Hacker News Reader

Comment by jliptzin | Hacker News Reader

If everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats

View on HN

And then you end up raising your grandkids instead of the kids you gave birth to. It's not something that comes without cost. And what if you don't particularly trust your parents to raise kids? I suppose you would have no idea whether you did or not, because they would not have parented you...

Peoples 40s and 50s are their most productive years. We would be better off just letting people take 10 years off in their twenties - but most people would just party party party (what they do anyway)

Given two parents, there are four grandparents. Sharing the load across six people is much better than sharing between two.

Those four grandparents could end up with anywhere from 1-8+ grandkids though, depending on how many children they had, and how many grandchildren come along

have you heard of people not surviving into old age, or not being present or not being able to take care of kids? What the fuck is wrong with people in this comment section?

> have you heard of people not surviving into old age

not really, overall the life expectancy is growing well over 80 years old. unless you live, like, in the woods and feed off berries and hunting or something like that.

and yeah sure there might be somebody that loses their parents at 15, absolutely. i'm sorry for them, but they are not statistically representative in any way.

ladies and gentlemen, the fucking state of hn.

grounded in reality you mean?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com