foolsletter.
Not that long ago, children were viewed as an asset to the family. They were labour. They were security. They were there to care for their parents when they got old. When people were making the ‘choice’ to have more children, the math, in times of plenty was simple: more = better
Born to surf / born to serve
The children were not there for their own sake. They were there to serve the family. Born to serve. What were they for? To serve. Who were they for? Their family and their community.. They were there to help. How would they do it? Through compliance. There was an inherent familial compliance that was essential for the good of society.
This has been shifting
These days, what are children for? They don’t need to work in a field. They can’t increase a family’s wealth by working in a coal mine or shining shoes on a street corner. These days young parents are bombarded by warnings of just how damn expensive it is to raise a child to maturit…
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Remarkable Fools Letter to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.