I am not entirely convinced by the idea that finances should be the primary factor in deciding how many children a person should have.
And by extension, I do not agree with the notion that it is better for a poor man not to father a child.
On the surface, that argument is logical. It makes sense. But there is something fundamentally troubling about the philosophy beneath it.
At its core, that thinking assumes that a child who may live a “subpar” life is better off never existing at all.
That is a dangerous line of thought.
Because once we start measuring the worthiness of life by comfort, wealth, or quality of living, we step onto a slippery slope.
Today it is: “Don’t have children if you cannot afford them.”
Tomorrow it becomes: “People living difficult lives would have been better off never being born.”
And from there, society begins to entertain ideas about whose life is worth preserving and whose is not.
That is where humanity starts losing its moral footing.
Yes, poverty makes life harder. No one should romanticize suffering.
But life itself carries possibility.
A child born into hardship is still a life filled with potential. Potential to grow, to change their circumstances, to contribute, to build, to become.
And that possibility is valuable.
If we are speaking economically, human beings are not merely mouths to feed; they are also hands to build, minds to create, and the workforce that drives every economy.
Population, by itself, is not the problem.
People are not the problem.
The real question is what society does with its people.
“Book says, fuck, kill, lie, repeat.”
- Not written by Muslim.
“Muslim author.”
- Not a theologian.
“Revered Salafi preacher.”
- Not Hadith.
“Also in Hadith.”
- Not sahih.
“Is sahih.”
- Not Qurʾan.
“Is in Qurʾan.”
- Wrong translation.
“Translated by an Arab.”
- Not the right dialect, nuance lost.
“Vetted by maulavis.”
- Wrong interpretation.
“Maybe, but being followed by Muslims.”
- Not true Muslims.
“Condemn them.”
- What about Zionists?
You can’t win an argument with this intellectual bankruptcy. So don’t engage.
Just expose, ridicule, and saturate the world with their depravity. Your job is not to reform Islam. Your job, if any, is to caution others.
My income can cover all our expenses. What is left of our household income goes into ETFs and other investments.
Maybe this will add context, at the barest minimum we try to use VIP lounges at the airport and fly business class whenever we get on a plane. I think it’s rather disturbing for the question of who pays April's electricity bill to even come up at all.
Like I responded to someone else, we all have different realities and ambitions.
There’s no version of the life I imagined for myself in which I won’t be able to pay ALL the bills for every member of my family.
There are some conversations I can’t relate to.
What’s the point of working extra hard and going through all the stress of getting to this point in life if I have to split bills with my wife BECAUSE I truly can’t afford to provide for my family alone?
All the sleepless nights, deprivation, I really did not explore my hobbies until my 30s and there are some parts of my 20s that feel like the dark ages - I lived what many people would call a boring life - because I was playing the long game. The dream was not to go through all these and then have to delegate responsibilities in the lowest level of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.
It’s okay if you think this is 'simping'; however, we all have think differently and have different ambitions. I know life happens, but this should be the worst case scenario not the ideal case that we optimise for.