Those DINKs can pawn future Generations

[Unic0rn]

You are mistaken to think that the DINK will be better off. You can say those with children can also end up like DINK, but you refuse to say DINK can also end up like those with children in the financial sense.

Money can always save, but whether have someone to care for you when you are alone is not something we have a solution in the foreseeable future.

And you need to accept that the probability for one half of a DINK to die alone is higher, and not just focus on the outcomes with smaller probabilities to console yourself.

Get married and have children, life will become more meaningful.

If you have children, they will take about 25 years at most to grow up but will take care of you when you are 50 all the way to 99 years old and that is you contributing for 25 years and enjoying for 49 years isn’t that good? If you have many children the results is multiply by say four children is x4 each give you $1500 per month is already $6000 per month passive income?

 

[TopGun]

Dying alone is not sad.

What is sad would be to look back in your life in your twilight years, and realized that you have lived a life that should have been, instead of would be.

If you want kids, go for it. If you don't want kids, then don't have kids for the sake of having it, or be guilt-tripped into having one.

 

[parchiao]

If you have children, they will take about 25 years at most to grow up but will take care of you when you are 50 all the way to 99 years old and that is you contributing for 25 years and enjoying for 49 years isn’t that good? If you have many children the results is multiply by say four children is x4 each give you $1500 per month is already $6000 per month passive income?

No lah, I don't believe in children paying for old parents. I think people need to look after themselves financially, as much as possible. Of course will always have a percentage of the population who will have difficulty in old age.

But if the children are happy to look after the parents, then all the better. There is also those situations with unspoken understanding e.g. I die I let the chid who looked after me to inherit my property etc. I believe this is still the majority.

For me, I think I will uplorry before my wife, so I hope my kids will at least monitor her when she gets to the stage where she cannot look after herself. Unlike the DINKs, cannot even hope to have anyone to do anything for them.

 

[spyder81]

Dinks should be penalised heavily. Cannot ballot central location and must be 2 room and below. Resale top up $50k for those with kids to subside more of their childcare.

Also private selling to dinks must input a nation building extra $50k to selling price, payable to mcys or moe for children education.

 

[TopGun]

If you have children, they will take about 25 years at most to grow up but will take care of you when you are 50 all the way to 99 years old and that is you contributing for 25 years and enjoying for 49 years isn’t that good? If you have many children the results is multiply by say four children is x4 each give you $1500 per month is already $6000 per month passive income?

By your analogy, your parents will also live till 99. So while you have a child at 25, and raise him for 25 years, you are also taking care of your parents for 49 years while your own children take care of you for 49 years.

 

[fire]

They happy can arl, who the **** care Abt sinkieland?

 

[Milodrink]

2nd bto means didnt make in life liao

still havent hit income ceiling

plus 8 years earn 300k only, if 300k each still okay

if not only 150k each, i dont even dare to tell pple sia

2 private is the way

This is true


Now we all know ppl say they bto is lao kuey liao

But still good lah shows that they still can make use of govt

 

[sky3838]

You are mistaken to think that the DINK will be better off. You can say those with children can also end up like DINK, but you refuse to say DINK can also end up like those with children in the financial sense.

Money can always save, but whether have someone to care for you when you are alone is not something we have a solution in the foreseeable future.

And you need to accept that the probability for one half of a DINK to die alone is higher, and not just focus on the outcomes with smaller probabilities to console yourself.

Get married and have children, life will become more meaningful.

How? Assuming both same lifestyle and same income, one need to spend money on bringing up children versus one that does not need?

When lifestyle and income all equals, DINK is definitely financially more well off than non DINK. Convince me if it is not.

Yes, money can be save. Having your kids to take care of you, is not 100%. That's why we have DINK.

However no kid, confirm 100% won't have kid take care, no doubt. I'm saying with money, you can have someone else take care and replacing this needs too.

DINK or no DINK, the probability of dying alone is almost the same nowadays, unless you're selfish enough to force your kids to take care and stay with you 24/7. If you scare of this, go old folks home, you won't die alone. DINK can also have niece or nephew to take care, if you put carrot (will inheritance) that they will get the money only if performing 24/7 duties and they die on your bed-side, likely they will do it if the money is huge. If you non DINK, likely you die off with less money to dangle to attractive (unless you rich or high income). But I suggest you old, just stay in old folks home since your main concern is dying alone.

