This is a response from someone who has been in too many online discussions, and knows when the question/supposition is pinned in such a way to essentially make good faith discussion surrounding it impossible.

In this case the OP made a bunch of claims which they cannot support, and then wants people to defend those claims/find counter-benefits to offset them. They've essentially pinned the discussion so that it wastes a bunch of time, and so their preconceived notions cannot be undercut.

If people want to have a good faith discussion about the positive/negatives, then that is certainly possible, but OP poisoned the well, so it is unlikely to be possible here.

What an oddly paranoid take on the thread. OP literally just said he's looking for new perspectives, because X has led him to his current perspective. I disagree completely that he did anything in poor faith; I think that you're just disregarding the question of "What are the benefits to having kids" outright, rather than take it seriously, which is my response as someone who has been in many online and in-person discussions about the idea of not having kids.

Indeed. And why did the mods flag my thread?

Flags aren't done by the mods, they're applied by other users who find that the post or your conduct go against the spirit of the site.

I dont known about the poster, but me personally I do remember having been a kid, meaning someone made a different calculation. Past performance is no indication of future returns I guess...