Is it cruel to bring a child into the world if you aren't upper or upper middle class in a first world country...

Is it cruel to bring a child into the world if you aren't upper or upper middle class in a first world country? The chance that they will live a comfortable life not filled with ruinous, tedious work, and constant anxiety over simply putting food on the table is very small.

even people who are poor as fuck nowadays are able to lead much better lives than most people in human history lead

So what? Given the choice between being punched in the arm and punched in the balls, I'd still prefer neither.

Well you went full retard in two posts, not really that impressive for an OP but not bad.

If you can't see the point I'm making, then perhaps you are the one who went full retard.

Stop crying you little faggot. If you can't find happiness as a person living in the 21st century, you fucking suck and should just kill yourself.

I weep not for myself, but for the countless babies brought forth to live lives of misery. Is it really so unthinkable to hold their parents accountable?

>Is it cruel to bring a child into the world if you aren't upper or upper middle class in a first world country?
No.
If you're poor as shit and homeless it is, yeah.

>The chance that they will live a comfortable life not filled with ruinous, tedious work, and constant anxiety over simply putting food on the table is very small.
Having to work hard doesn't mean you can't enjoy life.

>Having to work hard doesn't mean you can't enjoy life.
Who are you to make that decision for someone else, though? Day in, day out, toil and drudgery that brings with it no enjoyment or enlightenment, only wrinkles, aches and pains, and exhaustion. I would not force that on anyone.

They always have the option to opt out

Except he didn't?

Spoken like people who have never experienced real hardship.

There are many well documented physiological effects of being poor/low man on the societal flag pole (frayed telomeres, heart disease, prolonged weakened immune system, to name a few). This is a timeless question that humans have been debating for millennia, generally however our biological need to reproduce wins out over ethical concerns.

If you live in a socialist country its fine :3

In most countries, opting out is painful and there is a significant risk of failure resulting in a permanently worsened existence (i.e. permanent injury from a failed attempt). Not to mention society doing everything it can to stop people opting out, going so far as to lock them in padded cells and fill them with drugs - damn their quality of life as long as it continues!

If life is really so great, give people a real choice to opt out. Something fast, pain-free, and reliable. That such a choice is not available is quite telling.

>not being alive is better than having an imperfect life
So this is the power of nihilism

So your justification for it is subjective? Gotcha.

This world is too cruel and fucked up to have children anyway. If you can just adopt

If every human thought as you did, nobody would have been around to build the modern world. And being poor does not necessarily mean unhappiness, happiness is pretty stable between classes.

arguably yes but we are unfortunatley biologically programmed to feel an almost irresistable urge to do so

>going against the fundamental drive of humanity (having biological children) because you're too much of a pussy for real life
Kys

Suppose that, if you cut a random person's hand off, they will receive $500k. However, you're not allowed to tell or ask them about it beforehand or let them choose - you have to choose for them. Would you do it?

>If every human thought as you did, nobody would have been around to build the modern world.
So?

It is hardly irresistible.

>>If every human thought as you did, nobody would have been around to build the modern world.
>So?
Kill yourself edgelord

It's always more harmful than helpful to create a new life. If you don't create a new life then there isn't any new creature capable of suffering that exists. And you can't say this robs them of their potential pleasure on the opposing side of things either because you need to be alive in order to want pleasure in the first place.

>been in poor health and having to work yourself to death to survive
>""""imperfect"""""

Really makes you think

>Spoken like people who have never experienced real hardship.

Nigger, what the fuck are you talking about?

Hardship is a matter of perspective. If suffering is all you ever have known, than it isn't suffering is it?

The fact is that suffering and hardship are essential to the growth and development.

Only the truly weak find no purpose in it.

>ooooh no I have to live like an actual homo sapiens in nature not muh techno-utopian delusional society whatever will I doooooooooooooooo :(((((((

Guess the last ten thousand years just should've never happened because why the fuck bring a child up in neolithic society huh?

>nu-males

Is this a manifestation of Stockholm syndrome?

>I have no counter arguments so I'll make a lame quip and evacuate the thread

I can bring no counterarguments against a post that does not contain an argument.

>I have no counter arguments so I'll regurgitate the lame molyneux meme and evacuate the thread

If the last ten thousand years have wrought you then that is enough evidence that it would be better for them not to have happened.

>Is it cruel to bring a child into the world if you aren't upper or upper middle class in a first world country?
No, it would be moronic to think otherwise.
>The chance that they will live a comfortable life not filled with ruinous, tedious work, and constant anxiety over simply putting food on the table is very small.
This literally sounds like something a retarded middle-upper class idiot might think.

>be born in 21st century to a poor family
>can't afford proper healthcare
>can't afford dental healthcare
>can't afford proper education
>can't afford proper transportation
>can't afford proper modes of communication
o-okay, I'll be ostracized by the society, excluded from work/romance/social life. Okay, my $100 TV will bring me happiness. If it doesn't then you should I should kill myself.

>I have no counter arguments so I'll make a lame half attempt at an insult and evacuate the thread

Have you ever meet poor people?

Yes

I fucking despise my thirdworld parents, country, and existence

>Money is the only thing that makes you happy
>Raising children to be happy with what they have instead of spoiled brats is bad

Capitalists in a nutshell

It's not like communists/socialist are any different. They just think everybody should have money/material stuff.

Meh. Depends on the Marxist. The ones who LARP about transhumanism and post scarcity are pretty guilty of this, but the ones more focused on collectivist agrarian reforms are slightly different. They're still imperialists but they don't promote a state of wanton consumption or are as utopian as the others.

Yes.

Post-scarcity marxists are by far the majority.
The others are basically a bunch of christian fundamentalist sects who don't believe in god..

not seeing any arguments there pal

And I don't see any arguments in the OP either, so...

>Hardship is a matter of perspective. If suffering is all you ever have known, than it isn't suffering is it?
>The fact is that suffering and hardship are essential to the growth and development.
>Only the truly weak find no purpose in it.

*tips fedora*