Rich men have more houses, more cars, more yachts, but less kids. Why?
Simple. It costs far more for a rich man to produce and maintain kids than for the poor. The same car cost the same to the rich and the poor. The same house cost the same for the rich and the poor. Yet breeding and raising a kid is far costlier for the rich than the poor.
Some of the costs are natural. Rich men do want to spend more money for their children. However, a child need is limited. Once you spend $1 million per child, there’s probably nothing else you can do to make that kid any happier or more prepared to get rich and successful in real world.
However, for the truly rich, the extra costs are often artificial in a sense that government artificially inflate the cost.
Take a look at child support laws. It’s set proportional to a man’s income. Women cannot negotiate in advance how much child support she want. Perhaps the women prefer $20k per child per year from Tiger Wood than $20k per child per year from some poorer guy that make a total of $20k per year.
However, women can’t choose that. If Tiger Wood is the daddy, the court will simply allow women to sue for $1 million a year, for example. Most of those money will most likely not go to support Tiger’s child at all.
Another way Tiger Wood can prolong his stay in the gene pool is to get married. You know how costly it is for him.
Again, women may agree to do it for $20k per year with Tiger Wood than marrying a poorer guy that make a total of $20k per year. But if a woman agree to sell her self for $20k per year, it’s illegal due to anti prostitution laws. Marrying a poor guy that also pays $20k per year is legal. Why it’s up to government rather than the women, to decide terms of her sexual acts?
Many women prefer to be sugar babies of richer males than marrying a poorer males the way voters’ wish. However, the deal is borderline illegal.
What about prenuptial agreement? Marriage is such a lousy deal making it more complicated is beyond the lawyer skill of most people, including the rich.
To me, all socialism, as produced by democracy, will be peanuts except one. Genepool survival socialism. Currently there is no legal way a billionaire can make 20-30 kids without risking bankruptcy or other financial catastrophe. Yet deadbeat poor fathers that can make 20-30 kids with impunity because no body is going to sue him and because even the risk of going to jail is far more acceptable for those poor people. Moreover, government actually pay for all his kids.
Yet if that same guy work hard get rich and then want to breed, things just got too costly.
If marginal cost of raising a kid is constant between the rich and the poor, then the productive will out breed the unproductive and all these redistribution of wealth we are bitching about will be peanuts.
Incoming search terms:
- food powered by phpbb (37)