If your goal is generational wealth, leaving your kids better off than you, return on capital investment and things like that, owning property as early as possible that you can afford to own puts you miles ahead of people that don't do it, again degree or no degree.
Edit: This is an example of the classic marshmallow test.
Unless you are an Einstein-level genius (who by the way, had kids), the best contribution you can make to society is to have kids. Kids are multipliers as their achievements can not exist if they are not born. There is no "experience" that is worth dooming humanity to extinction, and I also doubt you can name any experience that a parent has not had at some point in their life.
What exactly are they missing out on? Perhaps you're missing out on what they have as well?
Telling people what their priorities in life ought to be is absolutely condescending. It's not a marshmallow test. It's a question of personal priorities and values. Looking down on people because they have different priorities and made different choices than you, telling yourself they missed out in doing it, it's really just a way to convince yourself you're happy with your choices and nothing more.
Also, anything good in your life would make you reluctant to move somewhere else. But you wouldn't say, for example, that having a significant other is bad because it makes you reluctant to move.
“Flyover country” is readily considered condescending. Might be an accurate description, but accuracy is not what makes it condescending.
Really??
Just as a counter-example, if you have your kids in your young 20s, then they are out of your house when you hit your mid 40s.
In your mid-40s, you tend to have much more money and a much better sense of what you want out of life.
So assuming you have children at some point, when is the best time to be child-free, in your 20s or in your 40s?
And what about the joy of grandchildren?
When society tells you to wait until you are 35 to have kids, how is having kids at 21 "lacking imagination"? Going against the crowd requires imagination.
I think it's pretty hard to argue this is true while literally making "life." Yeah you don't usually get a shiny new car and an unnecessarily large house having kids at 21, but the life you're talking about is a negative for humanity.
What does it matter when you're happy and have everything you need to survive and provide anyways? That's what a "win" is.
This is so far from what I’m talking about that it’s closer to what I’m arguing against than for it. I am not talking about materialistic things. I am talking about experiences, relationships, and outlook-defining memories.
> What does it matter when you're happy and have everything you need to survive and provide anyways? That's what a "win" is.
Eating buttered potatoes for the rest of my life isn’t a win to me even if it will technically sustain me.
You can do more. You can be more. You can experience more. And most people don’t even try. Sad.
And "pumping out kids" as you put it does this for many people. Sorry it doesn't for you, but saying that it isn't a "win" for some people is short sighted.
> You can do more. You can be more. You can experience more.
Many would say the same of those in their 30s and 40s with kids.
> Sad.
Again, many would say the same about your aspirations. Insulting, isn't it?
My point being, what makes you happy, doesn't make others, so don't cast someone who has kids at 21 with a home and ability to provide for them into a bucket of not "winning" at life.
Who says it doesn’t for me? I’m not against kids. I want kids, I’m going to have kids. But I’m going to finish getting some bucket list items out of the way first, when they’re possible and practical to do.
>Many would say the same of those in their 30s and 40s with kids.
Some things are either not possible or not responsible to do once you have kids. And once they’re adults, you’re too old.
>Again, many would say the same about your aspirations. Insulting, isn't it?
Not at all! I’m okay with that. Everyone’s living their own life and others can have an opinion on it if they want to.
>My point being, what makes you happy, doesn't make others, so don't cast someone who has kids at 21 with a home and ability to provide for them into a bucket of not "winning" at life.
Again, I started a more involved discussion, but the original comment strongly implied that earlier is better and I disagree. Sorry you’re taking it so personally.
I had a lot of experiences before I had kids. Traveled the world, great jobs, career, friends.
But those all seem pretty empty by comparison. I'm glad I did all that, but a lot of it (while very exciting at the time) I see as been-there-done-that. (Though I still get a lot of satisfaction from my career.)
But at some point I realized that human relationships are just a lot deeper than a trip to a faraway temple. And, though I like my friends, marriage and kids is just a much deeper relationship, full stop.
Also, I figure it's time to let the next generation experience things for the first time. I'd rather share those experiences with my kids then do another experience for myself and my friends for the Nth time.
I suspect that you are young, and you might also change your mind at some point. For me I just got to the point where I realized that I could go pretty much anywhere I wanted -- enough vacation time and money. And I just didn't want to.
Professional accomplishments are also great, so I don't criticize you if that's where you find meaning. But retirement might be pretty painful if so.
There are many careers that don't require or even suggest retirement. I've heard of professors dying mid semester. That's how I'd like to go - in the midst of doing what I live for.
Having a house and children as soon as possible isn't a win. It's what happens when you lack imagination. There's so much more to life than pumping out kids at 21 in your 3/2 in fly over country.