Christoph Reuss wrote:
>
> Brad McCormick wrote:
> > I find
> > it rather remarkable that techies still have any [human]
> > interest in having mates, and that they make any effort to
> > find mates.
>
> Well, what about all those DINKs (double income no kids) who
> don't want to have their "standard of living" lowered by kids ?
> (costs, inconvenience and stress..) [Not to speak of those who
> would want kids but are too chemically polluted to have any.]
> Not all mates mate, so to speak... Maybe there's an numeric error
> in Keith's theory on the "corporate uebermensch"...
>
> Chris
Good question. I've often thought that a lot of
"working class" persons could have had a better life
style had they not had children.
I would also refer once again to Garrett Hardin's
classic article "The Tragedy of the Commons", at, e.g.:
http://www.dieoff.com/page95.htm
In our grotesquely overpopulated world, I think it is
obscene for even rich persons to have more than
two children.
Here, as often though not everywhere:
Less is more
Check out the 4th item from the top on this
page on my website, about a National Public
Radio story of why the Russians are
trying to keep down their casualties in Chechnya:
http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/etc.html
\brad mccormick
--
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
-------------------------------------------------------
<![%THINK;[XML]]> Visit my website: http://www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