Kid is not the solution of dying alone, you don't drag them down, you don't make them die together or destroy their long years of life to take care of you, dying person. As a parent, I wouldn't want to add burden to my children. We should have kid only if you find joy, to upbringing one, which DINK do not find it as a joy to. We should not let our own children to be an retirement product, or a by-product to take care of us when we're old.

Anyway, when we leave this world we don't even get to feel or care so much. We enter and leave the world with nothing. So what's your worry?

 

[Milodrink]

A lot of angst in your words.

For him to justify have kids is great so less sad lol

 

[satkimania]

Bringing up kids is a wonderful experience.

DINKs have no idea what they are talking about when they don’t even have any experience with their own children.

yeap.... it takes on average 2-3k a month including enrichment, outings presents etc etc and all that to raise a kid from 0-12 years old. which is 24k a year.

After 12 years of investing $24,000 per year into an index fund earning 7% annually, you would have approximately $429,323

sorry, this little bundle of joy isnt worth 400k to me

Don't do enrichment lor... Let them self pawn and save to the maximum dollar song boh?!

 

[satkimania]

Wait for wc to pwn him.

Lol already so rich... No reason to divorce. Just go geylang for extra ccas

 

[Laguna123]

I have ex colleagues, the guy wants kid and the wife don’t want, the the other couple is opposite.
This one worse.

 

[nachtsid.er]

Moi suspect here 50% parents with kids , the other 50% are bbfas with left right hands for wife

 

[MatrixFanatic]

Today my cousin brought his wife to come my house and bai nian... he told me that his BTO let him earn chao chao $300K... and he intends to go for a second BTO again after his windfall... I said wah now next generation jialat... but he just tell me... not my problem because they dont have kids... they only care about milking more and more money and go enjoy during older age...

I think he is correct....

Still say PAP not good?

 

[jeffrey745]

Lol u also kay siao. Can converse with him hor.
Wah next generation jialat.
Alot of my frenz also said this. But they sip sip take bto and trying 2nd time again.

It reminds me of the buffet scenario where many take second and third helpings, leaving little to no food left for those who haven't had their share.

 

[jeffrey745]

Not totally denying with what you have said. But, believe it or not, the trend is many young couples do not want to have babies. I have a relative who does that.. his wife and him got married, knocked down the wall of one room (4 RM flat) and one room as walkin wardrobe. Hence, obviously proclaiming that they are DINK.

So how effective is allowing couples to buy bto early in boosting our birth rate?

 

[parchiao]

How? Assuming both same lifestyle and same income, one need to spend money on bringing up children versus one that does not need?

When lifestyle and income all equals, DINK is definitely financially more well off than non DINK. Convince me if it is not.

Yes, money can be save. Having your kids to take care of you, is not 100%. That's why we have DINK.

However no kid, confirm 100% won't have kid take care, no doubt. I'm saying with money, you can have someone else take care and replacing this needs too.

DINK or no DINK, the probability of dying alone is almost the same nowadays, unless you're selfish enough to force your kids to take care and stay with you 24/7. If you scare of this, go old folks home, you won't die alone. DINK can also have niece or nephew to take care, if you put carrot (will inheritance) that they will get the money only if performing 24/7 duties and they die on your bed-side, likely they will do it if the money is huge. If you non DINK, likely you die off with less money to dangle to attractive (unless you rich or high income). But I suggest you old, just stay in old folks home since your main concern is dying alone.

Kid is not the solution of dying alone, you don't drag them down, you don't make them die together or destroy their long years of life to take care of you, dying person. As a parent, I wouldn't want to add burden to my children. We should have kid only if you find joy, to upbringing one, which DINK do not find it as a joy to. We should not let our own children to be an retirement product, or a by-product to take care of us when we're old.

Anyway, when we leave this world we don't even get to feel or care so much. We enter and leave the world with nothing. So what's your worry?

Whatever you just typed, you still fail to recognise what is the predominant probability.

That last survivor of the DINK couple has a very high probability of dying alone.

And you are banking on being in the 95th or 99th percentile of what is unlikely to happen.

 

[parchiao]

Don't do enrichment lor... Let them self pawn and save to the maximum dollar song boh?!

I helping them but they don’t even want to recognise my intentions.

 

[satkimania]

I helping them but they don’t even want to recognise my intentions.

That's even worse... You are pawned hard by DINKs and your char siews

 

[MynameisS]

Wait for wc to pwn him.

Especially when an handrsum AMDK ish involved